Re: RAIDframe reconstruction

[Greg Oster <oster%cs.usask.ca@localhost>]

On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 03:20:32 +0100
Edgar Fuß <ef%math.uni-bonn.de@localhost> wrote:

> I have raid1 consisting of sd2a..sd9a. sd3a failed, and I did
> something presumably stupid: after detach-ing sd3 and scan-ing a
> replacement, instead of raidctl -R /dev/sd3a raid1, I did raidctl
> -a /dev/sd3a raid1, and, as that didn't start a reconstruction,
> raidctl -F /dev/sd3a raid1, which did start a reconstruction.
> 
> After the reconstruction succeeded, RAIDframe seems to be confused
> about the state of sd3a:

Hmm... interesting that what you did even worked... I'd have
thought /dev/sd3a would have still been held 'open' by the RAID set,
and that the hot-add would have failed.

> Components:
>            /dev/sd2a: optimal
>            /dev/sd3a: spared
>            /dev/sd4a: optimal
>            /dev/sd5a: optimal
>            /dev/sd6a: optimal
>            /dev/sd7a: optimal
>            /dev/sd8a: optimal
>            /dev/sd9a: optimal
> Spares:
>            /dev/sd3a: used_spare
>
> 
> How do I get out of this? Would unconfiguring raid1 and
> re-configuring it work? Or how can I make sure what has really been
> written to the component label of sd3a?

If you're using the autoconfigure stuff (which you should be) then a
simple reboot should fix things up. (it will write out the correct 
component label for sd3a as part of unconfiguring /dev/raid1 )

Later...

Greg Oster