From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bill Davidsen Subject: Re: Superblocks Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 09:49:35 -0400 Message-ID: <472C7C6F.2090205@tmr.com> References: <29a863790710260943o7623212esce30325be4610dea@mail.gmail.com> <18214.45758.794247.651163@notabene.brown> <29a863790710300906w497c0f35yb90c36dadbd2c5e7@mail.gmail.com> <18218.24911.715891.758629@notabene.brown> <29a863790711020715h726353bcq99a270494a9f471e@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <29a863790711020715h726353bcq99a270494a9f471e@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Greg Cormier Cc: Neil Brown , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Greg Cormier wrote: > Any reason 0.9 is the default? Should I be worried about using 1.0 > superblocks? And can I "upgrade" my array from 0.9 to 1.0 superblocks? > Do understand that Neil may have other reasons... but mainly the 0.9 format is the default because it is most widely supported and allows you to use new mdadm versions on old distributions (I still have one FC1 machine!). As for changing metadata on an existing array, I really can't offer any help. > Thanks, > Greg > > On 11/1/07, Neil Brown wrote: > >> On Tuesday October 30, gcormier@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> Which is the default type of superblock? 0.90 or 1.0? >>> >> The default default is 0.90. >> However a local device can be set in mdadm.conf with e.g. >> CREATE metdata=1.0 >> >> NeilBrown >> -- bill davidsen CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979