From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Small Subject: Re: RAID5 disk failure during rebuild of spare, any chance of recovery when one of the failed devices is suspected to be intact? Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 09:43:09 +0100 Message-ID: <4C68FA1D.7040105@seoss.co.uk> References: <4C68CCC9.2050604@jungers.net> <4C68D6D3.6070906@jungers.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4C68D6D3.6070906@jungers.net> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nicolas Jungers Cc: linux-raid , =?UTF-8?B?VG9yIEFybmUgVmVzdGI=?= =?UTF-8?B?w7g=?= List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 16/08/10 07:12, Nicolas Jungers wrote: > On 08/16/2010 07:54 AM, Tor Arne Vestb=C3=B8 wrote: >> You mean you sdc and sde plus either sdb or sdd, depending on which >> one I think is more sane a this point? > > I'd try both. Do a ddrescue of the failing one and try that (with=20 > copy of the others) and check what's coming out. As an alternative to using ddrescue, you could quickly prototype variou= s=20 arrangements (without writing anything to the drives) using a=20 device-mapper copy-on-write mapping - I posted some details to the list= =20 a while back when I was trying to use this to reconstruct a hw raid=20 array... Check the list archives for details. Tim. --=20 South East Open Source Solutions Limited Registered in England and Wales with company number 06134732. Registered Office: 2 Powell Gardens, Redhill, Surrey, RH1 1TQ VAT number: 900 6633 53 http://seoss.co.uk/ +44-(0)1273-808309 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html