[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RAID5 (mdadm) array hosed after grow operation (there are two of us)



In <[🔎] 20090429192819.GB1598@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes 
Holschuh wrote:
>On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, martin f krafft wrote:
>> also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> [2009.04.29.1522 
+0200]:
>> > As always, you MUST forbid lvm of ever touching md component
>> > devices even if md is offline, and that includes whatever crap is
>> > inside initrds...
>> One should thus fix LVM to be a bit more careful...
>It would need to start refusing devices with a raid superblock (all
> types), unless forced.

The feature doesn't have to be perfect out of the box.  It could initially 
just match 0.90 version superblocks and be extended later.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.           	 ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net            	((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy 	 `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/        	     \_/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: