* When does the raid bitmap actually work.
@ 2010-10-29 21:50 Daniel Reurich
2010-11-15 4:04 ` Neil Brown
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Reurich @ 2010-10-29 21:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-raid
Hi,
I'm wondering why if I fail and remove a drive from an array and then
re-add it a couple of minutes later that this forces a full resync even
though there is a bitmap setup. I was lead to believe that when using a
bitmap that it would only resync the areas of the array that have been
written too in the meantime. Am I mistaken in how the bitmap works? Or
is simply that I'm running either a too old kernel or version of mdadm?
The particular scenario I'm dealing with is having to drop members out
of the array to alter the partition table of each host disk one at a
time, and when I re-add the disks I'm having to wait for a full re-sync
taking 3 - 4 hours before doing the next members disk. As a result of
the partitioning changes, the device name changes from /dev/sd(X)2
to /dev/sd(X)3 but the partition itself remains untouched and in the
same location on disk.
Details: Debian Lenny Server
Mdadm version: 2.6.7.2
Kernel version: 2.6.29-2-amd64
:~# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md0 : active raid1 sdc2[4](S) sdg2[3] sdf2[2] sda1[0] sdb1[1]
308200 blocks [4/4] [UUUU]
md1 : active raid5 sdc3[4] sdg3[2] sda2[0] sdb2[1]
1463633664 blocks level 5, 256k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]
[============>........] recovery = 63.4% (309610996/487877888)
finish=154.6min speed=19215K/sec
bitmap: 1/2 pages [4KB], 131072KB chunk
:~# mdadm -D /dev/md1
/dev/md1:
Version : 00.90
Creation Time : Tue May 5 19:23:30 2009
Raid Level : raid5
Array Size : 1463633664 (1395.83 GiB 1498.76 GB)
Used Dev Size : 487877888 (465.28 GiB 499.59 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 1
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Intent Bitmap : Internal
Update Time : Sat Oct 30 10:40:32 2010
State : active, degraded, recovering
Active Devices : 3
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 1
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 256K
Rebuild Status : 65% complete
UUID : 5e64e0da:a5a68f88:03de972c:1e3eb3c3
Events : 0.24500
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2
1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2
2 8 99 2 active sync /dev/sdg3
4 8 35 3 spare rebuilding /dev/sdc3
The Removed and re-added partition:
:~# mdadm -E /dev/sdc3
/dev/sdc3:
Magic : a92b4efc
Version : 00.90.00
UUID : 5e64e0da:a5a68f88:03de972c:1e3eb3c3
Creation Time : Tue May 5 19:23:30 2009
Raid Level : raid5
Used Dev Size : 487877888 (465.28 GiB 499.59 GB)
Array Size : 1463633664 (1395.83 GiB 1498.76 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 1
Update Time : Sat Oct 30 10:47:08 2010
State : clean
Internal Bitmap : present
Active Devices : 3
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 1
Spare Devices : 1
Checksum : 8338653d - correct
Events : 24712
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 256K
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
this 4 8 35 4 spare /dev/sdc3
0 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2
1 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2
2 2 8 99 2 active sync /dev/sdg3
3 3 0 0 3 faulty removed
4 4 8 35 4 spare /dev/sdc3
One of the remaining member partitions:
:~# mdadm -E /dev/sda2
/dev/sda2:
Magic : a92b4efc
Version : 00.90.00
UUID : 5e64e0da:a5a68f88:03de972c:1e3eb3c3
Creation Time : Tue May 5 19:23:30 2009
Raid Level : raid5
Used Dev Size : 487877888 (465.28 GiB 499.59 GB)
Array Size : 1463633664 (1395.83 GiB 1498.76 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 1
Update Time : Sat Oct 30 10:44:23 2010
State : active
Internal Bitmap : present
Active Devices : 3
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 1
Spare Devices : 1
Checksum : 83380399 - correct
Events : 24629
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 256K
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
this 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2
0 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2
1 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2
2 2 8 99 2 active sync /dev/sdg3
3 3 0 0 3 faulty removed
4 4 8 35 4 spare /dev/sdc3
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: When does the raid bitmap actually work.
2010-10-29 21:50 When does the raid bitmap actually work Daniel Reurich
@ 2010-11-15 4:04 ` Neil Brown
2010-11-15 11:25 ` Daniel Reurich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Neil Brown @ 2010-11-15 4:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Reurich; +Cc: linux-raid
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 10:50:39 +1300
Daniel Reurich <daniel@centurion.net.nz> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm wondering why if I fail and remove a drive from an array and then
> re-add it a couple of minutes later that this forces a full resync even
> though there is a bitmap setup. I was lead to believe that when using a
> bitmap that it would only resync the areas of the array that have been
> written too in the meantime. Am I mistaken in how the bitmap works? Or
> is simply that I'm running either a too old kernel or version of mdadm?
>
> The particular scenario I'm dealing with is having to drop members out
> of the array to alter the partition table of each host disk one at a
> time, and when I re-add the disks I'm having to wait for a full re-sync
> taking 3 - 4 hours before doing the next members disk. As a result of
> the partitioning changes, the device name changes from /dev/sd(X)2
> to /dev/sd(X)3 but the partition itself remains untouched and in the
> same location on disk.
This should work. I have just performed a simple test myself and it did work.
I used a slightly newer kernel and mdadm, but I don't recall any recent
changes which would affect this functionality.
However I must have used a different mechanism to change the partitioning
that you did, as sdb2 remained as sdb2 (i used cfdisk).
The mostly likely explanation is that the partition was changed somehow even
though you think it wasn't. The easiest way to confirm or deny this is to
check the output of
mdadm -E /dev/whatever
mdadm -X /dev/whatever
bother before and after the partitioning and see if they are the same.
If you can reproduce the bad behaviour, it would help a lot if you could show
the output of "-E" and "-X" on all devices before adding the removed device
back in, and then the same once the recovery is well underway.
Sorry I cannot be more helpful at this point.
NeilBrown
>
> Details: Debian Lenny Server
> Mdadm version: 2.6.7.2
> Kernel version: 2.6.29-2-amd64
>
> :~# cat /proc/mdstat
> Personalities : [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
> md0 : active raid1 sdc2[4](S) sdg2[3] sdf2[2] sda1[0] sdb1[1]
> 308200 blocks [4/4] [UUUU]
>
> md1 : active raid5 sdc3[4] sdg3[2] sda2[0] sdb2[1]
> 1463633664 blocks level 5, 256k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]
> [============>........] recovery = 63.4% (309610996/487877888)
> finish=154.6min speed=19215K/sec
> bitmap: 1/2 pages [4KB], 131072KB chunk
> :~# mdadm -D /dev/md1
> /dev/md1:
> Version : 00.90
> Creation Time : Tue May 5 19:23:30 2009
> Raid Level : raid5
> Array Size : 1463633664 (1395.83 GiB 1498.76 GB)
> Used Dev Size : 487877888 (465.28 GiB 499.59 GB)
> Raid Devices : 4
> Total Devices : 4
> Preferred Minor : 1
> Persistence : Superblock is persistent
>
> Intent Bitmap : Internal
>
> Update Time : Sat Oct 30 10:40:32 2010
> State : active, degraded, recovering
> Active Devices : 3
> Working Devices : 4
> Failed Devices : 0
> Spare Devices : 1
>
> Layout : left-symmetric
> Chunk Size : 256K
>
> Rebuild Status : 65% complete
>
> UUID : 5e64e0da:a5a68f88:03de972c:1e3eb3c3
> Events : 0.24500
>
> Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
> 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2
> 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2
> 2 8 99 2 active sync /dev/sdg3
> 4 8 35 3 spare rebuilding /dev/sdc3
>
> The Removed and re-added partition:
>
> :~# mdadm -E /dev/sdc3
> /dev/sdc3:
> Magic : a92b4efc
> Version : 00.90.00
> UUID : 5e64e0da:a5a68f88:03de972c:1e3eb3c3
> Creation Time : Tue May 5 19:23:30 2009
> Raid Level : raid5
> Used Dev Size : 487877888 (465.28 GiB 499.59 GB)
> Array Size : 1463633664 (1395.83 GiB 1498.76 GB)
> Raid Devices : 4
> Total Devices : 4
> Preferred Minor : 1
>
> Update Time : Sat Oct 30 10:47:08 2010
> State : clean
> Internal Bitmap : present
> Active Devices : 3
> Working Devices : 4
> Failed Devices : 1
> Spare Devices : 1
> Checksum : 8338653d - correct
> Events : 24712
>
> Layout : left-symmetric
> Chunk Size : 256K
>
> Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
> this 4 8 35 4 spare /dev/sdc3
>
> 0 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2
> 1 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2
> 2 2 8 99 2 active sync /dev/sdg3
> 3 3 0 0 3 faulty removed
> 4 4 8 35 4 spare /dev/sdc3
>
>
>
>
> One of the remaining member partitions:
>
> :~# mdadm -E /dev/sda2
> /dev/sda2:
> Magic : a92b4efc
> Version : 00.90.00
> UUID : 5e64e0da:a5a68f88:03de972c:1e3eb3c3
> Creation Time : Tue May 5 19:23:30 2009
> Raid Level : raid5
> Used Dev Size : 487877888 (465.28 GiB 499.59 GB)
> Array Size : 1463633664 (1395.83 GiB 1498.76 GB)
> Raid Devices : 4
> Total Devices : 4
> Preferred Minor : 1
>
> Update Time : Sat Oct 30 10:44:23 2010
> State : active
> Internal Bitmap : present
> Active Devices : 3
> Working Devices : 4
> Failed Devices : 1
> Spare Devices : 1
> Checksum : 83380399 - correct
> Events : 24629
>
> Layout : left-symmetric
> Chunk Size : 256K
>
> Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
> this 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2
>
> 0 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2
> 1 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2
> 2 2 8 99 2 active sync /dev/sdg3
> 3 3 0 0 3 faulty removed
> 4 4 8 35 4 spare /dev/sdc3
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: When does the raid bitmap actually work.
2010-11-15 4:04 ` Neil Brown
@ 2010-11-15 11:25 ` Daniel Reurich
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Reurich @ 2010-11-15 11:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Neil Brown; +Cc: linux-raid
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 15:04 +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 10:50:39 +1300
> Daniel Reurich <daniel@centurion.net.nz> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm wondering why if I fail and remove a drive from an array and then
> > re-add it a couple of minutes later that this forces a full resync even
> > though there is a bitmap setup. I was lead to believe that when using a
> > bitmap that it would only resync the areas of the array that have been
> > written too in the meantime. Am I mistaken in how the bitmap works? Or
> > is simply that I'm running either a too old kernel or version of mdadm?
> >
> > The particular scenario I'm dealing with is having to drop members out
> > of the array to alter the partition table of each host disk one at a
> > time, and when I re-add the disks I'm having to wait for a full re-sync
> > taking 3 - 4 hours before doing the next members disk. As a result of
> > the partitioning changes, the device name changes from /dev/sd(X)2
> > to /dev/sd(X)3 but the partition itself remains untouched and in the
> > same location on disk.
>
> This should work. I have just performed a simple test myself and it did work.
> I used a slightly newer kernel and mdadm, but I don't recall any recent
> changes which would affect this functionality.
Ok.
>
> However I must have used a different mechanism to change the partitioning
> that you did, as sdb2 remained as sdb2 (i used cfdisk).
Gdisk actually - I had to change to gpt partition table and add a boot
partition. (I stole space from the raid1 /dev/md0 /boot partition which
I'd shrunk, and then dropped and re-added each member to that array).
This was all in order to make grub work properly as between versions it
went from fitting the raid enabled boot image in the embedding space to
not fitting, thus the need for adding gpt + bios boot volume.
> The mostly likely explanation is that the partition was changed somehow even
> though you think it wasn't.
Maybe. I did change the partition table from msdos to gpt and added a
boot partition at the start of the disk (causing the renumbering).
Anyway I successfully completed the job albeit after waiting for a full
resync after each disc manipulation, so it wasn't critical, just took
ages longer then I had hoped for.
Thanks anyway.
--
Daniel Reurich.
Centurion Computer Technology (2005) Ltd
Mobile 021 797 722
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-11-15 11:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-10-29 21:50 When does the raid bitmap actually work Daniel Reurich
2010-11-15 4:04 ` Neil Brown
2010-11-15 11:25 ` Daniel Reurich
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.