That would be a correct assesment. I've gotten the new howto, and new
raidtools - which kernel should i be using, or who's patch should i apply to standard
kernel source?
Sorry about the bounce, momentary sendmail misconfiguration while upgrading
email server.
- Eric
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Jakob Østergaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 02:34:03 +0100
>On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 04:32:14PM -0700, Eric Jorgensen wrote:
>>
>
>My last mail to you bounced, so I'm trying again. Sorry if anyone
>gets this twice...
>
>On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 03:41:37PM -0700, Eric Jorgensen wrote:
>> Well, I tried, something seems to be wrong. I had to update raidtools to
>> include the failed-disk directive. that took a while to figure out. someone
>> needs to tap linuxdoc.org on the shoulder and inform them their
>> software-raid-howto is painfully out of date. I'd do it myself but there are
>> too many blunt objects handy.
>
>http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/ is the place for the current
>0.90 software RAID howto.
>
>> ANYway, here's what happens. Sensitive argument replaced per request.
>>
>> ------------
>> [root@charlotte /root]# ./mkraid --truly-foolish /dev/md0
>> DESTROYING the contents of /dev/md0 in 5 seconds, Ctrl-C if unsure!
>> handling MD device /dev/md0
>> analyzing super-block
>> disk 0: /dev/sdd1, 8883913kB, raid superblock at 8883840kB
>> disk 1: /dev/sde1, 8964238kB, raid superblock at 8964160kB
>> disk 2: /dev/sdb1, failed
>> disk 3: /dev/sdc1, 8883913kB, raid superblock at 8883840kB
>> mkraid: aborted, see the syslog and /proc/mdstat for potential clues.
>>
>> ---------------
>>
>> And here's what dmesg reveals:
>>
>> ---------------
>>
>> bind<sdd1,1>
>> bind<sde1,2>
>> blkdev_open() failed: -19
>> md: [dev 00:00] has zero size, marking faulty!
>> md: error, md_import_device() returned -22
>>
>> ---------------
>>
>> And here's my raidtab. Sorry for the confusion, sdb is visually marked "4"
>> on the front of the case. Longer story.
>
>Gosh, something is just coming to my mind here... I was convinced that you
>were running 0.90 RAID, since most people posting on the list are (stupid
>assumptions come easy). But I guess you aren't... Right ?
>
>You're running a kernel with standard RAID, not an -ac or raid-patched kernel I
>guess... That means the new raidtools (which understand "failed-disk") will
>not talk to your kernel.
>
>I see one way out: Patch your old raidtools (version 0.42 or so ?) to
>understand the failed-disk directive. This may involve manual inclusion of
>some patch rejects. Maybe not. Don't know.
>
>If I'm really right that you're running the old code, you probably want to
>upgrade to 0.90 once your data are back :) The new code is stable, and the
>old code isn't (you can usually crash a RAID-5 box by stressing the RAID with
>the old code).
>
>
>Another way out would involve upgrading your old array to the new format, using
>the --upgrade switch, but I doubt that it is a very clever thing to do with the
>current state of your array...
>
>The failed-disk patch is fairly small. I guess you can apply it pretty quickly
>even if it doesn't apply cleanly to the older raidtools.
>
>
>--
>................................................................
>: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : And I see the elder races, :
>:.........................: putrid forms of man :
>: Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
>: OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
>:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............:
>
