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

RAID repartitioning



Hi,

I'm trying to repartition disks in a RAID array on potato, and have
largely succeeded except for making a new RAID array to use the space I
freed up on each disk.

The machine runs kernel 2.2.19 with the "new" RAID patch compiled from
the Debian packages of both kernel 2.2.19 and the raid patch.

The disks are five identical scsi disks, /dev/sd[a-e].

The last partition on each disk, /dev/sd[a-e]10, forms a RAID-5 array
/dev/md10.  The filesystem on this is mounted under /home.

It was my intention to split /dev/md10 up into two smaller arrays because
I was using a very small part of /dev/md10 for /home and was running out
of space in /var.

I backed up the /home filesystem data in /dev/md10, unmounted /home and
then did raidstop /dev/md10.  I re-partitioned the disks, reducing the
size of /dev/sd[a-e]10 on each.  I then did

# mkraid /dev/md10
# mke2fs -b 4096 -R stride=8 /dev/md10
# mount -a
# tar -x <restore data in /home from archive>

This went just fine, I now have my home filesystem in a smaller array as I
intended (I was using a very small part of it).

While reducing the size of /dev/sd[a-e]10 on each disk, I also made a new
partition /dev/sd[a-e]11 on each disk.  The intention was to make these
partitions into a new, additional RAID5 array /dev/md11.

Trying to do this, I got the following error:

# mkraid /dev/md11
handling MD device /dev/md11
analyzing super-block
couldn't open device /dev/sda11 -- Device not configured
mkraid: aborted, see the syslog and /proc/mdstat for potential clues.

So I can't make my new partitions into a RAID-5 array.

I haven't found any clues in either /proc/mdstat or the log files.

Any suggestions?

|      George Karaolides       8, Costakis Pantelides St.,         |
|      tel:   +357 99 68 08 86                  Strovolos,         |
|      email: george@karaolides.com       Nicosia CY 2057,         |
|      web:   www.karaolides.com      Republic  of Cyprus          |




Reply to: