Richard Scobie said: (by the date of Fri, 09 Nov 2007 10:32:08 +1300)
This was the bug I was thinking of:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-raidm=116003247912732w=2
This bug says that it only with mdadm 1.x:
If a drive is added to a raid1 using older tools
(mdadm-1.x or raidtools) then
Richard Scobie said: (by the date of Thu, 08 Nov 2007 08:13:19 +1300)
What kernel and RAID level is this?
If it's RAID 1, I seem to recall there was a relatively recently fixed
bug for this.
debian etch, stock install
Linux 2.6.18-5-k7 #1 SMP i686 GNU/Linux
The problem was with was
Janek Kozicki wrote:
Richard Scobie said: (by the date of Thu, 08 Nov 2007 08:13:19 +1300)
What kernel and RAID level is this?
If it's RAID 1, I seem to recall there was a relatively recently fixed
bug for this.
debian etch, stock install
Linux 2.6.18-5-k7 #1 SMP i686 GNU/Linux
The
Janek Kozicki [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
I finished copying all data from old disc hdc to my shiny new
RAID5 array (/dev/hda3 /dev/sda3 missing). Next step is to create a
partition on hdc and add it to the array. And so I did this:
# mdadm --add /dev/md1 /dev/hdc3
But then I had a
Janek Kozicki wrote:
Goswin von Brederlow said: (by the date of Wed, 07 Nov 2007 10:17:51 +0100)
Strange. That is exactly how I always do it and it always just worked.
mdadm should start syncing on any spare as soon as a disk fails or you
add the spare to a degraded array afaik. No
Goswin von Brederlow said: (by the date of Wed, 07 Nov 2007 10:17:51 +0100)
Strange. That is exactly how I always do it and it always just worked.
mdadm should start syncing on any spare as soon as a disk fails or you
add the spare to a degraded array afaik. No special start now
Hi,
I finished copying all data from old disc hdc to my shiny new
RAID5 array (/dev/hda3 /dev/sda3 missing). Next step is to create a
partition on hdc and add it to the array. And so I did this:
# mdadm --add /dev/md1 /dev/hdc3
But then I had a problem - the /dev/hdc3 was a spare, it didn't
