* missing superblock on RAID5
@ 2003-10-13 15:59 Victor
[not found] ` <3F8AD02C.8080606@fantinibakery.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Victor @ 2003-10-13 15:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-raid
At the time I created the RAID array I thought it had superblocks,
however if I use mdadm I get these results:
# mdadm --query /dev/md0
/dev/md0: 230.08GiB raid5 4 devices, 0 spares. Use mdadm --detail for
more detail.
/dev/md0: No md super block found, not an md component.
If the array really shouldn't have a superblock, is it possible to add
one (maybe marking a device faulty and readding it and repeating this
for each device)?
Thanks in advance,
Victor
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: missing superblock on RAID5
[not found] ` <3F8AD02C.8080606@fantinibakery.com>
@ 2003-10-13 17:47 ` Victor
2003-10-13 19:57 ` rob
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Victor @ 2003-10-13 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-raid
Now that you mention it I remember to have read somewhere that suberblocks
are written at the end of _partitions_ and not arrays.
Thanks for enlighten me :)
Maybe another stupid question:
# mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 00.90.00
Creation Time : Sun May 18 14:19:37 2003
Raid Level : raid5
Array Size : 241254336 (230.08 GiB 247.04 GB)
Device Size : 80418112 (76.69 GiB 82.35 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 5
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Update Time : Wed Oct 8 23:53:50 2003
State : dirty, no-errors
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 1
Spare Devices : 0
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 64K
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 3 65 0 active sync
/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part1
1 22 1 1 active sync
/dev/ide/host0/bus1/target0/lun0/part1
2 33 1 2 active sync
/dev/ide/host2/bus0/target0/lun0/part1
3 34 1 3 active sync
/dev/ide/host2/bus1/target0/lun0/part1
UUID : d8e2995c:dac28dbb:042eb748:bad0f5d6
Events : 0.52
It says (or at least I think it says) that this array has 5 devices of which
one is faulty. That's not true, it consists only out of 4 devices.
Victor
rob wrote:
> from my sys:
> root@fbc5:/etc # mdadm --query /dev/md3
> /dev/md3: 4.67GiB raid1 2 devices, 0 spares. Use mdadm --detail for more
> detail.
> /dev/md3: No md super block found, not an md component.
>
> root@fbc5:/etc # mdadm --query /dev/sdd5
> /dev/sdd5: is not an md array
> /dev/sdd5: device 1 in 2 device active raid1 md3. Use mdadm --examine
> for more detail.
>
> so the superblock is not on the /dev/md3 .
>
> query the disk partition to get the superblock
>
> Victor wrote:
>
> >At the time I created the RAID array I thought it had superblocks,
> >however if I use mdadm I get these results:
> >
> ># mdadm --query /dev/md0
> >/dev/md0: 230.08GiB raid5 4 devices, 0 spares. Use mdadm --detail for
> >more detail.
> >/dev/md0: No md super block found, not an md component.
> >
> >If the array really shouldn't have a superblock, is it possible to add
> >one (maybe marking a device faulty and readding it and repeating this
> >for each device)?
> >
> >
> >Thanks in advance,
> >
> >Victor
> >
> >
> >-
> >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] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: missing superblock on RAID5
2003-10-13 17:47 ` Victor
@ 2003-10-13 19:57 ` rob
2003-10-13 21:09 ` Victor
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: rob @ 2003-10-13 19:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Victor; +Cc: linux-raid
that does look strange. But I've been using software raid for just a
couple weeks, so don't know a lot about it.
here is same command on our computer. i have only 2 devices. looks like
something is up with yours. do you have another md device you can check
the command on?
root@fbc5:~ # mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 00.90.00
Creation Time : Tue Sep 30 15:22:45 2003
Raid Level : raid1
Array Size : 8337600 (7.95 GiB 8.54 GB)
Device Size : 8337600 (7.95 GiB 8.54 GB)
Raid Devices : 2
Total Devices : 2
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Update Time : Fri Oct 10 08:37:34 2003
State : dirty, no-errors
Active Devices : 2
Working Devices : 2
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 6 0 active sync
/dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part6
1 8 22 1 active sync
/dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target3/lun0/part6
UUID : 131c021d:7bc1e937:1bea7923:d7eed283
Events : 0.54
Victor wrote:
>Now that you mention it I remember to have read somewhere that suberblocks
>are written at the end of _partitions_ and not arrays.
>
>Thanks for enlighten me :)
>
>Maybe another stupid question:
># mdadm --detail /dev/md0
>/dev/md0:
> Version : 00.90.00
> Creation Time : Sun May 18 14:19:37 2003
> Raid Level : raid5
> Array Size : 241254336 (230.08 GiB 247.04 GB)
> Device Size : 80418112 (76.69 GiB 82.35 GB)
> Raid Devices : 4
> Total Devices : 5
>Preferred Minor : 0
> Persistence : Superblock is persistent
>
> Update Time : Wed Oct 8 23:53:50 2003
> State : dirty, no-errors
> Active Devices : 4
>Working Devices : 4
> Failed Devices : 1
> Spare Devices : 0
>
> Layout : left-symmetric
> Chunk Size : 64K
>
> Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
> 0 3 65 0 active sync
>/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part1
> 1 22 1 1 active sync
>/dev/ide/host0/bus1/target0/lun0/part1
> 2 33 1 2 active sync
>/dev/ide/host2/bus0/target0/lun0/part1
> 3 34 1 3 active sync
>/dev/ide/host2/bus1/target0/lun0/part1
> UUID : d8e2995c:dac28dbb:042eb748:bad0f5d6
> Events : 0.52
>
>
>It says (or at least I think it says) that this array has 5 devices of which
>one is faulty. That's not true, it consists only out of 4 devices.
