linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: nterry <nigel@nigelterry.net>
To: Michal Soltys <soltys@ziu.info>, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Raid 5 Problem
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:41:56 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49456F94.8020100@nigelterry.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4945276E.1010405@ziu.info>

Michal Soltys wrote:
> nterry wrote:
>> Hi.  I hope someone can tell me what I have done wrong.  I have a 4 
>> disk Raid 5 array running on Fedora9.  I've run this array for 2.5 
>> years with no issues.  I recently rebooted after upgrading to Kernel 
>> 2.6.27.7.  When I did this I found that only 3 of my disks were in 
>> the array.  When I examine the three active elements of the array 
>> (/dev/sdd1, /dev/sde1, /dev/sdc1) they all show that the array has 3 
>> drives and one missing.  When I examine the missing drive it shows 
>> that all members of the array are present, which I don't understand! 
>> When I try to add the missing drive back is says the device is busy.  
>> Please see below and let me know what I need to do to get this 
>> working again.  Thanks Nigel:
>>
>> ==================================================================
>> [root@homepc ~]# cat /proc/mdstat
>> Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
>> md0 : active raid5 sdd1[0] sdc1[3] sde1[1]
>>      735334656 blocks level 5, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UU_U]
>>     md_d0 : inactive sdb[2](S)
>>      245117312 blocks
>>      unused devices: <none>
>> [root@homepc ~]#
>
> For some reason, it looks like you have 2 raid arrays visible - md0 
> and md_d0. The latter took sdb (not sdb1) as its component.
>
> sd{c,d,e}1 is in assembeld array (with appropriately updated 
> superblocks), thus mdadm --examine calls show one device as removed, 
> but sdb is part of another inactive array, and the superblock is 
> untouched and shows "old" situation. Note that 0.9 superblock is 
> stored at the end  of the device (see md(4) for details), so its 
> position could be valid for both sdb and sdb1.
>
> This might be an effect of --incremental assembly mode. Hard to tell 
> more without seeing startup scripts, mdadm.conf, udev rules, partition 
> layout... Did upgrade involve anything more besides kernel ?
>
> Stop both arrays, check mdadm.conf, assemble md0 manually (mdadm -A 
> /dev/md0 /dev/sd{c,d,e}1 ), verify situation with mdadm -D. If 
> everything looks sane, add /dev/sdb1 to the array. Still, w/o checking 
> out startup stuff, it might happen again after reboot. Adding DEVICE 
> /dev/sd[bcde]1 to mdadm.conf might help though.
>
> Wait a bit for other suggestions as well.
>
> -- 
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
I don't think the Kernel upgrade actually caused the problem.  I tried 
booting up on an older (2.6.27.5) kernel and that made no difference.  I 
checked the logs for anything else that might have made a difference, 
but couldn't see anything that made any sense to me.  I did note that on 
an earlier update mdadm was upgraded:
Nov 26 17:08:32 Updated: mdadm-2.6.7.1-1.fc9.x86_64
and I did not reboot after that upgrade

I included my mdadm.conf with the last email and it includes ARRAY 
/dev/md0 level=raid5 num-devices=4 
devices=/dev/sdb1,/dev/sdc1,/dev/sdd1,/dev/sde1
My configuration is just vanilla Fedora9 with the mdadm.conf I sent

I've never had a /dev/md_d0 array, so that must have been automatically 
created.  I may have had other devices and partitions in /dev/md0 as I 
know I had several attempts at getting it working 2.5 years ago, and I 
had other issues when Fedora changed device naming, I think at FC7.  
There is only one partition on /dev/sdb, see below:

(parted) select /dev/sdb                                                 
Using /dev/sdb
(parted) print                                                           
Model: ATA Maxtor 6L250R0 (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 251GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number  Start   End    Size   Type     File system  Flags    
 1      32.3kB  251GB  251GB  primary               boot, raid

So it looks like something is creating the /dev/md_d0 and adding 
/dev/sdb to it before /dev/md0 gets started.

So I tried:
[root@homepc ~]# mdadm --stop /dev/md_d0
mdadm: stopped /dev/md_d0
[root@homepc ~]# mdadm --add /dev/md0 /dev/sdb1
mdadm: re-added /dev/sdb1
[root@homepc ~]# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md0 : active raid5 sdb1[4] sdd1[0] sdc1[3] sde1[1]
      735334656 blocks level 5, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UU_U]
      [>....................]  recovery =  0.1% (299936/245111552) 
finish=81.6min speed=49989K/sec
     
unused devices: <none>
[root@homepc ~]#

Great - All working.  Then I rebooted and was back to square one with 
only 3 drives in /dev/md0 and /dev/sdb in /dev/md_d0
                                   
So I am still not understanding where /dev/md_d0 is coming from and 
although I know how to get things working after a reboot, clearly this 
is not a long term solution...


  reply	other threads:[~2008-12-14 20:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-12-14 13:41 Raid 5 Problem nterry
2008-12-14 15:34 ` Michal Soltys
2008-12-14 20:41   ` nterry [this message]
2008-12-14 20:53     ` Justin Piszcz
2008-12-14 20:58       ` nterry
2008-12-14 21:03         ` Justin Piszcz
2008-12-14 21:08           ` Nigel J. Terry
2008-12-14 22:55           ` Michal Soltys
2008-12-14 21:14     ` Michal Soltys
2008-12-14 21:34       ` nterry
2008-12-14 22:02         ` Michal Soltys
2008-12-15 21:50         ` Neil Brown
2008-12-15 23:07           ` nterry
2008-12-16 20:39             ` nterry

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=49456F94.8020100@nigelterry.net \
    --to=nigel@nigelterry.net \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=soltys@ziu.info \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).