Ok--I'm a moron.
Long story short, I was messing around with my RAID6 array and I managed
to screw up two of the drives in my 7-drive 1-spare array.
I had problems in the middle of a kernel upgrade and I kept getting
errors about various drives having bad superblocks.
So without knowing much about
Hi,
On Sat, 07 Apr 2007, Rich wrote:
> Er, I went with Linear as reading around people seemed to recommend this
> for odd sized drives (my old drives are 80's, 120 and 320's) also a read
> somewhere that data on the other drives is more recoverable that most of
> the other RAID's.
You just wa
Gavin McCullagh wrote:
Hi,
The main reason I'm posting (given others can answer these questions
better) is to ask a further question:
Why would anyone use RAID-linear? If RAID-0 gives better performance for
the same (reduced) reliability, what's the point of using Linear? Do you
get slightl
Hi,
The main reason I'm posting (given others can answer these questions
better) is to ask a further question:
Why would anyone use RAID-linear? If RAID-0 gives better performance for
the same (reduced) reliability, what's the point of using Linear? Do you
get slightly more space out of it? I
Hello,
I currently have a linear RAID setup via mdadm with is made up of 3
drives. I just have a few questions that I can't seem to find searching
around on Google, etc.
First question, what happens if one drive fails (I know I will loose the
data on that drive) but how, if at all can I reco
