From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Chen Subject: Re: RAID without superblock Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 11:17:09 -0700 Message-ID: <7bc80d500904201117r60353fa1ped1d64a50da87bc0@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090419114743.GA29195@lazy.lzy> <20090419210200.GA6942@lazy.lzy> <1240178252.31728.12.camel@cichlid.com> <20090420181045.GA4236@lazy.lzy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090420181045.GA4236@lazy.lzy> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Piergiorgio Sartor Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids I don't think it's a problem anymore, but on Centos 5.2, use of superblocks other than 0.90 and sparegroups with md monitor are not compatible. I found this out the hard way after creating a few arrays with 1.2 and putting them in the same sparegroup--when one array went degraded, mdadm removed the spare from one, but failed when trying to add it to the other, leaving me one spare less and with a degraded array still. =46un! Cheers cc On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Piergiorgio Sartor wrote: > Hi, > > first of all thanks a lot for all the suggestions, > it is really nice to have this support! > > While reading the answers, I realized that I did > not make the "requirements" really clear. My bad. > > The "primary" disk is an external one, which 90% > of the time is connected to the same Linux PC. > But, it could happen it is removed and connected > somewhere else, where no "md" is available. > > My idea was, in order to have some protection, to > use it in RAID-1 "superblockless" configuration > on the "default" PC, and use it as a normal disk > whenever (or wherever) necessary. > Of course, the bitmap resync will not work, when > updating the disk directly, without "md" layer. > > On the other hand, if the full-resync is always > done from this disk to the local mirror, there > would be no problem, except time. > > The reason to do this kind of backup is that this > disk is encrypted, so a "block device copy" will > keep the data encrypted, while a backup of the > mounted disk will not. Unless done to another > encrypted disk/partition, of course. > > Clearly, any suggestion is still really appreciated! > > Thanks again, > > bye, > > -- > > piergiorgio > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid"= in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at =A0http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > --=20 Chris Chen "I want the kind of six pack you can't drink." -- Micah -- 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