On May 28, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Justin Brown <justin.br...@fandingo.org> wrote:
> Chris, > > Thanks for the tip. I was able to mount the drive as degraded and > recovery. Then, I deleted the faulty drive, leaving me with the > following array: > > > Label: media uuid: 7b7afc82-f77c-44c0-b315-669ebd82f0c5 > > Total devices 6 FS bytes used 2.40TiB > > devid 1 size 931.51GiB used 919.88GiB path > /dev/mapper/SAMSUNG_HD103SI_499431FS734755p1 > > devid 2 size 931.51GiB used 919.38GiB path /dev/dm-8 > > devid 3 size 1.82TiB used 1.19TiB path /dev/dm-6 > > devid 4 size 931.51GiB used 919.88GiB path /dev/dm-5 > > devid 5 size 0.00 used 918.38GiB path /dev/dm-11 > > devid 6 size 1.82TiB used 3.88GiB path /dev/dm-9 > > > /dev/dm-11 is the failed drive. You deleted a faulty drive, dm-11 is a failed drive. Is there a difference between faulty drive and failed drive, or are they the same drive? And what drive is the one you said you successfully added? I don't see how you have 6 devices raid10, with one failed and one added device. You need an even number of good drives to fix this. > I take it that size 0 is a good sign. Seems neither good nor bad to me, it's 0 because it's a dead drive presumably and therefore Btrfs isn't getting device information from it. > I'm not really sure where to go from here. I tried rebooting the > system with the failed drive attached, and Btrfs re-adds it to the > array. Should I physically remove the drive now? Is a balance > recommended? No don't do anything else until someone actually understands faulty vs failed vs added drives. Chris Murphy-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
