linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Robinson <john.robinson@anonymous.org.uk>
To: Leslie Rhorer <lrhorer@satx.rr.com>
Cc: Linux RAID <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RAID5 / 6 Growth
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:27:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B29F99A.2000709@anonymous.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1C.0E.01567.69E892B4@cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com>

On 17/12/2009 01:51, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
[...]
>> As to your initial question: Being able to keep the filesystem mounted
>> and used is the whole point of having online growing of the raid
>> system. If that weren't save then there would be no point to it as you
>> could just as well stop the raid if you already umounted it and grow
>> it offline.
> 
> 	I know that is the point of the utility.  My question boils down to,
> "How safe is it to avail one's self of the capability if it is not essential
> to have the array mounted for the duration?"  I don't particularly like
> having the array unavailable (especially not for nearly 5 days), but I
> prefer that to risking data loss, or especially risking irretrievably losing
> the entire array.  The question is particularly pertinent given the fact the
> growth is going to take nearly 5 days (a lot can happen in 5 days), and the
> fact the system was having the rather squirrelly issue a few days back which
> seems - emphasis on SEEMS - to have been resolved by disabling NCQ.  What
> happens if the system kicks a couple of drives, especially if one drive gets
> kicked, a bunch of data gets written and then a few minutes later another
> drive gets kicked?  In particular, what if neither of the two drives that
> get kicked are the new drive?

Well, what happens if two drives get kicked in normal use over the 
course of 5 days? I think you're being overly cautious, and I'll try to 
explain why.

The reshape only reduces redundancy during the "critical section". After 
that, you're as redundant as usual and can tolerate a drive failure. On 
RAID-6, 2 drive failures. A reshape should be considerably safer than 
doing a resync to a replacement drive, because in the reshape case if 
you get bad sectors md can regenerate the data from the parity info.

Do you regularly run a check on your array? Or have you done one 
recently? And does the SMART info on all your drives look OK? These 
should be the case before attempting any reshape anyway, so I'd say just 
keep the partition mounted.

Cheers,

John.

  reply	other threads:[~2009-12-17  9:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-12-16  5:40 RAID5 / 6 Growth Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-16  6:37 ` Majed B.
2009-12-16  8:06   ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-16  8:12     ` Michael Evans
2009-12-16  8:38       ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-16 11:21     ` Majed B.
2009-12-17  1:36       ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-19  1:13       ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-19 18:21         ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-19 18:36           ` Majed B.
2009-12-19 19:02             ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-19 19:55               ` Majed B.
2009-12-19 20:19                 ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-19 23:39                   ` John Robinson
2009-12-19 23:49                     ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-19 23:59                     ` Majed B.
2009-12-16 13:25     ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-17  1:51       ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-17  9:27         ` John Robinson [this message]
2009-12-18  1:33           ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-19  1:11           ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-18 12:27         ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-17 17:53     ` Bill Davidsen
2009-12-18  1:46       ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-19  1:12       ` Leslie Rhorer
     [not found] <70ed7c3e0912191232k7deb3a3p40ddd6bc1bdfd3ae@mail.gmail.com>
2009-12-19 21:05 ` Leslie Rhorer
2009-12-21 12:33   ` Goswin von Brederlow

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=4B29F99A.2000709@anonymous.org.uk \
    --to=john.robinson@anonymous.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lrhorer@satx.rr.com \
    /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).