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

Re: Need some help with MD raid1 or h/w prob



On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 10:19 -0400, Patrick Flaherty wrote:
> Look you grump, we don't get paid. you will not get 12 hour turn around 
> time on questions unless they are extremly simple, or extremly well 
> discribed.

I wasn't trying to be nasty in my last post, otherwise I would have used
grumpy language (which I don't think I did).  I just stated the facts as
I saw them.  I was only apparantly impatient because of the fright I had
with my machine.  Time means something different when you're in a panic.

> 
> anyways,
>   about your raid problems:
>    how did you originaly create them (from fresh install, or from 
> booting a cd)?
>    have the raid devices ever worked correctly?
>    Alot of times if you've specified your to boot
>      vmlinuz root=/dev/sda2
>     instead of
>      vmlinuz root=/dev/md1

OK, I'm not good with RAID, hence the vague post to start with.
I configure (I'm sure incorrectly) it using the amd64 netinst CD.  I say
incorrectly because I specified 1 active partition & 1 spare partition
per raid1 partition, I should have specified 2 active partitions and 0
spare partitions.  Therefore I don't actually have a raid1 setup, just 2
seperate disks not doing much good (as far as raid is concerned anyway).

The setup I was trying to configure at install was:

/boot  raid1 on /dev/md0 using /dev/sda1 & /dev/sdb1

/      raid1 on /dev/md1 using /dev/sda2 & /dev/sdb2

/home  LVM (HOMELogVol) on raid1 on /dev/md2  using /dev/sda3
& /dev/sdb3

SWAP part (I forget which partition I tried to install it on,but current
config mentioned below)

I have 2 physical disks:  /dev/sda, /dev/sdb  (both SATA).

According to mdadm, it shows for /dev/md0 and /dev/md1 1 active and 1
spare partition.  In EVMS, the GUI shows another problem:
somehow /dev/sda3 has got corrupted and now EVMS shows it holding
both /home and SWAP.

Somehow, probably using EVMS, I need to get the arrays properly
configured, and SWAP deleted, and /home uncorrupted (or both swap
& /home deleted and recreated if need be).

Do you know much about EVMS?  I've just read about it since my incident,
installed it via apt-get, looking at the GUI screen to make sense of it.
I won't try any changes until I know more of what I'm doing!

BTW, all my formatting is ext3, except for /boot which is ext2.

>    the raid array will not come up correctly. (makes sense, it's already 
> mounted the drive) If you are sure you've specified md1 at the boot 
> prompt, perhaps you just need to raidhotadd the second drive (raidhotadd 
> md0 /dev/sda1). Also make sure that you have either an initrd set up for 
> your raid, or a raid enabled kernel or you won't be able to mount your 
> root and may be fairly hosed.

To give you a better picture of my setup, here some output that I've
learned to generate:  mdadm details for md0

rahdebian:/boot/grub# mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
        Version : 00.90.01
  Creation Time : Tue May 17 17:57:48 2005
     Raid Level : raid1
     Array Size : 96256 (94.00 MiB 98.57 MB)
    Device Size : 96256 (94.00 MiB 98.57 MB)
   Raid Devices : 1
  Total Devices : 2
Preferred Minor : 0
    Persistence : Superblock is persistent

    Update Time : Fri Jun 17 16:25:19 2005
          State : clean
 Active Devices : 1
Working Devices : 2
 Failed Devices : 0
  Spare Devices : 1

           UUID : 14c5cc96:c83e55e8:9aa0a6f9:b0a48dff
         Events : 0.405

    Number   Major   Minor   RaidDevice State
       0       8        1        0      active
sync   /dev/.static/dev/sda1

       1       8       17        -      spare   /dev/.static/dev/sdb1

------------------------------------------------------------------

mdadm details for md1:

rahdebian:/boot/grub# mdadm --detail /dev/md1
/dev/md1:
        Version : 00.90.01
  Creation Time : Tue May 17 17:58:00 2005
     Raid Level : raid1
     Array Size : 9767424 (9.31 GiB 10.00 GB)
    Device Size : 9767424 (9.31 GiB 10.00 GB)
   Raid Devices : 1
  Total Devices : 2
Preferred Minor : 1
    Persistence : Superblock is persistent

    Update Time : Fri Jun 17 16:29:02 2005
          State : clean
 Active Devices : 1
Working Devices : 2
 Failed Devices : 0
  Spare Devices : 1

           UUID : c756a249:f7e3334a:dd0a538d:cfa602e8
         Events : 0.1280434

    Number   Major   Minor   RaidDevice State
       0       8        2        0      active
sync   /dev/.static/dev/sda2

       1       8       18        -      spare   /dev/.static/dev/sdb2

------------------------------------------------------------------


Grub entry for my default boot: (seems OK)


title           Debian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.8-11-amd64-k8-smp Default
root            (hd0,0)
kernel          /vmlinuz root=/dev/md1 ro console=tty0
initrd          /initrd.img
savedefault
boot

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I would assume that raid is configured into the kernel since I did
everything at install (so that I would have to figure out how to do
everything later on my own).  Guess that assumption was pre-mature!

What are the "major" and "minor" numbers that mdadm gives at the end of
its output?


> 
> also when you want to fsck a filesystem and it's telling you it's marked 
> as clean you need to
> pass it the -f flag to force it. Also you'll want to run that command on 
> the raid device not the individual partitions.

Thanks, I'll try that, although the instructions I've read on webpages
have been somewhat confusing to me!

> 
> please read the software raid howto for more info. You will probly be 
> interested in lvm for partitioning. I've only use ext3 with lvm, but 
> i've heard good things about reiserfs.
> http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Software-RAID-HOWTO-11.html

I will read this & see how I get on....

Any further suggestions you feel you can make are welcome.
I'll post any concrete results or questions I have back to the list
thread.

I'm assuming I should ensure that all filesystems are clean &
uncorrupted before trying to add a raid device (add my spares onto the
active raid).

-- 
Rupert Heesom rupert@heesom.org.uk




Reply to: