From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Robinson Subject: Re: Auto Rebuild on hot-plug Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 23:36:39 +0100 Message-ID: <4BB12B77.8030902@anonymous.org.uk> References: <20100325113543.0e2124c5@notabene.brown> <905EDD02F158D948B186911EB64DB3D11C510278@irsmsx503.ger.corp.intel.com> <4BB0ED13.6020507@redhat.com> <4BB0F32F.9030803@anonymous.org.uk> <4BB0F820.4030707@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4BB0F820.4030707@redhat.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Doug Ledford Cc: Dan Williams , "Labun, Marcin" , Neil Brown , "Hawrylewicz Czarnowski, Przemyslaw" , "Ciechanowski, Ed" , "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" , Bill Davidsen List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 29/03/2010 19:57, Doug Ledford wrote: > On 03/29/2010 02:36 PM, John Robinson wrote: [...] >> Yes, but do create the partition(s), boot sector, etc and set up the >> spare(s). > > Really, we should never have to do this in the situation I listed: aka > no degraded arrays exist. This implies that if you had a raid1 /boot > array, that it's still intact. So partitioning and setting up boot > loaders doesn't make sense as the new disk isn't going in to replace > anything. You *might* want to add it to the raid1 /boot, but we don't > know that so doing things automatically doesn't make sense. Actually I've just recently had the scenario where it would have made perfect sense. I hooked up the RAID chassis SATA[0-4] ports to the RAID chassis and put 3 drives in the first 3 slots. Actually it turned out I'd wired it up R-L not L-R so if I'd added a new drive in one of the two right-hand slots it would have turned up as sda on the next boot. OK, to some extent that's me being stupid, but at the same time I correctly hooked up the first 5 SATA ports to the hot-swap chassis and would want them considered the same group etc. Cheers, John.