From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Reuben Farrelly Subject: Re: Resizing RAID-1 arrays - some possible bugs and problems Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 09:10:07 +1200 Message-ID: <44AECDAF.3080608@reub.net> References: <44AE644C.9090408@reub.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Justin Piszcz Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Neil Brown List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 8/07/2006 6:52 a.m., Justin Piszcz wrote: > Reuben, > > What chunk size did you use? > > I can't even get mine to get past this part: > > p34:~# mdadm /dev/md3 --grow --raid-disks=7 > mdadm: Need to backup 15360K of critical section.. > mdadm: Cannot set device size/shape for /dev/md3: No space left on device > > Justin. > Just whatever the system selected for the chunk size, ie I didn't specify it myself ;) [root@tornado cisco]# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] md0 : active raid1 sdc2[0] sda2[1] 24410688 blocks [2/2] [UU] bitmap: 0/187 pages [0KB], 64KB chunk md1 : active raid1 sdc3[0] sda3[1] 19542944 blocks [2/2] [UU] bitmap: 0/150 pages [0KB], 64KB chunk md2 : active raid1 sdc5[0] sda5[1] 4891648 blocks [2/2] [UU] bitmap: 2/150 pages [8KB], 16KB chunk I was working on md1 when I filed the email earlier. I wonder if the chunk size is left as-is after a --grow, and if this is optimal or not or if this could lead to issues... reuben