Re: RAIDframe question

[Greywolf <relayer%gmail.com@localhost>]

I don't know what I did to get that volume to recover but ripping
it apart and placing the good component first on reconfiguration
produced a good volume on a rebuild.  As I recall it looked a lot like this:

Components:
          component0: failed
            /dev/wd1c: optimal
Spares:
            /dev/wd0c: spare
component0 status is: failed. skipping label
Component label for /dev/wd1c:
   Row: 0, Column: 1, Num Rows: 1, Num Columns: 2
   Version: 2, Serial Number: 1984, Mod Counter: 7232
   Clean: No, Status: 0
   sectPerSU: 128, SUsPerPU: 4, SUsPerRU: 1
   Queue size: 120, blocksize: 512, numBlocks: 976772992
   RAID Level: 1
   Autoconfig: Yes
   Root partition: No
   Last configured as: raid1
/dev/wd0c status is: spare.  Skipping label.
Reconstruction is 100% complete.
Parity Re-write is 100% complete.
Copyback is 100% complete.

On the other hand, I have the following showing up after
a rebuild (different volume, "raid2", mirrored 2TB disks):

Components:
            /dev/dk0: optimal
          component1: spared
Spares:
            /dev/dk1: used_spare
Component label for /dev/dk0:
   Row: 0, Column: 0, Num Rows: 1, Num Columns: 2
   Version: 2, Serial Number: 3337, Mod Counter: 468
   Clean: No, Status: 0
   sectPerSU: 128, SUsPerPU: 1, SUsPerRU: 1
   Queue size: 100, blocksize: 512, numBlocks: 3907028992
   RAID Level: 1
   Autoconfig: Yes
   Root partition: No
   Last configured as: raid2
component1 status is: spared.  Skipping label.
Component label for /dev/dk1:
   Row: 0, Column: 1, Num Rows: 1, Num Columns: 2
   Version: 2, Serial Number: 3337, Mod Counter: 468
   Clean: No, Status: 0
   sectPerSU: 128, SUsPerPU: 1, SUsPerRU: 1
   Queue size: 100, blocksize: 512, numBlocks: 3907028992
   RAID Level: 1
   Autoconfig: Yes
   Root partition: No
   Last configured as: raid2
Parity status: clean
Reconstruction is 100% complete.
Parity Re-write is 100% complete.
Copyback is 100% complete.

I've been thru enough different results it's hard to tell whether that is sane;
I would have expected /dev/dk1 to have shifted up to 'optimal' and component1 to
have vanished.

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:48 PM Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:44:35PM -0700, Greywolf wrote:
> > raidctl -a /dev/wd0c raid1
> >
> > raidctl -F component0 raid1
>
> I would have expected that to work. What is the raidctl status output
> after the -a ?
>
> Martin



-- 
--*greywolf;