From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Hardcastle Subject: Re: argh! Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:18:52 +0000 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: Jon@eHardcastle.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Leslie Rhorer Cc: Phil Turmel , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 31 October 2010 00:57, Leslie Rhorer wrote: >> >> > a new HDD has failed on me during a scrub.... i tried to remove= /fail >> it >> >> but >> >> > it kept saying the device was busy. so i forced a reboot. > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0BTW, it's better, if you can, to free up the device, r= ather than > reboot. =A0Now that you have rebooted, that's no longer possible. > >> >> > I have physically disconnected the drive.. >> >> > >> >> > can anyone take alook at the examine below and tell me if it is >> should >> >> > assemble ok? >> >> > >> >> > I tried >> >> > >> >> > mdadm --assemble /dev/md4 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdd1 /dev/sd= e1 >> >> /dev/sdf1 >> >> > /dev/sdg1 >> >> >> >> I'd try: >> >> >> >> mdadm --assemble /dev/md4 /dev/sd{g,a,e}1 missing /dev/sd{d,b,f}1 >> > >> > >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Yeah, I would, too. =A0Also, what are the contents = of >> > /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf? =A0If it is correct, then `mdadm --assemble= --scan` >> > should work. >> > >> > >> >> Hey, yeah I am confused as drives have failed before and it has stil= l >> assembled. I think it is because it is unclean.... >> >> Can I ask how did you arrive at the command list? > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Look at the results of --examine. =A0Every one shows t= he list of > drives and their order. > >> what is wrong with dbf? > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0'No idea. =A0SMART might give you an idea, or the kern= el logs. > >> also this is my mdadm.conf >> >> >> DEVICE /dev/sd[abcdefg]1 /dev/hd[ab]1 >> >> ARRAY /dev/md/4 metadata=3D0.90 UUID=3D7438efd1:9e6ca2b5:d6b88274:70= 03b1d3 >> ARRAY /dev/md/3 metadata=3D0.90 UUID=3Da1f24bc9:4e72a820:3a03f7dc:07= f9ab98 >> ARRAY /dev/md/2 metadata=3D0.90 UUID=3D0642323a:938992ef:b750ab21:e5= a55662 >> ARRAY /dev/md/1 metadata=3D0.90 UUID=3Dd4eeec62:148b3425:3f5e931c:bb= 3ef499 > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0--scan may work. =A0I suggest updating the file with a= ll the array > members. =A0Why are all the arrays assembled with 0.90 superblocks? =A0= The 0.90 > superblock has some significant limitations. =A0They may not be causi= ng you > grief right now, but they could in the future. =A0The only arrays I h= ave built > with 0.90 superblocks are the /boot targets, because GRUB2 does not s= upport > 1.x superblocks. =A0I've chosen 1.2 for all the others. > Hi, Thanks for your help. I use 0.90 as that is what there was when the machine was build ~3yrs ago.. the array has been grown and resized since then. Does anyone have a feature list for the superblocks? Why upgrade.....? Thanks -- 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