On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
>> ok, i bring in phil now, who i was talking to yesterday about this.
>> what he said was (and i may get this wrong: it only went in partly) -
>> something along the lines of "remember to build the drives with
>> individual mdadm bitmaps enab
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Philip Hands wrote:
>
> I must say that I'm a little beffuddled about how you managed to make
> the system sensitive to which device contains which MD component -- I
> seem to remember you mentioning that you had devices listed in your
> mdadm.conf -- just get rid
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 3:19 AM, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Tom H [2011.06.27.0851 +0200]:
>>
>> > Partitions do not have UUIDs. What you are seeing are the MD UUIDs
>> > stored in the superblock of the sda1 device.
>>
>> I called them "mdadm UUIDs" rather than "MD UUIDs" but they defin
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 14:42:03 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Andrew McGlashan
> wrote:
>
> > I hear what you are saying, but I had a related problem which was similar.
>
> well... it's funny, because this is exactly what i need.
>
> > Anyway
also sprach Tom H [2011.06.27.0851 +0200]:
> > Partitions do not have UUIDs. What you are seeing are the MD UUIDs
> > stored in the superblock of the sda1 device.
>
> I called them "mdadm UUIDs" rather than "MD UUIDs" but they definitely
> exist, are different from the "MD Array UUID", and, AFAIK
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Andrew McGlashan
wrote:
> Tom H wrote:
>>
>> You have "/" set up as a RAID 1 array md0 with sda1 and sdb1 as its
>> components.
>
> No / would be on an internal drive, right now that is not the concern as it
> has nothing to do with the external drive array(s) in
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 12:52 AM, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Tom H [2011.06.26.2328 +0200]:
>>
>> "mdadm --examine /dev/sda1" returns mdadm UUIDs of the array and
>> the partition. (I've never seen the mdadm UUID of a partition be
>> used for anything. Can an array be assembled by refer
Tom H wrote:
You have "/" set up as a RAID 1 array md0 with sda1 and sdb1 as its components.
No / would be on an internal drive, right now that is not the concern
as it has nothing to do with the external drive array(s) in question for
this issue.
--
Kind Regards
AndrewM
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
also sprach Tom H [2011.06.26.2328 +0200]:
> "mdadm --examine /dev/sda1" returns mdadm UUIDs of the array and
> the partition. (I've never seen the mdadm UUID of a partition be
> used for anything. Can an array be assembled by referring to an
> mdadm UUID of a partition to add a partition? Would i
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:29 AM, William Hopkins wrote:
>
> It seems to me that you'd be well served by simply using the UUID (by-uuid,
> not
> by-id) in all things, including mounting and managing. Then you would never
> need to figure out which disk sda was, you could just figure out which dis
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Andrew McGlashan
> wrote:
>
>> Anyway the long and short of it is, I can use mdadm without regard to
>> what devices are found, such as /dev/sda /dev/sdb /dev/sdc and the like as I
>> rely
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
wrote:
>
> is there an option to mdadm to make it display UUIDs instead of or
> as well as the disk name?
"mdadm --examine /dev/sdXY" gives you the device and the array UUIDs.
"mdadm --examine --scan" gives you the array UUID(s).
"md
Hi,
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
well. that was nice. the scenario you describe is precisely what i
sort-of had planned, but didn't have the expertise to do so was going
to recommend just two drives and then rsync to the other two.
_however_, given that you've solved exactly what is
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 4:26 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
> [2011.06.26.1634 +0200]:
>> > Search manpage for "partitions".
>>
>> that's odd. i read around each part (man mdadm^M /partitions^M),
>> paragraph back and forwards: no mention of the UUIDs of
On 06/27/11 at 01:02am, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > yes, mdadm names its RAID drives by UUID (as can clearly be seen in
> >/dev/mdadm/mdadm.conf) but does it *also* refer to its *COMPONENT*
> >drives (internally, and non-obviously, and undocumentedly) by UUID a
also sprach Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
[2011.06.26.1634 +0200]:
> > Search manpage for "partitions".
>
> that's odd. i read around each part (man mdadm^M /partitions^M),
> paragraph back and forwards: no mention of the UUIDs of drive
> components of an array was clearly evident.
I was not
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
yes, mdadm names its RAID drives by UUID (as can clearly be seen in
/dev/mdadm/mdadm.conf) but does it *also* refer to its *COMPONENT*
drives (internally, and non-obviously, and undocumentedly) by UUID and
then report to the outside world that it's using whate
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 3:11 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
> [2011.06.26.1241 +0200]:
>> * is there an option to mdadm to make it display UUIDs instead of or
>> as well as the disk name?
>
> mdadm -Es
oo! yaay! there is, however, no mention of the fac
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Andrew McGlashan
wrote:
> Anyway the long and short of it is, I can use mdadm without regard to
> what devices are found, such as /dev/sda /dev/sdb /dev/sdc and the like as I
> rely purely on the UUID functionality, which as you know, mdadm handles
> perfectly
also sprach Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
[2011.06.26.1241 +0200]:
> * is there an option to mdadm to make it display UUIDs instead of or
> as well as the disk name?
mdadm -Es
> * also, how about making mention of how mdadm works, in the man page
> somewhere reaaasonably prominently?
Search m
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Andrew McGlashan
wrote:
> I hear what you are saying, but I had a related problem which was similar.
well... it's funny, because this is exactly what i need.
> Anyway the long and short of it is, I can use mdadm without regard to
> what devices are found, s
Hi Luke,
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
the answer is that mdadm tracks down the hardlink and displays, as
best i can tell, only that, with no immediately obvious options to get
it to display the disk UUIDs.
I hear what you are saying, but I had a related problem which was similar.
When
moorning martin: thanks for responding. apologies for not thinking to
ask on debian-user earlier, and apologies for the long-winded style:
just got ddragged out of bed to go chase a lamb out of the garden that
was eating our flowers and vegetables. if i wasn't stumbling about
half-asleep or concer
at martin's request i'm forwarding this to debian-user so that it can
be found for archival purposes and general discussion. this is the
context: a follow-up question will be sent, without all the crap
below.
l.
[original]
allo martin,
haven't spoken to you for a while. got an interes
24 matches
Mail list logo
