| To: | Mathieu Betrancourt <mbetrancourt@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfs_repair |
| From: | Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 7 Jan 2005 00:02:32 +0100 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <26743c105010614583c2d5499@mail.gmail.com> |
| References: | <20050106224742.GB2313@mail.muni.cz> <26743c105010614583c2d5499@mail.gmail.com> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i |
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:58:16PM +0100, Mathieu Betrancourt wrote: > if that drive was part of a raid5 array its fail may cause zero data > loss because the 2 other drives have enough information to reconstruct > all data (see raid 5 design). ah. I did not explain it clearly. We have a server with two 200GB disks. We have an RAID5 array that was degraded. We want to fix RAID array using one of those 200GB disks. Unfortunately we took the bad one that was full of important data. Hope it is clear now. -- Lukáš Hejtmánek |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | xfs_repair, Lukas Hejtmanek |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | oops with software raid, lvm, xfs, nfs and smp, Phil Dier |
| Previous by Thread: | xfs_repair, Lukas Hejtmanek |
| Next by Thread: | Re: xfs_repair, Frank Hellmann |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |