Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares! -> Solved !

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Pierre =?utf-8?q?Vign=C3=A9ras?=
Date: Friday, May 21, 2010 - 2:27 pm

Sorry for the delay of my reply...

This small mail to let you know that my RAID array is currently recovering 
thanks to the valuable inputs of this mailing list users. You are great!

For the curious, what I did is the following:

# ##### Do not forget the '--assume-clean' as I almost did! ;-(
# mdadm -C /dev/md2 -l 10 -n 4 -c 64 -e 0.90 --assume-clean /dev/sdd1 missing 
/dev/sdc1 missing               
# vgchange -a y                                                                                               
# xfs_repair -n -t 1 -v /dev/my-vg/my-lv
# mount -o ro /dev/my-vg/my-lv /mnt/tmp
# find /mnt/tmp
# du -ks /mnt/tmp/
# umount /mnt/tmp
# #### Required: XFS asked the log to get replayed
# mount /dev/my-vg/my-lv /mnt/tmp/
# umount /mnt/tmp
# xfs_repair  -t 1 -v /dev/my-vg/my-lv
# mdadm --manage /dev/md2 --add /dev/sde1
# mdadm --manage /dev/md2 --add /dev/sdf1

The array is currently at 25 % of the recovery process. A bit too soon to say 
that everything is fine... By the way, I am quite sure now that my USB 
controllers (or the use driver or whatever in the chain except all disks) are 
buggy: all the other RAIDs of my setup are gone!

I will try to recover them using the same kind of process, to backup all data. 
Do you think that using BBR (since each time, the burden started due to a 
sector (write?) error), the problem will be "solved" (or at least postponed 
until BBR itself does not have enough free sectors)?

Anyway, again, thanks a lot to all of you. 
Open Source rocks! ;-)
-- 
Pierre Vignéras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
RE: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, Leslie Rhorer, (Sun May 16, 12:56 pm)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, Pierre =?iso-8859-1? ..., (Mon May 17, 11:10 am)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, Tim Small, (Mon May 17, 2:09 pm)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, Neil Brown, (Mon May 17, 6:30 pm)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, Neil Brown, (Mon May 17, 7:06 pm)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, MRK, (Tue May 18, 3:25 pm)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, Pierre =?utf-8?q?Vig ..., (Tue May 18, 4:07 pm)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, Neil Brown, (Tue May 18, 6:45 pm)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, Simon Matthews, (Wed May 19, 12:56 pm)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares!, Pierre =?utf-8?q?Vig ..., (Fri May 21, 2:00 pm)
Re: mdadm: failed devices become spares! -> Solved !, Pierre =?utf-8?q?Vig ..., (Fri May 21, 2:27 pm)