From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Rabbitson Subject: Re: In this partition scheme, grub does not find md information? Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:47:30 +0100 Message-ID: <47A08E02.3000009@rabbit.us> References: <479EAF42.6010604@pobox.com> <18334.46306.611615.493031@notabene.brown> <479F07E1.7060408@pobox.com> <479F0AAB.3090702@rabbit.us> <479F331F.7080902@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <479F3C74.1050605@rabbit.us> <479F42A5.8040007@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <20080129162640.GA16250@rap.rap.dk> <479F5882.8050400@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <20080129180101.GB19527@rap.rap.dk> <47A07D95.2030902@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <47A07D95.2030902@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Tokarev Cc: =?UTF-8?B?S2VsZCBKw7hybiBTaW1vbnNlbg==?= , Moshe Yudkowsky , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Michael Tokarev wrote: > With 5-drive linux raid10: > > A B C D E > 0 0 1 1 2 > 2 3 3 4 4 > 5 5 6 6 7 > 7 8 8 9 9 > 10 10 11 11 12 > ... > > A&B can't be removed - 0, 5. A&C CAN be removed, as > are A&D. But not A&E - losing 2 and 7. And so on. I stand corrected by Michael, this is indeed the case with the current state of md raid 10. Either my observations were incorrect when I made them a year and a half ago, or some fixes went into the kernel since then. In any way - linux md10 does behave exactly as a classic raid 1+0 when created with -n D -p nS where D and S are both even and D = 2S.