>
>Victor
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: missing superblock on RAID5
2003-10-13 19:57 ` rob
@ 2003-10-13 21:09 ` Victor
2003-10-13 23:27 ` rob
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Victor @ 2003-10-13 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-raid
Actually I have 2 arrays and both have a device more than they should.
# mdadm --detail /dev/md1
/dev/md1:
Version : 00.90.00
Creation Time : Wed Jul 30 21:49:33 2003
Raid Level : raid5
Array Size : 18474496 (17.62 GiB 18.92 GB)
Device Size : 9237248 (8.81 GiB 9.46 GB)
Raid Devices : 3
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 1
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Update Time : Wed Oct 8 23:53:50 2003
State : dirty, no-errors
Active Devices : 3
Working Devices : 3
Failed Devices : 1
Spare Devices : 0
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 64K
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 3 3 0 active sync
/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part3
1 33 2 1 active sync
/dev/ide/host2/bus0/target0/lun0/part2
2 34 2 2 active sync
/dev/ide/host2/bus1/target0/lun0/part2
UUID : 7aa04659:9100ac93:b3808182:f11c0b78
Events : 0.36
rob wrote:
> that does look strange. But I've been using software raid for just a
> couple weeks, so don't know a lot about it.
>
> here is same command on our computer. i have only 2 devices. looks
> like
> something is up with yours. do you have another md device you can
> check
> the command on?
>
>
> root@fbc5:~ # mdadm --detail /dev/md0
> /dev/md0:
> Version : 00.90.00
> Creation Time : Tue Sep 30 15:22:45 2003
> Raid Level : raid1
> Array Size : 8337600 (7.95 GiB 8.54 GB)
> Device Size : 8337600 (7.95 GiB 8.54 GB)
> Raid Devices : 2
> Total Devices : 2
> Preferred Minor : 0
> Persistence : Superblock is persistent
>
> Update Time : Fri Oct 10 08:37:34 2003
> State : dirty, no-errors
> Active Devices : 2
> Working Devices : 2
> Failed Devices : 0
> Spare Devices : 0
>
> Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
> 0 8 6 0 active sync
> /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part6
> 1 8 22 1 active sync
> /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target3/lun0/part6
> UUID : 131c021d:7bc1e937:1bea7923:d7eed283
> Events : 0.54
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: missing superblock on RAID5
2003-10-13 21:09 ` Victor
@ 2003-10-13 23:27 ` rob
2003-10-13 23:44 ` Victor
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: rob @ 2003-10-13 23:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Victor; +Cc: linux-raid
which version of mdadm are you using?
which distribution & release?
Victor wrote:
>Actually I have 2 arrays and both have a device more than they should.
>
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: missing superblock on RAID5
2003-10-13 23:27 ` rob
@ 2003-10-13 23:44 ` Victor
2003-10-14 0:18 ` rob
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Victor @ 2003-10-13 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rob; +Cc: linux-raid
mdadm - v1.2.0 - 13 Mar 2003
on Gentoo (something like v1.4 with lots of updates)
rob wrote:
> which version of mdadm are you using?
>
> which distribution & release?
>
> Victor wrote:
>
> >Actually I have 2 arrays and both have a device more than they should.
> >
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: missing superblock on RAID5
2003-10-13 23:44 ` Victor
@ 2003-10-14 0:18 ` rob
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: rob @ 2003-10-14 0:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Victor; +Cc: linux-raid
my info:
mandrake 9.1
mdadm 1.2.0
do you have ARRAY or DEVICE entries in your /etc/mdadm.conf ?
if so try commenting them out and run the mdadm command again.
Did the GENTOO mdadm come with a monitoring script for in /etc/init.d
? Mandrake's rpm did not.
RedHats's mdadm rpm contains /etc/init.d/mdmonitor script which does a
great job running mdadm --monitor.
I used RH's mdmonitor on the Mandrake computer. works great, with just 2
lines in /etc/mdadm.conf.
RedHat seems to have software raid implemented better than Mandrake.
Victor wrote:
>mdadm - v1.2.0 - 13 Mar 2003
>on Gentoo (something like v1.4 with lots of updates)
>
>
>
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-10-14 0:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-10-13 15:59 missing superblock on RAID5 Victor
[not found] ` <3F8AD02C.8080606@fantinibakery.com>
2003-10-13 17:47 ` Victor
2003-10-13 19:57 ` rob
2003-10-13 21:09 ` Victor
2003-10-13 23:27 ` rob
2003-10-13 23:44 ` Victor
2003-10-14 0:18 ` rob
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.