On Fri, Aug 13, 1999 at 03:23:52PM -0400, Drenning Bruce wrote:
...
>
> It was originally built with hda7 as a failed-disk 1. I tried switching it
> to 0 in raidtab to see what would happen. Apparently nothing. cat
> /proc/mdstat still shows:
>
> Personalities : [raid1]
> read_ahead 1024 sectors
> md2 : active raid1 hdc2[0] hda2[1] 264000 blocks [2/2] [UU]
> md5 : active raid1 hdc5[0] hda5[1] 526080 blocks [2/2] [UU]
> md6 : active raid1 hdc6[0] hda6[1] 66432 blocks [2/2] [UU]
> md7 : active raid1 hdc7[0] hda7[1] 66432 blocks [2/2] [UU]
> md8 : active raid1 hdc8[0] hda8[1] 34176 blocks [2/2] [UU]
> unused devices: <none>
>
> even after raidstop, raidstart, even reboot. It appears then, that raidtab
> is only used by mkraid. Correct?
Yes
>
> The reason for this is that it seems the failed-disk directive would be nice
> for bringing the machine back up with a new disk after a failure. However,
> the docs say that failed-disk cannot be first. What happens if hdc fails?
Read on.... You don't need failed-disk directives for putting in new disks.
The failed-disk directive is just a nice option to have when initially building
a boot-on-raid system. It has no use (what I know of at least) on a system once
it's set up.
> If I bring up the PC with a new hdc, I expect RAID would come up in degraded
> mode of some kind, I could do a raidhotremove, partition hdc, and then
> raidhotadd. Is this right?
It's already removed if the machine comes up in degraded mode.
Partition and raidhotadd. Reconstruction will start, and you'll be back in
business.
................................................................
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : And I see the elder races, :
:.........................: putrid forms of man :
: Jakob �stergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
: OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............:
