On 06/27/11 at 01:02am, Andrew McGlashan wrote: > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > yes, mdadm names its RAID drives by UUID (as can clearly be seen in > >/dev/mdadm/mdadm.conf) but does it *also* refer to its *COMPONENT* > >drives (internally, and non-obviously, and undocumentedly) by UUID and > >then report to the outside world that it's using whatever name > >(/dev/sdX) which can, under these external-drives scenario, change. > > > > l. > > > Let's say that /dev/sda has gone bad of a two drive RAID1 array; I > can visually detect the drive by doing the following: > > dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/null > > Go look to see which drive is busy [hopefully it will show with a > flashing activity LED] and I can see which one has failed -- if that > doesn't work, then I can reverse the test and try all drives that > are meant to be okay to eliminate them. It seems to me that you'd be well served by simply using the UUID (by-uuid, not by-id) in all things, including mounting and managing. Then you would never need to figure out which disk sda was, you could just figure out which disk the UUID was (and you'd only have to learn it once). -- Liam
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature