From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: rob Subject: Re: missing superblock on RAID5 Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:57:19 -0400 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <3F8B039F.2070403@fantinibakery.com> References: <3F8ACBD2.CA1B8CBD@vitoni.de> <3F8AD02C.8080606@fantinibakery.com> <3F8AE51C.3F0A9451@vitoni.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3F8AE51C.3F0A9451@vitoni.de> To: Victor Cc: linux-raid List-Id: linux-raid.ids that does look strange. But I've been using software raid for just a couple weeks, so don't know a lot about it. here is same command on our computer. i have only 2 devices. looks like something is up with yours. do you have another md device you can check the command on? root@fbc5:~ # mdadm --detail /dev/md0 /dev/md0: Version : 00.90.00 Creation Time : Tue Sep 30 15:22:45 2003 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 8337600 (7.95 GiB 8.54 GB) Device Size : 8337600 (7.95 GiB 8.54 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Fri Oct 10 08:37:34 2003 State : dirty, no-errors Active Devices : 2 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 6 0 active sync /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part6 1 8 22 1 active sync /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target3/lun0/part6 UUID : 131c021d:7bc1e937:1bea7923:d7eed283 Events : 0.54 Victor wrote: >Now that you mention it I remember to have read somewhere that suberblocks >are written at the end of _partitions_ and not arrays. > >Thanks for enlighten me :) > >Maybe another stupid question: ># mdadm --detail /dev/md0 >/dev/md0: > Version : 00.90.00 > Creation Time : Sun May 18 14:19:37 2003 > Raid Level : raid5 > Array Size : 241254336 (230.08 GiB 247.04 GB) > Device Size : 80418112 (76.69 GiB 82.35 GB) > Raid Devices : 4 > Total Devices : 5 >Preferred Minor : 0 > Persistence : Superblock is persistent > > Update Time : Wed Oct 8 23:53:50 2003 > State : dirty, no-errors > Active Devices : 4 >Working Devices : 4 > Failed Devices : 1 > Spare Devices : 0 > > Layout : left-symmetric > Chunk Size : 64K > > Number Major Minor RaidDevice State > 0 3 65 0 active sync >/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part1 > 1 22 1 1 active sync >/dev/ide/host0/bus1/target0/lun0/part1 > 2 33 1 2 active sync >/dev/ide/host2/bus0/target0/lun0/part1 > 3 34 1 3 active sync >/dev/ide/host2/bus1/target0/lun0/part1 > UUID : d8e2995c:dac28dbb:042eb748:bad0f5d6 > Events : 0.52 > > >It says (or at least I think it says) that this array has 5 devices of which >one is faulty. That's not true, it consists only out of 4 devices. > >Victor > >