linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Can't re-assemble successfully after creation, initial sync and reboot
@ 2010-01-18 17:33 Stephan Stachurski
  2010-01-20 13:24 ` Stephan Stachurski
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephan Stachurski @ 2010-01-18 17:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-raid

I'm having problems with an array that I just created. It's a raid
level 5 with 4 devices using all of the default settings. I'm using
the version of mdadm that's included in ubuntu 9.10 repositories.

When I reboot the machine, /proc/mdstat shows this:
md_d0 : inactive sdc[2](S)

I can stop the device, and attempt the --assemble the array correctly,
but something still is wrong:

$ sudo mdadm --stop /dev/md_d0
mdadm: stopped /dev/md_d0
$ sudo mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 -fv /dev/sda /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sdd
mdadm: looking for devices for /dev/md0
mdadm: /dev/sda is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 0.
mdadm: /dev/sdb is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 1.
mdadm: /dev/sdc is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 2.
mdadm: /dev/sdd is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 3.
mdadm: added /dev/sdb to /dev/md0 as 1
mdadm: added /dev/sdc to /dev/md0 as 2
mdadm: added /dev/sdd to /dev/md0 as 3
mdadm: added /dev/sda to /dev/md0 as 0
mdadm: /dev/md0 has been started with 3 drives (out of 4).
$ sudo cat /proc/mdstat
md0: active raid5 sda[0] sdc[2] sdb[1]
2930287488 blocks level 5, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]

md_d0: inactive sdd[3](S)
976762496 blocks

Why, if it correctly identifies the devices that are members of
/dev/md0, and then adds them to /dev/md0, do I not get the complete
array?
--
Stephan E Stachurski

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Can't re-assemble successfully after creation, initial sync and reboot
  2010-01-18 17:33 Can't re-assemble successfully after creation, initial sync and reboot Stephan Stachurski
@ 2010-01-20 13:24 ` Stephan Stachurski
  2010-01-20 13:32   ` Majed B.
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephan Stachurski @ 2010-01-20 13:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-raid

Ok, I tried a couple of things, so far with no success.

I re-created the array, let it synchronize, then rebooted. When I
first created the array, the components devices looked like this:

md0 : active raid5 sda[0] sdb[1] sdc[2] sdd[3]

When I rebooted, it suddenly comes up like this, skipping component device 3:

md0 : active raid5 sda[0] sdd[4] sdb[1] sdc[2]

and it was automatically resyncing, destroying the last 6 hours I was
waiting for it to initially sync, and it changed my chunk size! Why do
I keep getting these problems?

On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Stephan Stachurski <ses1984@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm having problems with an array that I just created. It's a raid
> level 5 with 4 devices using all of the default settings. I'm using
> the version of mdadm that's included in ubuntu 9.10 repositories.
>
> When I reboot the machine, /proc/mdstat shows this:
> md_d0 : inactive sdc[2](S)
>
> I can stop the device, and attempt the --assemble the array correctly,
> but something still is wrong:
>
> $ sudo mdadm --stop /dev/md_d0
> mdadm: stopped /dev/md_d0
> $ sudo mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 -fv /dev/sda /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sdd
> mdadm: looking for devices for /dev/md0
> mdadm: /dev/sda is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 0.
> mdadm: /dev/sdb is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 1.
> mdadm: /dev/sdc is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 2.
> mdadm: /dev/sdd is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 3.
> mdadm: added /dev/sdb to /dev/md0 as 1
> mdadm: added /dev/sdc to /dev/md0 as 2
> mdadm: added /dev/sdd to /dev/md0 as 3
> mdadm: added /dev/sda to /dev/md0 as 0
> mdadm: /dev/md0 has been started with 3 drives (out of 4).
> $ sudo cat /proc/mdstat
> md0: active raid5 sda[0] sdc[2] sdb[1]
> 2930287488 blocks level 5, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]
>
> md_d0: inactive sdd[3](S)
> 976762496 blocks
>
> Why, if it correctly identifies the devices that are members of
> /dev/md0, and then adds them to /dev/md0, do I not get the complete
> array?
> --
> Stephan E Stachurski
>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Can't re-assemble successfully after creation, initial sync and reboot
  2010-01-20 13:24 ` Stephan Stachurski
@ 2010-01-20 13:32   ` Majed B.
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Majed B. @ 2010-01-20 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephan Stachurski; +Cc: linux-raid

Have you ran SMART tests using smartctl (part of smartmontools) on
each disk to verify that they're all sane and have no bad sectors or
any sort of damage?

Which version are you using exactly? mdadm --version

If the array is fresh, you don't need to resync. zero all disks then
create the array and use the assumeclean flag.
To zero them, use dd: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdx of=/dev/sdz of=/dev/sdy bs=50M

Also provide the output of mdadm -E /dev/sdx for each disk (paste it
in the email itself)

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Stephan Stachurski <ses1984@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, I tried a couple of things, so far with no success.
>
> I re-created the array, let it synchronize, then rebooted. When I
> first created the array, the components devices looked like this:
>
> md0 : active raid5 sda[0] sdb[1] sdc[2] sdd[3]
>
> When I rebooted, it suddenly comes up like this, skipping component device 3:
>
> md0 : active raid5 sda[0] sdd[4] sdb[1] sdc[2]
>
> and it was automatically resyncing, destroying the last 6 hours I was
> waiting for it to initially sync, and it changed my chunk size! Why do
> I keep getting these problems?
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Stephan Stachurski <ses1984@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm having problems with an array that I just created. It's a raid
>> level 5 with 4 devices using all of the default settings. I'm using
>> the version of mdadm that's included in ubuntu 9.10 repositories.
>>
>> When I reboot the machine, /proc/mdstat shows this:
>> md_d0 : inactive sdc[2](S)
>>
>> I can stop the device, and attempt the --assemble the array correctly,
>> but something still is wrong:
>>
>> $ sudo mdadm --stop /dev/md_d0
>> mdadm: stopped /dev/md_d0
>> $ sudo mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 -fv /dev/sda /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sdd
>> mdadm: looking for devices for /dev/md0
>> mdadm: /dev/sda is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 0.
>> mdadm: /dev/sdb is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 1.
>> mdadm: /dev/sdc is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 2.
>> mdadm: /dev/sdd is identified as a member of /dev/md0, slot 3.
>> mdadm: added /dev/sdb to /dev/md0 as 1
>> mdadm: added /dev/sdc to /dev/md0 as 2
>> mdadm: added /dev/sdd to /dev/md0 as 3
>> mdadm: added /dev/sda to /dev/md0 as 0
>> mdadm: /dev/md0 has been started with 3 drives (out of 4).
>> $ sudo cat /proc/mdstat
>> md0: active raid5 sda[0] sdc[2] sdb[1]
>> 2930287488 blocks level 5, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]
>>
>> md_d0: inactive sdd[3](S)
>> 976762496 blocks
>>
>> Why, if it correctly identifies the devices that are members of
>> /dev/md0, and then adds them to /dev/md0, do I not get the complete
>> array?
>> --
>> Stephan E Stachurski
>>
> --
> 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  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>



-- 
       Majed B.
--
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  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2010-01-20 13:32 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-01-18 17:33 Can't re-assemble successfully after creation, initial sync and reboot Stephan Stachurski
2010-01-20 13:24 ` Stephan Stachurski
2010-01-20 13:32   ` Majed B.

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).