On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 10:53:33AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > Yes, although it's limited, you apparently only lose new data that was added
> > after you went into degraded mode and only if you add another drive where
> > you write more data.
> > In real life this shouldn't be too common, even if it is indeed a bug.
> It's entirely plausible a drive power/data cable becomes lose, runs for hours 
> degraded before the wayward device is reseated. It'll be common enough. It's 
> definitely not OK for all of that data in the interim to vanish just because 
> the volume has resumed from degraded to normal. Two states of data, normal vs 
> degraded, is scary. It sounds like totally silent data loss. So yeah if it's 
> reproducible it's worthy of a separate bug.

Actually what I did is more complex, I first added a drive to a degraded
array, and then re-added the drive that had been removed.
I don't know if re-adding the same drive that was removed would cause the
bug I saw.

For now, my array is back to actually trying to store the backup I had meant
for it, and the drives seems stable now that I fixed the power issue.

Does someone else want to try? :)

"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R.
Microsoft is to operating systems ....
                                      .... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/  
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to