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

Re: Grub2 reinstall on raid1 system. Corrections!!!!!

On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 18:42:49 -0700
Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com> wrote:

> Jack,
> With your pastebin information and the mdstat information (that last
> information in your mail and pastebins was critical good stuff) and
> I found this old posting from you too:  :-)
>   http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2009/10/msg00808.html
> With all of that I deduce the following:
>   /dev/md125 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdc1 (10G) root partition with no lvm
>   /dev/md126 /dev/sda5 /dev/sdc5 (288G) LVM for /home, /var, swap, ...
>   /dev/md127 /dev/sdb /dev/sdd (465G) as yet unformatted
> Jack, If that is wrong please correct me.  But I think that is right.

That is Exactly correct.

> The mdstat data showed that the arrays are sync'd.  The UUIDs are as
> follows.
>   ARRAY /dev/md/125_0 metadata=0.90
> UUID=e45b34d8:50614884:1f1d6a6a:d9c6914c ARRAY /dev/md/126_0
> metadata=0.90 UUID=c06c0ea6:5780b170:ea2fd86a:09558bd1
> ARRAY /dev/md/Speeduke:2 metadata=1.2 name=Speeduke:2
> UUID=91ae6046:969bad93:92136016:116577fd
> The desired state:
>   /dev/md0 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdc1 (10G) root partition with no lvm
>   /dev/md1 /dev/sda5 /dev/sdc5 (288G) LVM for /home, /var, swap, ...
> Will get to /dev/md2 later...
> > My thinking is that I should rerun mdadm and reassemble the arrays
> > to the original definitions...  /md0  from sda1 & sdc1
> > 			     /md1  from sda5 & sdc5  note: sda2
> > &sdc2 are  legacy msdos extended partitions.
> > I would not build a md device with msdos extended partitions under
> > LVM2 at this time..   Agree?
> Agreed.  You want to rename the arrays.  Don't touch the msdos
> partitions.
> > Is the above doable?  If I can figure the right mdadm commands...8-)
> Yes.  It is doable.  You can rename the array.  First stop the array.
> Then assemble it again with the new desired name.  Here is what you
> want to do.  Tom, Henrique, others, Please double check me on these.
>   mdadm --stop /dev/md125
>   mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 --update=super-minor /dev/sda1 /dev/sdc1
>   mdadm --stop /dev/126
>   mdadm --assemble /dev/md1 --update=super-minor /dev/sda5 /dev/sdc5
> That should by itself be enough to get the arrays going.
> But, and this is an important but, did you previously add the new disk
> array to the LVM volume group on the above array?  If so then you are
> not done yet.  The LVM volume group won't be able to assemble without
> the new disk.  If you did then you need to fix up LVM next.

NO!  I did NOT add /dev/sdb and /dev/sdd to the LVM..  So that is not a
problem.. I was about to do that when the machine failed..
> I think you should try to get back to where you were before when your
> system was working.  Therefore I would remove the new disks from the
> LVM volume group.  But I don't know if you did or did not add it yet.
> So I must stop here and wait for further information from you.

> I don't know if your rescue disk has lvm automatically configured or
> not.  You may need to load the device mapper module dm_mod.  I don't
> know.  If you do then here is a hint:
>   modprobe dm_mod
> To scan for volume groups:
>   vgscan
Found volume group "Speeduke" using metadata type lvm2

> To activate a volume group:
>   vgchange -ay

5 logical volume(s) in volume group "Speeduke" now active

> To display the physical volumes associated with a volume group:
>   pvdisplay

PV Name /dev/md126
VG Name Speeduke

Other data ommited

PV UUID kUoBgV-R9n6-exZ1-fdIk-aqlb-7Ue1-R3B1PD 

> If the new disks haven't been added to the volume group (I am hoping
> not) then you should be home free.  But if they are then I think you
> will need to remove them first.
> I don't know if the LVM actions above are going to be needed.  I am
> just trying to proactively give some possible hints.
> Bob

 Bob, You cannot know how much I appreciate the time and effort you
 and others have given to this, hopefully a few more steps and all will
 be well..
 I have not done the things you have suggested above. I'll wait for your
 response and then go!!!

 One other thing I am bothered by, md0, md1 were built using mdadm
 v0.90, md2 was built with the current mdadm v 3.1.4. which changed
 the md names.  Does this matter????



Reply to: