On Jan 10, 2012 8:48 AM, "Jeff Cranmer" <j...@lotussevencars.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Me too. > > > > > > mdadm --detail /dev/md0 thinks that /dev/sdc1 is faulty. > > > I'm not sure whether it's really faulty, or just that my setup for RAID > > > is screwed up. > > > > > > How do I get rid of an existing /dev/md0? > > > > you stop it. Override the superblock with dd.. and lose all data on the disks. > > > > > > > > > > I'm thinking that I can try creating a RAID1 array using the two > > > allegedly good disks and see if I can make that work. > > > > yeah > > > > > > > > If that works, I'll get rid of it and try recreating the RAID1 with one > > > good disk and the one that mdadm thinks is faulty. > > > > > > > you don't have to. You can migrate a 2 disk raid1 to a 3 disk raid5. Howtos > > are availble via google. > > > > > > just saying - box in suspend to ram. I change the cable (and connector on > > mobo) on a disk with two raid 1 partitions on it. > > > > One came back after starting the box. > > > > The other? Nothing I tried worked. At the end I dd'ed the partition.. and did > > a complete 'faulty disk/replacement' resync.... > > > > argl. > > > > > OK, so lesson learned. Just because it builds correctly in a RAID1 > array, that doesn't mean that the drive isn't toast. > > I ran badblocks on the three drive components and, surprise, > surprise, /dev/sdc came up faulty. I think I'll just build the two > non-faulty drives as a RAID0 array until the hard drive prices come back > down to pre-Thailand flood prices and backup regularly. > > Thanks for all the help. > > Jeff > > >
RAID 0?!?! Please reconsider. With RAID 0, *any* single drive failure will result in *total* data loss. Rgds,
