From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Tom=E1=A8_Dul=EDk?= Subject: Re: raid10,f2 Add a Controller: Which drives to move? Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:43:16 +0200 Message-ID: <4BC2CF14.9000209@unart.cz> References: <4BC29670.6020504@unart.cz> <4BC2B887.6020403@stud.tu-ilmenau.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4BC2B887.6020403@stud.tu-ilmenau.de> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: st0ff@npl.de Cc: Linux RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids Stefan /*St0fF*/ H=FCbner napsal(a): > I cannot quite understand your problem. As every part of the array > contains it's own metadata, it doesn't matter to md which /dev/sdX a > drive is. It might matter a bit for boot-time assembly, but actually > that's what UUIDs are for. > =20 I know how UUIDs work. My problem with device names is not a "critical", it's about "user=20 friendliness" of the physical disk management. If a disk fails and I receive email "A Fail event had been detected on=20 md device /dev/md2. It could be related to component device /dev/sdd3",= =20 how will I know which disk should be replaced, if the device name is no= t=20 fixed/persistent? Is it the disk in the first bay, or the second? Aside= =20 of the solution documented on the wiki page, I could also use try a=20 simpler one based on the idea here: http://www.outsidaz.org/blog/2009/11/05/identifying-failed-drives-via-u= dev-and-mdadm/ But for the disk management purposes, I prefer having the disk names=20 fixed according the the disk bay position. So disk in bay nr. 1 is=20 /dev/sda, bay nr. 2 is /dev/sdb, etc. The wiki page I created is just about this. I haven't found any documen= t=20 like this anywhere else, so if it helps someone, I'll be glad. Tom -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html