Re: [gentoo-user] Software RAID-1 - FIXED
On Tuesday 26 August 2014 18:25:00 Kerin Millar wrote: On 26/08/2014 17:49, Peter Humphrey wrote: So all this has been for nothing. I was sure I'd set 1.x metadata when creating the md device, but I must eat humble pie and glare once again at my own memory. Not to worry. However, I still think that it's a bug that mdadm behaves as it does, leading to the curious behaviour of the mdraid script. Please consider filing one and, if you do so, cc me into it. I have an interest in pursuing it. Done: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=521280 -- Regards Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Software RAID-1 - FIXED
On Tuesday 26 August 2014 17:00:37 Kerin Millar wrote: On 26/08/2014 15:54, Peter Humphrey wrote: On Tuesday 26 August 2014 14:21:19 Kerin Millar wrote: On 26/08/2014 10:38, Peter Humphrey wrote: On Monday 25 August 2014 18:46:23 Kerin Millar wrote: On 25/08/2014 17:51, Peter Humphrey wrote: On Monday 25 August 2014 13:35:11 Kerin Millar wrote: ---8 Again, can you find out what the exit status is under the circumstances that mdadm produces a blank error? I am hoping it is something other than 1. I've remerged mdadm to run this test. I'll report the result in a moment. [...] In fact it returned status 1. Sorry to disappoint :) Thanks for testing. Can you tell me exactly what /etc/mdadm.conf contained at the time? It was the installed file, untouched, which contains only comments. LVM has nothing to do with md. No, I know. I was just searching around for sources of info. When I talk about 1.x metadata, I am talking about the md superblock. You can find out what the metadata format is like so:- # mdadm --detail /dev/md7 | grep Version That's what I was looking for - thanks. It shows version 0.90. I did suspect that before, as I said, but couldn't find the command to check. If I had, I might not have started this thread. So all this has been for nothing. I was sure I'd set 1.x metadata when creating the md device, but I must eat humble pie and glare once again at my own memory. Many thanks for the effort you've put into this for me. -- Regards Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Software RAID-1 - FIXED
On 26/08/2014 17:49, Peter Humphrey wrote: On Tuesday 26 August 2014 17:00:37 Kerin Millar wrote: On 26/08/2014 15:54, Peter Humphrey wrote: On Tuesday 26 August 2014 14:21:19 Kerin Millar wrote: On 26/08/2014 10:38, Peter Humphrey wrote: On Monday 25 August 2014 18:46:23 Kerin Millar wrote: On 25/08/2014 17:51, Peter Humphrey wrote: On Monday 25 August 2014 13:35:11 Kerin Millar wrote: ---8 Again, can you find out what the exit status is under the circumstances that mdadm produces a blank error? I am hoping it is something other than 1. I've remerged mdadm to run this test. I'll report the result in a moment. [...] In fact it returned status 1. Sorry to disappoint :) Thanks for testing. Can you tell me exactly what /etc/mdadm.conf contained at the time? It was the installed file, untouched, which contains only comments. LVM has nothing to do with md. No, I know. I was just searching around for sources of info. When I talk about 1.x metadata, I am talking about the md superblock. You can find out what the metadata format is like so:- # mdadm --detail /dev/md7 | grep Version That's what I was looking for - thanks. It shows version 0.90. I did suspect that before, as I said, but couldn't find the command to check. If I had, I might not have started this thread. So all this has been for nothing. I was sure I'd set 1.x metadata when creating the md device, but I must eat humble pie and glare once again at my own memory. Not to worry. However, I still think that it's a bug that mdadm behaves as it does, leading to the curious behaviour of the mdraid script. Please consider filing one and, if you do so, cc me into it. I have an interest in pursuing it. --Kerin
