brilliant, not rebuild though, you mean remount / assemble?
On 7 February 2013 23:50, Shane Johnson <s...@rasmussenequipment.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Sam Martin <sambomar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> do you know whether i could move a raid1 vol from 32bit dist to 64bit
>> dist?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7 February 2013 23:32, Shane Johnson <s...@rasmussenequipment.com>wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Sam Martin <sambomar...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> could it be used without mdadm? i think the suggestion was that if it
>>>> went wrong the disk could still be used as the "raid" stuff was on the end
>>>> of the disk?
>>>>
>>>> that right?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7 February 2013 22:33, Shane Johnson <s...@rasmussenequipment.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Sam Martin <sambomar...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Pascal,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure what top-posting is?
>>>>>> I hope this isn't it!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean test whether i can bring the raid vol up by booting into
>>>>>> 64bit debian from usb?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i did a mdadm -e on one of the disks in the array
>>>>>>
>>>>>> root@HTPC-NAS:~# mdadm -E /dev/sdc1
>>>>>> /dev/sdc1:
>>>>>> Magic : a92b4efc
>>>>>> Version : 1.2
>>>>>> Feature Map : 0x0
>>>>>> Array UUID : 25a729b1:71f5193b:6abe8ba9:21e698f5
>>>>>> Name : HTPC-NAS:0 (local to host HTPC-NAS)
>>>>>> Creation Time : Thu Dec 20 12:25:56 2012
>>>>>> Raid Level : raid1
>>>>>> Raid Devices : 2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Avail Dev Size : 5860268032 (2794.39 GiB 3000.46 GB)
>>>>>> Array Size : 2930133824 (2794.39 GiB 3000.46 GB)
>>>>>> Used Dev Size : 5860267648 (2794.39 GiB 3000.46 GB)
>>>>>> Data Offset : 262144 sectors
>>>>>> Super Offset : 8 sectors
>>>>>> State : clean
>>>>>> Device UUID : fe1998ea:8535a654:31083985:d8c560c1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Update Time : Thu Feb 7 09:01:38 2013
>>>>>> Checksum : ad4320a8 - correct
>>>>>> Events : 51
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Device Role : Active device 1
>>>>>> Array State : AA ('A' == active, '.' == missing)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the 1.2 means it's a no go in terms of running the disk
>>>>>> independently of the raid vol.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> Sam
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sunday, January 27, 2013 11:10:01 PM UTC, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
>>>>>> > Sam Martin a ï¿œcrit :
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > > Thanks for reply Pascal.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Please don't top-post.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > > How would I know?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > mdadm -E /dev/<raid_member> (e.g. /dev/sdc1)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > mdadm -D /dev/<raid_device> (e.g. /dev/md0)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > cat /proc/mdstat
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > > I've just posted a question to original response, do you happen
>>>>>> to know the answer?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > There are two questions.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I already replied to the first one. I don't know about the second
>>>>>> one,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > but I see no reason why the RAID array would not work with a 64-bit
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > system. If unsure just try it with a 64-bit live system.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > --
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
>>>>>> listmas...@lists.debian.org
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5105af36.60...@plouf.fr.eu.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
>>>>>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
>>>>>> listmas...@lists.debian.org
>>>>>> Archive:
>>>>>> http://lists.debian.org/9bfc076c-457e-45e3-8719-35bc86a0f...@googlegroups.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your output from mdadm -e on that disk show that it is raid level one
>>>>> which is a mirror so you can run with one disk failed, but there is no
>>>>> redundancy anymore.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Shane D. Johnson
>>>>> IT Administrator
>>>>> Rasmussen Equipment
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I don't think so. From my understanding, it is still a member
>>> of the raid and would need the mdadm in order to present the volume to the
>>> os to see the partition info, Although, I don't know about pulling data of
>>> with some sort of disk forensics.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Shane D. Johnson
>>> IT Administrator
>>> Rasmussen Equipment
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Please use reply all to keep on the list for future reference and the
> enlightenment of as many people as possible.
>
> Yes, mdadm will rebuild it as long as it supports the version that created
> the volume.
>
> --
> Shane D. Johnson
> IT Administrator
> Rasmussen Equipment
>
>
>
