I'm sorry- is this an inappropriate list to ask for help? There seemed
to be a fair amount of that when I searched the archives, but I don't
want to bug developers with my problems!
Please let me know if I should find another place to ask for help (and
please let me know where that might
Jed Davidow wrote:
I have a RAID5 (5+1spare) setup that works perfectly well until I
reboot. I have 6 drives (two different models) partitioned to give me
2 arrays, md0 and md1, that I use for /home and /var respectively.
When I reboot, the system assembles each array, but swaps out what was
Hi Bill,
Maybe I'm using the wrong words...
In this instance, on the previous boot, md1 was assembled from
sd[efbac]2 and sdg2 was the spare. When I rebooted it assembled from
sd[efbgc]2 and had no spare (appears that sdg was swapped in for sda).
Since sdg2 had been the spare, the array is
Jed Davidow wrote:
I'm sorry- is this an inappropriate list to ask for help? There seemed
to be a fair amount of that when I searched the archives, but I don't
want to bug developers with my problems!
Please let me know if I should find another place to ask for help (and
please let me know
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It looks to me like md inspects and attempts to assemble after each
drive controller is scanned (from dmesg, there appears to be a failed
bind on the first three devices after they are scanned, and then again
when the second controller is
distro: Ubuntu 7.10
Two files show up...
85-mdadm.rules:
# This file causes block devices with Linux RAID (mdadm) signatures to
# automatically cause mdadm to be run.
# See udev(8) for syntax
SUBSYSTEM==block, ACTION==add|change, ENV{ID_FS_TYPE}==linux_raid*, \
RUN+=watershed
One quick question about those rules. The 65-mdadm rule looks like it
checks ACTIVE arrays for filesystems, and the 85 rule assembles arrays.
Shouldn't they run in the other order?
distro: Ubuntu 7.10
Two files show up...
85-mdadm.rules:
# This file causes block devices with Linux RAID
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
distro: Ubuntu 7.10
Two files show up...
85-mdadm.rules:
# This file causes block devices with Linux RAID (mdadm) signatures to
# automatically cause mdadm to be run.
# See udev(8) for syntax
SUBSYSTEM==block, ACTION==add|change,
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One quick question about those rules. The 65-mdadm rule looks like it
checks ACTIVE arrays for filesystems, and the 85 rule assembles arrays.
Shouldn't they run in the other order?
They are fine. The '65' rule applies to arrays. I.e. it
(Sorry- yes it looks like I posted an incorrect dmesg extract)
$egrep sd|md|raid|scsi /var/log/dmesg.0
[ 36.112449] md: linear personality registered for level -1
[ 36.117197] md: multipath personality registered for level -4
[ 36.121795] md: raid0 personality registered for level 0
[
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(Sorry- yes it looks like I posted an incorrect dmesg extract)
This still doesn't seem to match your description.
I see:
[ 41.247389] md: bindsdf1
[ 41.247584] md: bindsdb1
[ 41.247787] md: bindsda1
[ 41.247971] md: bindsdc1
[
11 matches
Mail list logo
