Re: is "replaceable" in 3.2 considered stable

[joystick <joystick@shiftmail.org>]

On 11/07/12 02:42, Brad Campbell wrote:
> On 05/11/12 13:22, NeilBrown wrote:
>
> I have a test system set up at the moment with a RAID10 n,2 across 6 
> 1TB drives + 2 spares.
>
> I've run several hot-replace tests using 3.6.2 and found it works as 
> advertised.
>
> I also have two drives with hard write errors (excellent for failure 
> testing), and trying to replace a drive with one that contains a write 
> error fails the replace as you would expect.

Thanks for your testing Brad

we still need someone to test the other case, a more common scenario I'd 
say: the disk to be replaced fails during hot-replace

> The test machine is on UPS, so I have not done any testing that 
> involves reboots during a re-sync.

And also this one...
Best simulation would be unpulling the plug so that disks do not flush
if you have still time for us, of course :-)

Thank you