From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Clements Subject: Re: Converting Ext3 to Ext3 under RAID 1 Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:31:43 -0400 Message-ID: <44D0FD9F.9070605@steeleye.com> References: <200607152056.55090.pwaldo@waldoware.com> <200607230753.47853.pwaldo@waldoware.com> <17603.25777.274507.385333@cse.unsw.edu.au> <200607230832.48807.pwaldo@waldoware.com> <17605.22207.56022.972200@cse.unsw.edu.au> 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: Dan Graham Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Dan Graham wrote: > Is this scheme even half-way sane? Yes. It sounds correct. > Is 16 blocks a large enough area? Maybe. The superblock will be between 64KB and 128KB from the end of the partition. This depends on the size of the partition: SB_LOC = PART_SIZE - 64K - (PART_SIZE & (64K-1)) So, by 16 blocks, I assume you mean 16 filesystem blocks (which are generally 4KB for ext3). So as long as your partition ends exactly on a 64KB boundary, you should be OK. Personally, I would err on the safe side and just shorten the filesystem by 128KB. It's not like you're going to miss the extra 64KB. -- Paul