Le 10/11/2017 à 09:12, deloptes a écrit :
Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
Here's what I see when I look at my RAID disks:
/dev/sda2: UUID="67d3c233-96a0-737c-5f88-ed9b936ea3ae"
UUID_SUB="48b56869-6f19-21b9-283f-3eee3ac90cf8" LABEL="snowball:1"
TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="3bb3729a-528b-4384-b6a5-b6d9e148ed2a"
/dev/sdb2: UUID="67d3c233-96a0-737c-5f88-ed9b936ea3ae"
UUID_SUB="1f48f805-4173-78cd-1f52-957920f66335" LABEL="snowball:1"
TYPE="linux_raid_member" PARTUUID="1bdd3893-9346-49d2-8292-a61075ad0c5e"
you see in your case PARTUUID is different for both members. In my case it
is identical and this is what is bothering me
and here's the relevant line in my /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf
ARRAY /dev/md/1 metadata=1.2 UUID=67d3c233:96a0737c:5f88ed9b:936ea3ae
name=snowball:1
It looks like the new style raid
Indeed, superblock format 1.x. In addition to the "array UUID" which is
common to all members of the array, it adds a specific "device UUID" for
each member. blkid labels it "UUID_SUB".
However this raid was created ~12y ago without metadata.
I don't think so. If the array was created without metadata, blkid would
not report the members as TYPE="linux_raid_member". It was rather
probably created with the old metadata format 0.90. You can check with
mdadm --examine /dev/sd[fg]1
