** Description changed:

  In short this really isn't a bug I found but just one that came up on a
  mailing list, so for those who want to read the original post should go
  through the archives of the "Ubuntu user technical support, not for
  general discussions" <ubuntu-us...@lists.ubuntu.com> list. The poster
  indicated that he had no intention of filing a bug report despite a
  large reason to. This needs to be addressed, or at least a warning given
  before the Lucid release date, or there could be many angry people
  especially those with servers!
  
  I am really unable to fully test this but there is a slim chance that it
  is a duplicate of bug #191119 or #369635 and my apologies if it is some
  other duplicate. Also I have no idea if this is present (though I find
  it hard to believe it might be) on past versions of ubuntu.
  
- 
  Regardless here is the verbatim post:
- 
  
  Title: DANGER!!! Problems with 10.04 installer (RAID devices *will* get
  corrupted)
  
  Long story short: the only way to be safe right now is to physically
  remove drives with important data during the install.
  
  I figured out the cause of my RAID problems, and it's a problem with
  ubuntu's installer.  This will cost people their data if not fixed.
  Sorry about the length of this post, but the problem takes a while to
  explain.
  
  The following scenario is not the only way your partitions can get
  hosed.  I simply use it because it's a common use case, it illustrates
  what data is where on the hard drives, and it exposes the flaws in the
  installer's logic.  It also doesn't matter if you don't touch a
  particular drive, partition, or file system during the install.  The
  data on it can still be corrupted.
  
  Suppose you have a hard drive with some partitions on it.  On one of
  those partitions you have a linux file system which houses your data.
  We'll say for the sake of this discussion that sda2 contains an EXT4
  file system with your data.  So far, so good.
  
  Because this data is too important to rely on a single drive, you decide
  to buy some more drives and make a RAID 5 device.  You buy 3 more drives
  and create similar partitions an them (say, sdb2, sdc2, and sdd2).  You
  copy the data currently on sda2 somewhere safe, then you use mdadm to
  create a RAID5 array with sda2, sdb2, sdc2, and sdd2.  The new RAID
  device is md0.  You create an XFS file system on md0 and move your data
  to it*.  This is all perfectly fine, but the stage has been set for
  disaster with the ubuntu installer.
  
  Later, you decide to do a clean install of ubuntu on sda1 (sda1 is *not*
  part of the RAID array), and you get to the partitioning stage and
  select manual partitioning.  This is where things get really ugly really
  fast.
  
  The bug is how the installer detects existing file systems.  It simply
  reads the raw data in a partition to see if the bits it finds correspond
  to a known file system.  In the above example, the installer detects the
  remnants of the original (non-RAID) file system on sda2 and thinks it's
  a current EXT4 file system.  Even if you use fdisk to mark sda2's
  partition type as 'RAID autodetect' instead of 'linux' (which is no
  longer necessary), the installer still detects the partition as having
  an EXT4 file system.
  
  Once this 'ghost' file system is detected, the installer gets really
  confused about what goes where and will try to write to sda2 during the
  install, even if you told the installer to ignore sda2 and just install
  to sda1.  This corrupts the current XFS file system on md0, and you're
  screwed.
  
  The overall flaw here is in the file system detection; you can't just
  assume that any sequence of bits you find sitting around on a hard drive
  are still current.
  
  A possible solution may be to first check for a RAID superblock, and if
  found that trumps all file system detection.  I imagine something
  similar will have to be done with partitions that are part of an LVM
  volume as well.
  
  -Alvin
  
  * In my case, I took a shortcut and created a degraded array (missing
  sda2), copied the data from sda2 to the array, added sda2 to the array,
  and resynched.   I don't think it makes a difference.

-- 
Non-selected Raid Array Corruption from Installer 
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/568183
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to