From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Piergiorgio Sartor Subject: Re: RAID without superblock Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:10:45 +0200 Message-ID: <20090420181045.GA4236@lazy.lzy> References: <20090419114743.GA29195@lazy.lzy> <20090419210200.GA6942@lazy.lzy> <1240178252.31728.12.camel@cichlid.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1240178252.31728.12.camel@cichlid.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Cc: Piergiorgio Sartor , linux raid mailing list List-Id: linux-raid.ids Hi, first of all thanks a lot for all the suggestions, it is really nice to have this support! While reading the answers, I realized that I did not make the "requirements" really clear. My bad. The "primary" disk is an external one, which 90% of the time is connected to the same Linux PC. But, it could happen it is removed and connected somewhere else, where no "md" is available. My idea was, in order to have some protection, to use it in RAID-1 "superblockless" configuration on the "default" PC, and use it as a normal disk whenever (or wherever) necessary. Of course, the bitmap resync will not work, when updating the disk directly, without "md" layer. On the other hand, if the full-resync is always done from this disk to the local mirror, there would be no problem, except time. The reason to do this kind of backup is that this disk is encrypted, so a "block device copy" will keep the data encrypted, while a backup of the mounted disk will not. Unless done to another encrypted disk/partition, of course. Clearly, any suggestion is still really appreciated! Thanks again, bye, -- piergiorgio