From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roland RoLaNd Subject: FW: can i recover an all spare raid10 array ? Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 20:11:09 +0200 Message-ID: References: ,<20141028170111.GA20226@cthulhu.home.robinhill.me.uk>,, 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: "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-raid.ids sending again as it failed the first time for some unknown reason=A0 ________________________________ > From: r_o_l_a_n_d@hotmail.com=20 > To: robin@robinhill.me.uk=20 > CC: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org=20 > Subject: RE: can i recover an all spare raid10 array ?=20 > Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 19:30:50 +0200=20 >=20 >=20 > Correction:=20 > i couldn't force assemble the read devices so i issued instead:=20 >=20 > mdadm --create /dev/md089 --assume-clean --level=3D10 --verbose=20 > --raid-devices=3D8 missing /dev/dm-1 /dev/dm-0 /dev/dm-5 /dev/dm-3=20 > /dev/dm-2 missing /dev/dm-4=20 >=20 > which got it into degraded state=20 >=20 >=20 > ________________________________=20 > From: r_o_l_a_n_d@hotmail.com=20 > To: robin@robinhill.me.uk=20 > CC: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org=20 > Subject: RE: can i recover an all spare raid10 array ?=20 > Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 19:29:25 +0200=20 >=20 > Thanks for pitching in.=20 > here are the responses to you questions:=20 >=20 >=20 > - yes i expected both of them to be part of the array though one of=20 > them was just added to the array and didnt finish recovering when rai= d1=20 > "/" crashed=20 >=20 > - i have not removed their superblocks or at least not in a way that = i=20 > amaware of=20 >=20 > - mdadm: 3.2.5-5ubuntu4.1=20 > - uname -a: 3.13.0-24-generic=20 >=20 >=20 > PS:=20 > I just followed this recovery page:=20 > https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Recovering_a_failed_software_R= AID=20 >=20 > I managed to reach the last step, whenever i tried to mount it kept=20 > asking me for the right file system=20 >=20 >=20 >> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 17:01:11 +0000=20 >> From: robin@robinhill.me.uk=20 >> To: r_o_l_a_n_d@hotmail.com=20 >> CC: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org=20 >> Subject: Re: can i recover an all spare raid10 array ?=20 >>=20 >> On Tue Oct 28, 2014 at 06:22:11PM +0200, Roland RoLaNd wrote:=20 >>=20 >>> I have two raid arrays on my system:=20 >>> raid1: /dev/sdd1 /dev/sdh1=20 >>> raid10: /dev/sde1 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdf1 /dec/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdg1= =20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> two disks had bad sectors: sdd and sdf <<-- they both got hot swapp= ed.=20 >>> i added sdf back to raid10 and recovery took place but adding sdd1 = to=20 >>> raid1 proved to be troublesome=20 >>> as i didn't have anything important on '/' i formatted and installe= d=20 >>> ubuntu 14 on raid1=20 >>>=20 >>> now system is up on raid 1, but raid10 (md127) is inactive=20 >>>=20 >>> cat /proc/mdstat=20 >>>=20 >>> Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6]=20 > [raid5] [raid4] [raid10]=20 >>> md127 : inactive sde1[2](S) sdg1[8](S) sdc1[6](S) sdb1[5](S)=20 > sdf1[4](S) sda1[3](S)=20 >>> 17580804096 blocks super 1.2=20 >>>=20 >>> md2 : active raid1 sdh4[0] sdd4[1]=20 >>> 2921839424 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]=20 >>> [=3D=3D>..................] resync =3D 10.4%=20 > (304322368/2921839424) finish=3D672.5min