Hi Paul
Maybe I'm also wrong, but I think, that the system tries to initialize md3
before having initialized md1 and md2. Let me explain my idea:
The system comes up, recognizes the md1, starts the process to initialize it
and goes forward, recognizing that there is a md2 and does the same as before
(maybe the md1-initialization is still running). Now it recognizes the md3
before having finished the initialization-phase of md1 and md2...
Dietmar
Paul Hancock wrote:
> I'm probably doing something obviously wrong, but I am unable to get a
> RAID array using other RAID arrays working. I have created md1, which is
> a RAID-1 array using sdb2 and sdc2, and md2, which is a RAID-5 array using
> sda6, sdb1, sdc2. All partitions are the same size. md3 is a linear
> array, incorporating sdb3 and sdc3, as well as md1 and md2. Running
> mke2fs on md3 causes the process to hang, and incapacitates the machine
> (cannot login or completely reboot system). I have the listed partitions
> set to auto-mount (type fd). md2 always comes up in degraded mode, and
> md3 does not come up at all. I am running v. 0.90 on Linux 2.2.3 + the
> raid 0145 patch.
>
> To those pondering the logic of such a configuration, I wanted to test
> RAID 1 and RAID 5, while having available a partition using all of the
> combined free disk space.
>
> What am I doing wrong? I have included by /etc/raidtab below:
>
> # RAID config file, Paul Hancock, 3/18/99
> raiddev /dev/md1
> raid-level 1
> nr-raid-disks 2
> nr-spare-disks 0
> chunk-size 4
>
> device /dev/sdb2
> raid-disk 0
>
> device /dev/sdc2
> raid-disk 1
>
> raiddev /dev/md2
> raid-level 5
> nr-raid-disks 3
> chunk-size 4
> parity-algorithm left-symmetric
>
> device /dev/sda6
> raid-disk 0
> device /dev/sdb1
> raid-disk 1
> device /dev/sdc1
> raid-disk 2
>
> raiddev /dev/md3
> raid-level linear
> persistent-superblock 1
> nr-raid-disks 4
> nr-spare-disks 0
> chunk-size 4
>
> device /dev/sdb3
> raid-disk 0
> device /dev/sdc3
> raid-disk 1
> device /dev/md1
> raid-disk 2
> device /dev/md2
> raid-disk 3
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> -- Paul ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
