RE: FW: Ugh . . .
*sigh* raidtools on the system in question reports that it is V0.90. Well,
specifically --
-
[root@charlotte /]# /sbin/raidstart --version
/sbin/raidstart v0.3d compiled for md raidtools-0.90
-
- Eric
-Original Message-
From: Jakob Østergaard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 6:34 PM
To: Eric Jorgensen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: Ugh . . .
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software-raid-howto is painfully out of date.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:
---
bindsdd1,1
bindsde1,2
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}...:
Re: FW: Ugh . . .
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:
---
bindsdd1,1
bindsde1,2
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}...:
Re: FW: Ugh . . .
On Sat, Dec 18, 1999 at 09:13:39AM -0700, Eric Jorgensen wrote:
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?
Problem is, if your current array was built with the old raidtools/kernel, you should
not upgrade the raidtools/kernel before the recovery, but instead get old raidtools to
go with your current kernel and array. Problem is that the failed-disk patch is for
the newer raidtools. Apply the new patch to the old raidtools (manually if required).
--
: [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}...:
FW: Ugh . . .
-Original Message-
From: Eric Jorgensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 3:42 PM
To: Jakob Østergaard
Subject: RE: Ugh . . .
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.
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:
---
bindsdd1,1
bindsde1,2
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.
---
raiddev /dev/md0
raid-level 5
nr-raid-disks 4
nr-spare-disks 0
chunk-size 512
device /dev/sdd1
raid-disk 0
device /dev/sde1
raid-disk 1
device /dev/sdb1
failed-disk 2
device /dev/sdc1
raid-disk 3
Thanks, very much, for any help at this time.
- Eric
-Original Message-
From: Jakob Østergaard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 11:30 AM
To: Eric Jorgensen
Subject: Re: Ugh . . .
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 11:10:42AM -0700, Eric Jorgensen wrote:
I have, well, had, 4 drives in a raid 5 array. drive 4 went
south, drive 3
is desynced.
What ? How ? You lost two drives in your RAID-5 ?
Box crashed for other reasons while it was in degraded
mode. Long story.
Wish RedHat had thought to include LOUD alarms for degraded drives.
If it has been in degraded mode for long, you won't save all your
data, or more
specifically, all you data will be saved but some of them will be older
versions. That might or might not work well with e2fsck.
Ahh, sounds rational. I knew i was missing something,
thanks for pointing
out manually ensuring the blank drive is failed out.
If it works out (and nobody gets to scream STOP in time ;)
please let me know.
PleasePlease: Before you actually do this, wait for a little
while to allow someone
on this list to jump in and say "DON'T!", if appropriate.
Agreed.
Thanks very much. Lemme know if you need any web hosting
space (heh heh .
. )
Thanks, I think I'm covered for now, but I'll keep it in mind;)
Cheers,
--
: [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}...:
Re: FW: Ugh . . .
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:
---
bindsdd1,1
bindsde1,2
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}...:
