| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 05.01.2012 04:45, Jeff Cranmer wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 04:01 +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>> the short one: |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> partition one disk with (c)fdisk. Use sfdisk to transfer the |
| 10 |
>> partition scheme to the other disks. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> run mdadm --create /dev/md0 level=whatever you want --raid- |
| 13 |
>> devices=thenumberofdevices /dev/sdXY /dev/sdZY ... |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> mdadm --detail --scan >> /etc/mdadm.conf |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> done |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
> OK, but there is active data on the disks, so I don't want to |
| 21 |
> partition them. They should already partitioned, and running fdisk |
| 22 |
> will erase the data. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> If I run mdadm --create /dev/md0 level=5 --raid-devices=3 /dev/sdb |
| 25 |
> /dev/sdc /dev/sdd, will that erase data already on the disks? |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Prior to running this command, there is no /dev/md entry. Is this |
| 28 |
> correct? |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> Looking further by using fdisk, it appears that sdc has a linux |
| 31 |
> partition on sdc1 starting at sector 34, and a GPT partition of |
| 32 |
> size 0+ at /dev/sdc4, sector 0. Nothing else is on that disk (no |
| 33 |
> sdc2 or sdc3). |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> sdd and sdb report invalid partition table flags and do not appear |
| 36 |
> to have active partitions. Does this make sense? |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> Is it possible that I ordered the disks incorrectly when I |
| 39 |
> installed them, and by simply swapping disks b and c at the raid I |
| 40 |
> can get things to start making sense? Is there an order to a set |
| 41 |
> of RAID5 disks? I thought any two of three RAID5 disks could be |
| 42 |
> recovered, regardless of which one dies? |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
>> there is a reason why I never ever touch genkernel. |
| 45 |
>> |
| 46 |
>> you should forget that crap. You don't need to copy around |
| 47 |
>> anything. If your root is not on some fancy setup, you don't need |
| 48 |
>> initramfs. |
| 49 |
>> |
| 50 |
>> Just make a nice kernel, put it in /boot. Done. |
| 51 |
>> |
| 52 |
> OK. The OS disk is non-RAID (120GB SSD), so I don't need any |
| 53 |
> fancy options in my kernel. All the domdadm and dodmraid stuff is |
| 54 |
> needed just when your OS disk is raided. Correct? |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
> Thanks |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
> Jeff |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
If you used a hardware-based RAID before, you should do nothing with |
| 61 |
mdadm or fdisk until you have a working copy of your data. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
If I recall correctly, you said, you used that RAID-array on a |
| 64 |
different mobo before. Then the mobo died and you want just to reuse |
| 65 |
the array. Correct? |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
If that's correct you may be in serious trouble, because afaik there |
| 68 |
ist no real standart in how to create a hardware RAID. If the old |
| 69 |
RAID-controller/firmware isn't available anymore you could try to find |
| 70 |
an identical one. |
| 71 |
There may be even the possibility that through your tries with the new |
| 72 |
controller/mobo the array is damaged right now. |
| 73 |
That is - by the way - one very good reason to use a software-based |
| 74 |
solution like mdadm: you aren't restricted to specific hardware... |
| 75 |
|
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
|
| 78 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 79 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) |
| 80 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ |
| 81 |
|
| 82 |
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPBV29AAoJEJwwOFaNFkYcdhYH/A6zUEe8AQGYR959DNYvfkIV |
| 83 |
V4XRyP1QbVYNcC5hou3vtC8ey7SvZisOXh3JX7vo534ATtY+KW6hRIHu5xlDJe67 |
| 84 |
KuX1aa37fZ9ivhkpLaGGXOluDZIlf28L70jGV48FMd95TMWFmK4tO12CwTbmRy30 |
| 85 |
ckuyHFgLrJOsYcTIlrlB/DSsosklsQ3wyMJX5XbqUi7dJuae+h+yiphuPoAU99iX |
| 86 |
FnO/QxhjfrX37Ch56ughvTSMKxRe6XDtECyIB/v3/2Dq1GH07FHONjIfJ8qEbqjK |
| 87 |
bfa4W9XHygkWd/Wwfop//2hmz1bXJmGrVRd9iLzs9prnc/Cgv0yDuAPoUhFKgkw= |
| 88 |
=Yrz+ |
| 89 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives