🚀 go-pugleaf

--fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

also sprach whollygoat@letterboxes.org <whollygoat@letterboxes.org> [2009.06.07.0457 +0200]:
> Can anyone tell me why the following command 
> creates 2 spares instead of just one?
> 
> # mdadm -C /dev/md0 -v -e1 -l5 -b internal \
>   -n3 /dev/hde1 /dev/hdg1 /dev/hdi1 \
>   -x1 /dev/hdk1 --name FileServ -a yes

Give it time; the array first has to synchronise. Once that's done,
one spare will become part of the array.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o>      Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer               http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck    http://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
above all, we should not wish to divest
our existence of its rich ambiguity.
                                                 --friedrich nietzsche

--fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="digital_signature_gpg.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREDAAYFAkosqmcACgkQIgvIgzMMSnXGuQCeLIhnDp46JKraeSU0bqy1/rJg
AVYAoMTwTmIsUWv6n2IumAn92q4Ttsjy
=YyRh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7--

--nextPart1345685.ysV4fE0V9L
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

In <1244343455.32414.1319142213@webmail.messagingengine.com>, 
whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
>Can anyone tell me why the following command
>creates 2 spares instead of just one?
>
># mdadm -C /dev/md0 -v -e1 -l5 -b internal \
>  -n3 /dev/hde1 /dev/hdg1 /dev/hdi1 \
>  -x1 /dev/hdk1 --name FileServ -a yes

It's mdadm being "smart".

Evidently, something about the raid5 personality makes it faster to sync a 
single disk rather than to sync across the whole array.[1]  So, unless given 
the "-f" flag, mdadm creates all RAID 5 arrays as "X-1" synced disks and one 
spare.  Once anything is written to the array, it will start "recovery" of 
the spare.

You can either let mdadm create it it with one more spare than you expect, 
or you can force the behavior with "-f".  The former will be faster.

IIRC, this is all documented on in the mdadm man page.  It's a long read, 
but I'm pretty sure it is in there.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.           	 ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net            	((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy 	 `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/        	     \_/

[1] I'm not sure why this is.  When doing the initial RAID 5 sync you should 
be able to spread writes across all the disks, and sync very quickly.  
However, the way mdadm does it, all the writes go to a single disk and it's 
sustained write speed becomes a bottleneck.

--nextPart1345685.ysV4fE0V9L
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAkotPnoACgkQdNbfk+86fC1pPACfQ3IUm3nhcC8nMGc0q2M655a2
Fh0An3fKGVxx89Eoi43e1+CIYwA61g0v
ÌDc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1345685.ysV4fE0V9L--

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:07 +0100, "kj"
<koffiejunkielistlurker@koffiejunkie.za.net> wrote:
> whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
> >     Number   Major   Minor   RaidDevice State
> >        0      33        1        0      active sync   /dev/hde1
> >        1      34        1        1      active sync   /dev/hdg1
> >        2       0        0        2      removed
> >
> >        3      57        1        -      spare   /dev/hdk1
> >        4      56        1        -      spare   /dev/hdi1
> >
> >
>
> What does `cat /proc/mdstat` show you?

cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md0 : active (auto-read-only) raid5 hdi1[4](S) hdk1[3](S) hdg1[1]
hde1[0]
      156250880 blocks super 1.0 level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [3/2]
      [UU_]
      bitmap: 0/150 pages [0KB], 256KB chunk

unused devices: <none>

will
--

  whollygoat@letterboxes.org

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and
                          love email again

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 11:38 -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
<bss@iguanasuicide.net> wrote:
> In <1244343455.32414.1319142213@webmail.messagingengine.com>,
> whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
> >Can anyone tell me why the following command
> >creates 2 spares instead of just one?
> >
> ># mdadm -C /dev/md0 -v -e1 -l5 -b internal \
> >  -n3 /dev/hde1 /dev/hdg1 /dev/hdi1 \
> >  -x1 /dev/hdk1 --name FileServ -a yes
>
> It's mdadm being "smart".
>
> Evidently, something about the raid5 personality
> makes it faster to sync a single disk rather than
> to sync across the whole array.[1]  So, unless given
> the "-f" flag, mdadm creates all RAID 5 arrays as
> "X-1" synced disks and one spare.  Once anything is
> written to the array, it will start "recovery" of
> the spare.
>
> You can either let mdadm create it it with one more
> spare than you expect, or you can force the behavior
> with "-f".  The former will be faster. IIRC, this is
> all documented on in the mdadm man page.  It's a long
> read, but I'm pretty sure it is in there.
[snip]
> [1] I'm not sure why this is.  When doing the initial
> RAID 5 sync you should be able to spread writes across
> all the disks, and sync very quickly.  However, the way
> mdadm does it, all the writes go to a single disk and
> it's sustained write speed becomes a bottleneck.

It is a long read.  I've read it a few times and there
is still lots I don't understand.  For example, I never
really understood the --force switch in the create
context.  I think I get it now.

Nevertheless, this doesn't seem to be the behaviour I
remember from an Etch system.  I have to say though
that I was plagued with h/w problems on that (now trashed)
system, so I don't know what normal behaviour looks
like.  I'm now having another stab at mdadm with a
new mobo and a new DIMM.

I'm still certain of the ide expansion cards though.  I've
been putting them in the machine one at a time.  I was
alarmed when I saw two spares because it seems to me
that on the last system I saw one spare and all the rest
resyncing.  I want to be sure of the system before I add
another ide daughter card.  So, I'll give it a little
more time and see if the extra spare doesn't get
integrated into the array.

thanks,

will
--

  whollygoat@letterboxes.org

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Access all of your messages and folders
                          wherever you are

whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
>     Number   Major   Minor   RaidDevice State
>        0      33        1        0      active sync   /dev/hde1
>        1      34        1        1      active sync   /dev/hdg1
>        2       0        0        2      removed
>
>        3      57        1        -      spare   /dev/hdk1
>        4      56        1        -      spare   /dev/hdi1
>
>

What does `cat /proc/mdstat` show you?

--kj

--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 03:45:22PM -0700, whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:07 +0100, "kj"
> <koffiejunkielistlurker@koffiejunkie.za.net> wrote:
> > whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
> > >     Number   Major   Minor   RaidDevice State
> > >        0      33        1        0      active sync   /dev/hde1
> > >        1      34        1        1      active sync   /dev/hdg1
> > >        2       0        0        2      removed
> > >
> > >        3      57        1        -      spare   /dev/hdk1
> > >        4      56        1        -      spare   /dev/hdi1
> > >
> > >   
> > 
> > What does `cat /proc/mdstat` show you?
> 
> cat /proc/mdstat
> Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
> md0 : active (auto-read-only) raid5 hdi1[4](S) hdk1[3](S) hdg1[1]
> hde1[0]
>       156250880 blocks super 1.0 level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [3/2]
>       [UU_]
>       bitmap: 0/150 pages [0KB], 256KB chunk

Hi 

I believe you are in READ ONLY MODE, it will not attempt to put the
spares back into to the array until it is moved into read/write

mdadm -w /dev/md0


> 
> unused devices: <none>
> 
> will

-- 
"We wouldn't go forward if we were concerned about the security of the United States of America."

	- George W. Bush
02/23/2006
Washington, DC
in a Cabinet meeting

--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkotuloACgkQkZz88chpJ2MK9ACfT9ukc9DyDiKRVRnowo7cItqG
JrAAn2OCde+rLNSsMHggHUMDgduj5sNd
=2L+Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk--

On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:26 +1000, "Alex Samad" <alex@samad.com.au> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 03:45:22PM -0700, whollygoat@letterboxes.org
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:07 +0100, "kj"
> > <koffiejunkielistlurker@koffiejunkie.za.net> wrote:
> > > whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
> > > >     Number   Major   Minor   RaidDevice State
> > > >        0      33        1        0      active sync   /dev/hde1
> > > >        1      34        1        1      active sync   /dev/hdg1
> > > >        2       0        0        2      removed
> > > >
> > > >        3      57        1        -      spare   /dev/hdk1
> > > >        4      56        1        -      spare   /dev/hdi1
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > What does `cat /proc/mdstat` show you?
> >
> > cat /proc/mdstat
> > Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
> > md0 : active (auto-read-only) raid5 hdi1[4](S) hdk1[3](S) hdg1[1]
> > hde1[0]
> >       156250880 blocks super 1.0 level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [3/2]
> >       [UU_]
> >       bitmap: 0/150 pages [0KB], 256KB chunk
>
> Hi
>
> I believe you are in READ ONLY MODE, it will not attempt to put the
> spares back into to the array until it is moved into read/write
>
> mdadm -w /dev/md0
>
Right you are.  The third drive was synced into the array with the above
command.

But, now I am wondering what put it into read-only mode.  Looking at man
 mdadm and greping for "read" I find nothing that says it goes into
read-only mode by default.  The only thing I can find relative to
read-only operation and "create" mode is "--readonly start the array
readonly -- not supported yet".  Otherwise, read-only seems only to be
available in "misc" mode.

What I am ultimately after at this stage in the server building game is
to ensure myself that the ide expansion cards I am using are not faulty.
 As I mentioned in another post, I had many many h/w problems with a
previous attempt at raid building.  I am using, apart from one new DIMM,
entirely used parts whose history is unknown.  I managed to find
problems with the previous motherboard, two DIMMs, and I am not yet
entirely sure of the integrity of the expansion cards.  Do you know if
read only mode could be caused by some fault in the cards?

Thanks,

will
--

  whollygoat@letterboxes.org

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail...

--nextPart30360281.kQsVTS4mYx
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

In <1244582859.18981.1319594151@webmail.messagingengine.com>, 
whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
>On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:26 +1000, "Alex Samad" <alex@samad.com.au> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 03:45:22PM -0700, whollygoat@letterboxes.org
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:07 +0100, "kj"
>> > <koffiejunkielistlurker@koffiejunkie.za.net> wrote:
>> > > What does `cat /proc/mdstat` show you?
>> > cat /proc/mdstat
>> > Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
>> > md0 : active (auto-read-only) raid5 hdi1[4](S) hdk1[3](S) hdg1[1]
>> I believe you are in READ ONLY MODE, it will not attempt to put the
>> spares back into to the array until it is moved into read/write
>>
>> mdadm -w /dev/md0
>Right you are.  The third drive was synced into the array with the above
>command.
>
>But, now I am wondering what put it into read-only mode.

It was in auto-read-only (not quite the same).  Auto-read-only is set 
automatically by mdadm for array that is started without all of it's 
devices.  It prevents mdadm from starting a rebuild until the array is 
written to (or forced into read-write mode).  This is to allow the 
incremental build system to work sanely when spares are detected before all 
the active devices.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.           	 ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net            	((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy 	 `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/        	     \_/


--nextPart30360281.kQsVTS4mYx
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAkou4nQACgkQdNbfk+86fC0yYwCeOn3P9CEiPzX/+zSG8VH8ut90
owYAn0XRVw6BQMocTJArHQiQHkMpZZAZ
=j3qy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart30360281.kQsVTS4mYx--

On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:30 -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
<bss@iguanasuicide.net> wrote:
> In <1244582859.18981.1319594151@webmail.messagingengine.com>,
> whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
> >On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:26 +1000, "Alex Samad" <alex@samad.com.au> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 03:45:22PM -0700, whollygoat@letterboxes.org
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:07 +0100, "kj"
> >> > <koffiejunkielistlurker@koffiejunkie.za.net> wrote:
> >> > > What does `cat /proc/mdstat` show you?
> >> > cat /proc/mdstat
> >> > Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
> >> > md0 : active (auto-read-only) raid5 hdi1[4](S) hdk1[3](S) hdg1[1]
> >> I believe you are in READ ONLY MODE, it will not attempt to put the
> >> spares back into to the array until it is moved into read/write
> >>
> >> mdadm -w /dev/md0
> >Right you are.  The third drive was synced into the array with the above
> >command.
> >
> >But, now I am wondering what put it into read-only mode.
>
> It was in auto-read-only (not quite the same).  Auto-read-only is set
> automatically by mdadm for array that is started without all of it's
> devices.  It prevents mdadm from starting a rebuild until the array is
> written to (or forced into read-write mode).  This is to allow the
> incremental build system to work sanely when spares are detected before
> all the active devices.
>

Is this behaviour related to what is described in the following mdadm
changelog.Debian.gz?:

   mdadm (2.6.1-1) unstable: urgency=low
     ...
     * Start arays read-only in initramfs to prevent syncing and hence
       enable resuming/freezing. The arrays will automatically sync as
       soon something writes to it...

I ask because the array wasn't started during boot, but during creation.
 Even if so, I'm afraid I don't understand why this happened in my case
because the array was created (started) with all it's devices.

Can you explain what I am missing something here?

Thanks,

will
--

  whollygoat@letterboxes.org

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home and the web

--nextPart1294893.53fgANdLj1
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

In Tuesday 09 June 2009, you wrote:
>On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:30 -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
><bss@iguanasuicide.net> wrote:
>> In <1244582859.18981.1319594151@webmail.messagingengine.com>,
>> whollygoat@letterboxes.org wrote:
>> >On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:26 +1000, "Alex Samad" <alex@samad.com.au> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 03:45:22PM -0700, whollygoat@letterboxes.org
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > cat /proc/mdstat
>> >> > Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
>> >> > md0 : active (auto-read-only) raid5 hdi1[4](S) hdk1[3](S) hdg1[1]
>> >I am wondering what put it into read-only mode.
>> It was in auto-read-only (not quite the same).  Auto-read-only is set
>> automatically by mdadm for array that is started without all of it's
>> devices.  It prevents mdadm from starting a rebuild until the array is
>> written to (or forced into read-write mode).  This is to allow the
>> incremental build system to work sanely when spares are detected before
>> all the active devices.
>Is this behaviour related to what is described in the following mdadm
>changelog.Debian.gz?:

Perhaps, although the auto-read-only state is not just set in an initramfs; 
it is build into the mdadm start code, as best as I can tell.

>I ask because the array wasn't started during boot, but during creation.
> Even if so, I'm afraid I don't understand why this happened in my case
>because the array was created (started) with all it's devices.

No, it wasn't.  Again, it was mdadm being "smart" and starting your array 
with the last device missing but with an extra spare.  Thus, the device 
didn't have all of it's active devices and started in auto-read-only.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.           	 ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net            	((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy 	 `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/        	     \_/


--nextPart1294893.53fgANdLj1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAkovOH0ACgkQdNbfk+86fC0HgQCfYs2ASm8z4WrP2bb3Ny96bwPo
eXsAn3I4grh4wNscgubwcQwxfW5hzpSN
=xy8k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1294893.53fgANdLj1--

--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

also sprach Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss@iguanasuicide.net> [2009.06.10.0030 +0200]:
> It was in auto-read-only (not quite the same).  Auto-read-only is set 
> automatically by mdadm for array that is started without all of it's 
> devices.

Not true: it's set for all arrays until the first write.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o>      Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer               http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck    http://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
mulutlitithtrhreeaadededd s siigngnatatuurere

--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="digital_signature_gpg.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREDAAYFAkovX/sACgkQIgvIgzMMSnV3sACeNjU/AAPPeOSWoIeM5XcCKrhn
gZEAoLa1BmRatXfNk2VHUZtxCMqob5RJ
=YNfi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc--

--nextPart1522487.6gnu6VIyb6
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

In <20090610072551.GE13088@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net>, martin f krafft 
wrote:
>mulutlitithtrhreeaadededd s siigngnatatuurere

You are missing an 'm'.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.           	 ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net            	((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy 	 `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/        	     \_/


--nextPart1522487.6gnu6VIyb6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAkov11IACgkQdNbfk+86fC1s/QCfWmLOcrEERSeJ2BRshA7MDV1V
ljcAn2o9r60YeatlM+iGx/+l41DLCj0r
=pqXH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1522487.6gnu6VIyb6--

--nextPart1674901.6FrUM0h9xc
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

In <20090610072551.GE13088@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net>, martin f krafft 
wrote:
>also sprach Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss@iguanasuicide.net> [2009.06.10.0030 
+0200]:
>> It was in auto-read-only (not quite the same).  Auto-read-only is set
>> automatically by mdadm for array that is started without all of it's
>> devices.
>
>Not true: it's set for all arrays until the first write.

