Tom Bishop wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:30 PM, wrote:
>>
>>Here's the answer: making a software RAID on a bare drive with no GPT
>> works fine. If it has a GPT, and no partition, it fails on reboot, even
>> with an /etc/mdadm.conf.
>>
>>I've proved this:
>>first, I created th
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:30 PM, wrote:
> Ok, folks,
>
>Here's the answer: making a software RAID on a bare drive with no GPT
> works fine. If it has a GPT, and no partition, it fails on reboot, even
> with an /etc/mdadm.conf.
>
>I've proved this:
>first, I created the array on the
Ok, folks,
Here's the answer: making a software RAID on a bare drive with no GPT
works fine. If it has a GPT, and no partition, it fails on reboot, even
with an /etc/mdadm.conf.
I've proved this:
first, I created the array on the bare drive, rebooted, and
/dev/md0 was there;
t
On 09/04/2014 01:35 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
.. (The 1.2 superblock
goes 4K in from the first sector; prior to 1.1 the superblock went to the
last sector of the drive).
Does that mean autodetection/assembly would be possible with 1.2 but
not 1.1
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
>
>>
> Of course; but in the context of an MD RAID device with member devices as
> raw disks I would not expect a partition table of any kind, GPT or
> otherwise. Whether it can be there or not is not my point; it's whether
> it's expected or not.
On 09/02/2014 07:36 PM, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
Wait just a minute. How can you use the raw device but still have a GPT
on it? That doesn't seem right, to have a GUID Partition Table but no
partitions.
Have you never deleted all the partitions on a disk under any scheme before?
Of course; bu
On 2014-09-02, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> And my manager has taken a fancy to raw drives; not sure why.
Some reasons have already been cited in this thread. No reasons are
given, but the author of md and mdadm apparently prefers raw drives
too.
https://raid.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Partition_Ty
> Wait just a minute. How can you use the raw device but still have a GPT
> on it? That doesn't seem right, to have a GUID Partition Table but no
> partitions.
Have you never deleted all the partitions on a disk under any scheme before?
___
CentOS m
On 09/02/2014 04:16 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I know how to do this - it *is* how I started. Also, I guess you didn't
read the original post - these are 4TB drives, so no MBR, GPT only.
And my manager has taken a fancy to raw drives; not sure why.
Wait just a minute. How can you use the
GKH wrote:
> Hmm, very bad idea to create a file system on the raw disk.
> The swap type partitions know how to handle this well
> but for a partition with data why take the chance that
> something will write the MBR there. That's what happenned
> I bet.
>
I know how to do this - it *is* how I star
Hmm, very bad idea to create a file system on the raw disk.
The swap type partitions know how to handle this well
but for a partition with data why take the chance that
something will write the MBR there. That's what happenned
I bet.
The procedure is this:
Create a partition 1 on the new unused d
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:33 PM, wrote:
>>> But sdd _should_ have the correct data - it just isn't being detected
>>> as a raid member. I think with smaller devices - or at least devices
>>> with smaller partitions and FD type in the MBR it would have worked
>>> automatica
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:33 PM, wrote:
>
>> I haven't used raw devices as members so I'm not sure I understand the
>> scenario. However, I thought that devices over 2TB would not auto
>> assemble so you would have to manually add the ARRAY entry for
>> /dev/md4 in /etc/mdadm.conf containing /de
I'm the OP, here
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>> On 8/29/2014 14:26, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>>
>>> Note that we did this on *raw*, unpartitioned drives (not my idea).
>>
>>> I added /dev/sdc to /dev/md4, and it started rebuilding.
> I haven't u
On Aug 29, 2014, at 3:26 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> mdadm -E /dev/sdd
Just to confirm that /dev/sdd is the new disk after you rebooted, the right
model and serial number, drive letters are assigned based on the order the
block devices are detected so can change on reboot.
—
Mark Tinberg
m
On 9/2/2014 12:05, Keith Keller wrote:
On 2014-09-02, Warren Young wrote:
On 8/29/2014 14:26, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Note that we did this on *raw*, unpartitioned drives (not my idea).
Nothing wrong with that, particularly with big "midden" volumes like
this one.
Indeed--hardware RAID co
On 2014-09-02, Warren Young wrote:
> On 8/29/2014 14:26, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
>> Note that we did this on *raw*, unpartitioned drives (not my idea).
>
> Nothing wrong with that, particularly with big "midden" volumes like
> this one.
Indeed--hardware RAID controllers don't partition their
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> On 8/29/2014 14:26, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
>>
>> Note that we did this on *raw*, unpartitioned drives (not my idea).
>
>
>> I added
>> /dev/sdc to /dev/md4, and it started rebuilding.
>
> I know this isn't the answer you wanted, but it's
On 8/29/2014 14:26, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Note that we did this on *raw*, unpartitioned drives (not my idea).
Nothing wrong with that, particularly with big "midden" volumes like
this one.
I added
/dev/sdc to /dev/md4, and it started rebuilding.
*facepalm*
You forgot the primary maxim
19 matches
Mail list logo
