[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45BC6740.1000606@tls.msk.ru>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 12:05:04 +0300
From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
CC: Marc Perkel <mperkel@...oo.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Raid 10 question/problem [ot]
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jan 27 2007 10:31, Marc Perkel wrote:
[]
>> Sorry about that. I'm using Fedora Core 6. /dev/md0
>> and /dev/md1, buth of which are raid 1 arrays survive
>> the reboot. But when I make a raid 0 out of those two
>> raid arrays that's what is vanishing.
>
> That's interesting. I am using Aurora Corona, and all but md0 vanishes.
> (Reason for that is that udev does not create the nodes md1-md31 on
> boot, so mdadm cannot assemble the arrays.)
This is nonsense.
Mdadm creates those nodes automa[tg]ically - man mdadm, search for --auto.
Udev has exactly nothing to do with mdX nodes.
In order for an md array to be started up on boot, it has to be specified
in /etc/mdadm.conf. With proper DEVICE line in there. That's all.
If you're using raid0 on top of two raid1s (as opposed to using raid10
directly - which is more efficient and flexible), the DEVICE line in
mdadm.conf should be either `partitions' (usually preferred way), or -
in case direct device list is specified - should contain both real
disks AND the raid1 arrays.
But in any case, this has exactly nothing to do with kernel.
It's 100% userspace issues, I'd say distribution-specific issues.
/mjt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists