On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:43:52 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> On Thursday 30 October 2008, Hendrik Boom wrote: ...
>> > I've had trouble with removing drives if I didn't manually fail them.
>> > Someone who knows the inner workings of mdadm might be able to
>> > provide more information on that.
>>
>>
On Thursday 30 October 2008, Hendrik Boom wrote:
...
> > I've had trouble with removing drives if I didn't manually fail
> > them. Someone who knows the inner workings of mdadm might be able
> > to provide more information on that.
>
> I wonder if /dev/hdc3 still needs to be manually failed. I won
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 17:58:56 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 October 2008, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>>
>> I'm a bit surprised that none of the messages identifies the other
>> drive, /dev/hdc3. Is this normal? Is that information available
>> somewhere besides the sysadmin's memory?
>
>
On Wednesday 29 October 2008, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 13:00:25 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> > On Wednesday 29 October 2008, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> >> I got the message (via email)
> >>
> >> This is an automatically generated mail message from mdadm running
> >> on april
> >>
> >> A
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 13:00:25 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 October 2008, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>> I got the message (via email)
>>
>> This is an automatically generated mail message from mdadm running on
>> april
>>
>> A DegradedArray event had been detected on md device /dev/md0.
>>
>
On Wednesday 29 October 2008, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> I got the message (via email)
>
> This is an automatically generated mail message from mdadm
> running on april
>
> A DegradedArray event had been detected on md device /dev/md0.
>
> Faithfully yours, etc.
>
> P.S. The /proc/mdstat file currently
6 matches
Mail list logo
