Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-xfs); Fri, 23 May 2003 07:38:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from forumakad.pl (mail@forumakad.pl [212.182.115.22]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id h4NEc12x002351 for ; Fri, 23 May 2003 07:38:02 -0700 Received: from eyck by forumakad.pl with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19JDgl-0004hT-00; Fri, 23 May 2003 16:38:31 +0200 Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 16:38:31 +0200 To: Seth Mos Cc: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: Problem with XFS on software RAID1 Message-ID: <20030523143831.GA11793@forumakad.pl> References: <20030523134818.GA1514@forumakad.pl> <4.3.2.7.2.20030523160347.03871080@pop.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20030523160347.03871080@pop.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i From: Dariush Pietrzak X-archive-position: 4117 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: eyck@forumakad.pl Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-xfs Content-Length: 1509 Lines: 37 On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 04:16:02PM +0200, Seth Mos wrote: > mount /dev/sda1 under /mnt/sda1 Exactly.. that part doesen't work with XFS for me, although I see no reason for it to fail ( other than that raw partition contains raid superblock, and it works fine with other filesystems ). For this part you can always created degraded array with non-existant failed disk and then mount this. But I still have no idea how one could migrate from simple filesystem to RAID1. > Linux software raid 1 uses read balancing to give higher read speeds (raid > 0 like), however the data on both disks must be the _exact_ same to the > bit. Mounting the disk without the raid layer once will make them different I don't know the code, but if i understand correctly then untill the array is resynced it works in degraded mode and should read only from working partition. I think this: harybda:~# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] read_ahead 1024 sectors md0 : active raid1 sdb6[2] sda6[0] 714752 blocks [2/1] [U_] [>....................] recovery = 2.7% (19456/714752) finish=1.7min speed=6485K/sec would mean that freshly addedd sdb6 part is not operational ( "_" as opposed to "U" ) until it has been fully resynced. The other thing is that I'm working here with clean filesystems so no log-reply should occur ( i think ). -- Dariush Pietrzak, She swore and she cursed, that she never would deceive me Key fingerprint = 40D0 9FFB 9939 7320 8294 05E0 BCC7 02C4 75CC 50D9