From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.stoffel.org (mail.stoffel.org [172.104.24.175]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 439A0256C79 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 12:34:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=172.104.24.175 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749040459; cv=none; b=b2MX/wrVhHp6A5Yhn8uji9Zugw1cGtshHH8aCXvkRarRtSyH+uCDOvlF8WPURDHeKEj0jK0zlA6y5VxgAQ69rS1uFMK9l0YxOJGiooWBkbVd+GxEyvovlWBbHaCz0ZsaD7yiBeTfeAnmvh9k0Fz6iYoEfvCBp9THq1nihXJYTCo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749040459; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VebfN2XBteKzBqUMT18SDeeL0Q3wfkpQGzbwbsPkLAA=; h=MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject: In-Reply-To:References; b=Qve25VwmHDGwzuG9GvR81opWJKQr8DuJ+0ALEZtlxyFMNu+mAjbZTDpg5FDzboHQZ62bzFX4581ahbJnv/oO1m3c0CtTmAvBv5JNPo9DJwC6P7Pq01kOaZalz8uGcOja1Yq6YbG6tCYJpVdx0MWnOZ6SR2sYc4lxnr7aw4rtHdY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=stoffel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=stoffel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=172.104.24.175 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=stoffel.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=stoffel.org Received: from quad.stoffel.org (syn-097-095-183-072.res.spectrum.com [97.95.183.72]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.stoffel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 52F4D1E38B; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 08:24:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: by quad.stoffel.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6B1E8A103F; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 08:24:29 -0400 (EDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <26688.15101.386901.684@quad.stoffel.home> Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 08:24:29 -0400 From: "John Stoffel" To: Reindl Harald Cc: Linux RAID X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Subject: Re: Need help increasing raid scan efficiency. In-Reply-To: References: <20250602210514.7acd5325@Zen-II-x12.niklas.com> X-Mailer: VM 8.3.x under 28.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) >>>>> "Reindl" == Reindl Harald writes: > Am 03.06.25 um 03:05 schrieb David Niklas: >> My PC suffered a rather nasty case of HW failure recently where the MB >> would break the CPU and RAM. I ended up with different data on different >> members of my RAID6 array. >> >> I wanted to scan through the drives and take some checksums of various >> files in an attempt to ascertain which drives took the most data >> corruption damage, to try and find the date that the damage started >> occurring (as it was unclear when exactly this began), and to try and >> rescue some of the data off of the good pairs. > forget it and restore a backup Or if your data is static, use last years backup and look for un-changed files and them compare the data inside them? but yes, using a better backup system is a good idea. I'm using 'burp' for my home backups. And big disks are cheap. How much is your data worth to you?