Rainer Fuegenstein wrote:
hi,
1) the kernel was:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# uname -a
Linux alfred 2.6.19-1.2288.fc5xen0 #1 SMP Sat Feb 10 16:57:02 EST 2007
i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
now upgraded to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# uname -a
Linux alfred 2.6.20-1.2307.fc5xen0 #1 SMP Sun Mar 18 21:59:42 EDT 2007
i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
OS is fedora core 6
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --version
mdadm - v2.3.1 - 6 February 2006
2) I got the impression that the old 350W power supply was to weak, I
replaced it by a 400W version.
3) re-created the raid:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --misc --zero-superblock /dev/hde1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --misc --zero-superblock /dev/hdf1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --misc --zero-superblock /dev/hdg1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --misc --zero-superblock /dev/hdh1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --level=5
--raid-devices=4 --spare-devices=0 /dev/hde1 /dev/hdf1 /dev/hdg1
/dev/hdh1
mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric
mdadm: chunk size defaults to 64K
mdadm: size set to 390708736K
mdadm: array /dev/md0 started.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md0 : active raid5 hdh1[4] hdg1[2] hdf1[1] hde1[0]
1172126208 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]
unused devices: <none>
same as before.
4) did as dan suggested:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm -S /dev/md0
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --misc --zero-superblock /dev/hde1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --misc --zero-superblock /dev/hdf1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --misc --zero-superblock /dev/hdg1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --misc --zero-superblock /dev/hdh1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --create /dev/md0 -n 4 -l 5 /dev/hd[efg]1 missing
mdadm: array /dev/md0 started.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md0 : active raid5 hdg1[2] hdf1[1] hde1[0]
1172126208 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]
unused devices: <none>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# mdadm --add /dev/md0 /dev/hdh1
mdadm: added /dev/hdh1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md0 : active raid5 hdh1[4] hdg1[2] hdf1[1] hde1[0]
1172126208 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]
[>....................] recovery = 0.0% (47984/390708736)
finish=406.9min speed=15994K/sec
unused devices: <none>
seems like it's working now - tnx !
This still looks odd, why should it behave like this. I have created a
lot of arrays (when I was doing the RAID5 speed testing thread), and
never had anything like this. I'd like to see dmesg to see if there was
an error reported regarding this.
I think there's more going on, the original post showed the array as up
rather than some building status, also indicates some issue, perhaps.
What is the partition type of each of these partitions? Perhaps there's
a clue there.
--
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
