linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: "Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram" <mparamas@iupui.edu>
Cc: "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: mdadm raid6 recovery status
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 06:41:45 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120330064145.6747fff0@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B2B36B3006DB4C47A56D6BA19443F5D12DCEBAA4@IU-MSSG-MBX110.ads.iu.edu>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3790 bytes --]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 18:47:14 +0000 "Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram"
<mparamas@iupui.edu> wrote:

> 
> Clarification:
> >>should I do new array creation 
> I meant running newfs on assembled 12 TB array, and restore data from backup, to resolve "df" reporting problem.

I would suggest asking on 
    linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org

be sure to give lots of details - kernel version etc.
It would be worth running 
   fsck -n /dev/md2
first and see if it reports anything strange.
Maybe  just a fsck will fix it.

NeilBrown


> 
> ________________________________________
> From: Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 1:33 PM
> To: NeilBrown
> Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: mdadm raid6 recovery status
> 
> Good news: Got ALL of our data back. [Actually it was 4.96TB not 7TB].
>                      mdadm is a good one.
> 
> Bad news: "df" is reporting wrong, while "du" is showing full size.
> # df -kl /myarray
> Filesystem           1K-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted on
> /dev/md2             11537161976    162432 10950945196   1% /myarray
> # du -sk /myarray
> 5326133556      /myarray
> #
> 
> I never looked into du or looked in depth of the files & folders and simply got mislead by reported "df" usage; data was there all along. We definitely want "df" for the array's filesystem (ext3) to report right.
> 
> Now that we are backing up all of the data (at 400 Mbps) over network, I want to know if "df" reporting can be fixed easily or should I do new array creation and restore data from backup.
> 
> We are ordering a new RAID card, just to be on safer side.
> 
> Sundar
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: NeilBrown [neilb@suse.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 7:27 PM
> To: Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram
> Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: mdadm raid6 recovery status
> 
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 12:49:18 +0000 "Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram"
> <mparamas@iupui.edu> wrote:
> 
> > [root@in-rady-neuro9 ~]# df -kl /myarray
> > Filesystem           1K-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted on
> > /dev/md2             11537161976    162432 10950945196   1% /myarray
> > Should be 7TB of used space.
> 
> This is bad.  Something has happened to your filesystem.
> It is almost as though someone ran "mkfs" on the array.
> I don't know much about recovery after such an action, but I doubt you
> will get much back.
> 
> >
> > [root@in-rady-neuro9 ~]# cat /proc/partitions
> > major minor  #blocks  name
> >
> >    8        0  438960128 sda
> >    8        1     512000 sda1
> >    8        2   51200000 sda2
> >    8        3  387247104 sda3
> >    8       16 1953514584 sdb
> >    8       32 1953514584 sdc
> >    8       48 1953514584 sdd
> >    8       64 1953514584 sde
> >    8       80 1953514584 sdf
> >    8       96 1953514584 sdg
> >    8      112 1953514584 sdh
> >    8      128 1953514584 sdi
> >  253        0  346226688 dm-0
> >  253        1   40992768 dm-1
> 
> No md2 ???
> 
> >
> > sd[b-i] are raid devices
> >
> > [root@in-rady-neuro9 ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md2
> > /dev/md2:
> >         Version : 0.90
> >   Creation Time : Fri Dec 16 17:56:14 2011
> >      Raid Level : raid6
> >      Array Size : 11721086976 (11178.10 GiB 12002.39 GB)
> >   Used Dev Size : 1953514496 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB)  <<<====== Wrong! Should be 7TB of used array space.
> 
> "Used Dev Size" isn't "how much of the array is used by the filesystem" -
> mdadm doesn't know anything about filesystems.
> It is "How much of each individual device is used by the array", which is
> usually a little less than the size of the smallest device.
> So 2TB is correct here.
> 
> 
> NeilBrown
> 
> 


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2012-03-29 19:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-28  2:22 mdadm raid6 recovery status Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram
2012-03-28  4:11 ` NeilBrown
2012-03-28 12:49   ` Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram
2012-03-28 19:39     ` John Robinson
2012-03-28 23:27     ` NeilBrown
2012-03-29 17:33       ` Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram
2012-03-29 18:47         ` Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram
2012-03-29 19:41           ` NeilBrown [this message]
2012-03-30 21:22             ` Paramasivam, Meenakshisundaram
2012-03-30 22:51               ` NeilBrown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120330064145.6747fff0@notabene.brown \
    --to=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mparamas@iupui.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).