Thanks for the correction.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.           	 ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net            	((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy 	 `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/        	     \_/


--nextPart1674901.6FrUM0h9xc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAkov12UACgkQdNbfk+86fC1zVwCfcp/yKkBNEFC57Yxc7rO/Zc0d
TeoAnjb83khSXI3durOZiWJRpWSfe0Yj
=n0Jr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1674901.6FrUM0h9xc--

On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 09:25 +0200, "martin f krafft" <madduck@debian.org>
wrote:
> also sprach Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss@iguanasuicide.net>
> [2009.06.10.0030 +0200]:
> > It was in auto-read-only (not quite the same).  Auto-read-only is set
> > automatically by mdadm for array that is started without all of it's
> > devices.
>
> Not true: it's set for all arrays until the first write.

So, if I understand correctly, in the Lenny version of mdadm
(I never experienced this building arrays with mdadm on Etch)
in order for the creation of an array to take place, one must
run "mdadm -w <arrayx>" immediately after running "mdadm
-C <arrayx> -n y -x z etcetc" otherwise the new array will just sit
there not syncing the component devices until the first write?

will
--

  whollygoat@letterboxes.org

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service

Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> In <20090610072551.GE13088@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net>, martin f krafft
> wrote:
>> mulutlitithtrhreeaadededd s siigngnatatuurere
>
> You are missing an 'm'.

I guess another 'm' would be wrong, but he /could/ add another 'e'
without harm  8-)

Cheers,
Johannes

--
This signature is intentionally left blank.

--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

also sprach whollygoat@letterboxes.org <whollygoat@letterboxes.org> [2009.06.10.2308 +0200]:
> So, if I understand correctly, in the Lenny version of mdadm 
> (I never experienced this building arrays with mdadm on Etch)
> in order for the creation of an array to take place, one must 
> run "mdadm -w <arrayx>" immediately after running "mdadm
> -C <arrayx> -n y -x z etcetc" otherwise the new array will just sit 
> there not syncing the component devices until the first write?

Yes, this is a safety measure, since -C only writes the superblocks
and then assembles the array as normal. This is postponed until
a write operation takes place in case in case the admin needs to
intervene.

Note that mounting the device or creating a filesystem on it will
have the desired effects too.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o>      Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer               http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck    http://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
"life moves pretty fast. if you don't stop and look around once in
 a while, you could miss it."
                                                     -- ferris bueller

--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="digital_signature_gpg.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREDAAYFAkowMk4ACgkQIgvIgzMMSnWBogCcDVS7WWYSQ+ul5B7yTAbH3lBu
zFoAoKg0mhPzd7esfTJobSimGoFlrt9q
=y0oH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j--

On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:23 +0200, "martin f krafft" <madduck@debian.org>
wrote:
> also sprach whollygoat@letterboxes.org <whollygoat@letterboxes.org>
> [2009.06.10.2308 +0200]:
> > So, if I understand correctly, in the Lenny version of mdadm
> > (I never experienced this building arrays with mdadm on Etch)
> > in order for the creation of an array to take place, one must
> > run "mdadm -w <arrayx>" immediately after running "mdadm
> > -C <arrayx> -n y -x z etcetc" otherwise the new array will just sit
> > there not syncing the component devices until the first write?
>
> Yes, this is a safety measure, since -C only writes the superblocks
> and then assembles the array as normal. This is postponed until
> a write operation takes place in case in case the admin needs to
> intervene.

I guess you need to be more of a power user than myself to imagine
a scenario requiring intervention.  But, I do understand what is
happening on my machine, now.  Thanks.

will
--

  whollygoat@letterboxes.org

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software
                          or over the web