From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neil Brown Subject: Re: 'Array state: ... 1 failed', but array clean? Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 20:44:18 +1100 Message-ID: <20100129204418.79734e4a@notabene> References: <1264680565.1928.20.camel@test.apertos.eu> <1264683579.1928.23.camel@test.apertos.eu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1264683579.1928.23.camel@test.apertos.eu> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgg==?= Sawicz Cc: linux-raid List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:59:39 +0100 Micha=C5=82 Sawicz wrote: > Dnia 2010-01-28, czw o godzinie 13:09 +0100, Micha=C5=82 Sawicz pisze= : > > Where does this 'failed' come from? Oh, and it's like that on all > > members. Is my array safe as /proc/mdstat says?=20 >=20 > Hmm I think it might be related to this: >=20 > > # mdadm -E /dev/sdb1 > > [...] > > Array Slot : 6 (0, failed, 2, 3, 1, 5, 4) > > Array State : uuuuUu 1 failed >=20 > One of the disks in this array was swapped, maybe this is what this i= nfo > records? How can I get rid of that? >=20 The device that was the second device added to the array failed (or disappeared), and this fact is recorded in case that device ever reappe= ars... Yes, this is confusing. mdadm-3.x report the array state differently. NeilBrown -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html