From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adam Goryachev Subject: Re: proactive disk replacement Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 02:23:14 +1100 Message-ID: <3df5e6da-6085-58fb-2811-cb4be843e676@websitemanagers.com.au> References: <3FA2E00F-B107-4F3C-A9D3-A10CA5F81EC0@allygray.2y.net> <11c21a22-4bbf-7b16-5e64-8932be768c68@websitemanagers.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Reindl Harald , Jeff Allison , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 21/3/17 02:04, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 20.03.2017 um 15:59 schrieb Adam Goryachev: >> On 20/3/17 23:47, Jeff Allison wrote: >>> Hi all I’ve had a poke around but am yet to find something definitive. >>> >>> I have a raid 5 array of 4 disks amounting to approx 5.5tb. Now this >>> disks are getting a bit long in the tooth so before I get into >>> problems I’ve bought 4 new disks to replace them. >>> >>> I have a backup so if it all goes west I’m covered. So I’m looking for >>> suggestions. >>> >>> My current plan is just to replace the 2tb drives with the new 3tb >>> drives and move on, I’d like to do it on line with out having to trash >>> the array and start again, so does anyone have a game plan for doing >>> that. >> Yes, do not fail a disk and then replace it, use the newer replace >> method (it keeps redundancy in the array) > > how should it keep redundancy when you have to remove a disk anyways > except you have enough slots to at least temporary add a additional one? Yes, assuming you can (at least temporarily) add an additional disk, then you will not lose redundancy by using the replace instead of fail/add method. Regards, Adam