On Jan 10, 2012 8:48 AM, "Jeff Cranmer" <jeff@lotussevencars.com> wrote:
>
>
> > >
> > > Me too.
> > >
> > > mdadm --detail /dev/md0 thinks that /dev/sdc1 is faulty.
> > > I'm not sure whether it's really faulty, or just that my setup for
RAID
> > > is screwed up.
> > >
> > > How do I get rid of an existing /dev/md0?
> >
> > you stop it. Override the superblock with dd.. and lose all data on the
disks.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I'm thinking that I can try creating a RAID1 array using the two
> > > allegedly good disks and see if I can make that work.
> >
> > yeah
> >
> > >
> > > If that works, I'll get rid of it and try recreating the RAID1 with
one
> > > good disk and the one that mdadm thinks is faulty.
> > >
> >
> > you don't have to. You can migrate a 2 disk raid1 to a 3 disk raid5.
Howtos
> > are availble via google.
> >
> >
> > just saying - box in suspend to ram. I change the cable (and connector
on
> > mobo) on a disk with two raid 1 partitions on it.
> >
> > One came back after starting the box.
> >
> > The other? Nothing I tried worked. At the end I dd'ed the partition..
and did
> > a complete 'faulty disk/replacement' resync....
> >
> > argl.
> >
> >
> OK, so lesson learned.  Just because it builds correctly in a RAID1
> array, that doesn't mean that the drive isn't toast.
>
> I ran badblocks on the three drive components and, surprise,
> surprise, /dev/sdc came up faulty.  I think I'll just build the two
> non-faulty drives as a RAID0 array until the hard drive prices come back
> down to pre-Thailand flood prices and backup regularly.
>
> Thanks for all the help.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>

RAID 0?!?!

Please reconsider.

With RAID 0, *any* single drive failure will result in *total* data loss.

Rgds,