speed=3D64861K/sec=20 >>>=20 >>> md1 : active raid1 sdh3[0] sdd3[1]=20 >>> 7996352 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]=20 >>>=20 >>> md0 : active raid1 sdh2[0] sdd2[1]=20 >>> 292544 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]=20 >>>=20 >>> unused devices: =20 >>> if i try to assemble md127=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> mdadm --assemble /dev/md127 /dev/sde1 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdf1=20 > /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdg1=20 >>> mdadm: /dev/sde1 is busy - skipping=20 >>> mdadm: /dev/sda1 is busy - skipping=20 >>> mdadm: /dev/sdf1 is busy - skipping=20 >>> mdadm: /dev/sdb1 is busy - skipping=20 >>> mdadm: /dev/sdc1 is busy - skipping=20 >>> mdadm: /dev/sdg1 is busy - skipping=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> if i try to add one of the disks: mdadm --add /dev/md127 /dev/sdj1=20 >>> mdadm: cannot get array info for /dev/md127=20 >>>=20 >>> if i try:=20 >>>=20 >>> mdadm --stop /dev/md127=20 >>> mdadm: stopped /dev/md127=20 >>>=20 >>> then running: mdadm --assemble /dev/md127 /dev/sde1 /dev/sda1=20 > /dev/sdf1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdg1=20 >>>=20 >>> returns:=20 >>>=20 >>> assembled from 5 drives and 1 rebuilding - not enough to start the = array=20 >>>=20 >>> what does it mean ? is my data lost ?=20 >>>=20 >>> if i examine one of the md127 raid 10 array disks it shows this:=20 >>>=20 >>> mdadm --examine /dev/sde1=20 >>> /dev/sde1:=20 >>> Magic : a92b4efc=20 >>> Version : 1.2=20 >>> Feature Map : 0x0=20 >>> Array UUID : ab90d4c8:41a55e14:635025cc:28f0ee76=20 >>> Name : ubuntu:data (local to host ubuntu)=20 >>> Creation Time : Sat May 10 21:54:56 2014=20 >>> Raid Level : raid10=20 >>> Raid Devices : 8=20 >>>=20 >>> Avail Dev Size : 5860268032 (2794.39 GiB 3000.46 GB)=20 >>> Array Size : 11720534016 (11177.57 GiB 12001.83 GB)=20 >>> Used Dev Size : 5860267008 (2794.39 GiB 3000.46 GB)=20 >>> Data Offset : 262144 sectors=20 >>> Super Offset : 8 sectors=20 >>> State : clean=20 >>> Device UUID : a2a5db61:bd79f0ae:99d97f17:21c4a619=20 >>>=20 >>> Update Time : Tue Oct 28 10:07:18 2014=20 >>> Checksum : 409deeb4 - correct=20 >>> Events : 8655=20 >>>=20 >>> Layout : near=3D2=20 >>> Chunk Size : 512K=20 >>>=20 >>> Device Role : Active device 2=20 >>> Array State : AAAAAAAA ('A' =3D=3D active, '.' =3D=3D missing)=20 >>>=20 >>> Used Dev Size : 5860267008 (2794.39 GiB 3000.46 GB) <<--- does this= =20 > mean i still have my data ?=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> the remaining two disks:=20 >>>=20 >>> mdadm --examine /dev/sdj1=20 >>> mdadm: No md superblock detected on /dev/sdj1.=20 >>> mdadm --examine /dev/sdi1=20 >>> mdadm: No md superblock detected on /dev/sdi1.=20 >>=20 >> The --examine output indicates the RAID10 array was 8 members, not 6= =2E=20 >> As it stands, you are missing two array members (presumably a mirror= ed=20 >> pair as mdadm won't start the array). Without these you're missing 5= 12K=20 >> of every 2M in the array, so your data is toast (well, with a lot of= =20 >> effort you may recover some files under 1.5M in size).=20 >>=20 >> Were you expecting sdi1 and sdj1 to have been part of the original=20 >> RAID10 array? Have you removed the superblocks from them at any poin= t?=20 >> For completeness, what mdadm and kernel versions are you running?=20 >>=20 >> Cheers,=20 >> Robin=20 >> --=20 >> ___=20 >> ( ' } | Robin Hill |=20 >> / / ) | Little Jim says .... |=20 >> // !! | "He fallen in de water !!" |=20 -- 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