From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stone <stone@heisl.org>
Subject: Re: Brocken Raid & LUKS
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 21:11:28 +0100
Message-ID: <512BC570.20609@heisl.org>
References: <5123A1CC.2000003@heisl.org> <51267467.9040603@turmel.org> <512675A6.1000801@heisl.org> <5126797C.8090105@heisl.org> <51269DE0.5070905@heisl.org> <512748FA.2000709@heisl.org> <51277876.30008@turmel.org> <51278793.80904@heisl.org> <512790AE.2080102@turmel.org> <5127B64A.3000808@heisl.org> <5127D857.9090204@heisl.org> <5127F2B8.4050601@turmel.org> <5127F45F.5020608@heisl.org> <512827FC.7010403@turmel.org> <5128336E.5060809@heisl.org> <51284762.2080202@turmel.org> <51289798.7050500@heisl.org> <5128E9F4.5040700@turmel.org> <5129421C.7070105@heisl.org> <51295599.5040907@turmel.org> <51295B1B.2030404@heisl.org> <51299135.1000206@turmel.org> <5129BCCC.7090202@heisl.org> <512A2094.3020008@turmel.org> <512A5A5A.5020904@heisl.org> <512A5CFA.6020205@turmel.org> <512A6897.3040809@heisl.org
 > <512A6F39.7090008@turmel.org> <512A74FA.8000100@heisl.org> <512A7730.7010600@turmel.org> <512A7A2D.3040109@heisl.org> <512A7BC6.5010406@turmel.org> <512BAE16.1020205@heisl.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <512BAE16.1020205@heisl.org>
Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Phil Turmel <philip@turmel.org>
Cc: linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: linux-raid.ids

Am 25.02.2013 19:31, schrieb Stone:
> Am 24.02.2013 21:44, schrieb Phil Turmel:
>> On 02/24/2013 03:38 PM, Stone wrote:
>>> if i can copy data. is there a way to check the files of consistency?
>>> thx
>> I'm not sure which files' consistency you mean here...  the dd image in
>> your nas?  If so, you compute md5sums of each entire disk (rather time
>> consuming).
>>
>> If you mean the data inside your encrypted array...  You can only use
>> whatever consistency mechanisms you already have for those files, like
>> "par2" Reed-Solomon checksums.
>>
>> Phil
> i have a backup from the three devices and i switched back to partion 
> case 1 and i fire up the fsck:
>
> fsck -y /dev/mapper/md2_nas
> fsck from util-linux 2.19.1
> e2fsck 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010)
> fsck.ext4: Group descriptors look bad... trying backup blocks...
> The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 1465134336 blocks
> The physical size of the device is 1465133568 blocks
> Either the superblock or the partition table is likely to be corrupt!
> Abort? yes
>
> thats all?
> is my chance on case 1 over?
should i try a fsck -a?