Accepted mdadm 2.6.2-1ubuntu1 (source)

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 06:17:03PM +0300, Marius Gedminas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 03:15:37PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > Scott James Remnant <scott at ubuntu.com> writes:
> > 
> > >> Reported as https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mdadm/+bug/125471
> > >> 
> > > This is not a regression though, right?  We found nothing that made an
> > > attempt to force a degraded array to be used at boot.
> > 
> > No, I'd expect it to be triaged as wishlist bug for enhancment of the
> > package. I can imagine that espc. the ubuntu server people would be
> > interested in solving it.
> > 
> > > What suggestion would you make for it?
> > 
> > Basically the solution you suggested: Detect root on a degraded array,
> > and drop to busybox with a short explanation how to boot in degraded
> > mode.
> 
> Is there no better solution?  I've a server sitting in a data center
> 1000 km from here; I'd rather get an email about a degraded RAID array
> on / and schedule a replacement at a convenient time than have to call
> the local technicians and walk them through the busybox shell over the
> phone.

I'm inclined to agree.  Bringing up a degraded array, and allowing the admin
to recover it in a normal administration scenario, should always be better
than failing the boot.

If the concern is over data consistency, is it not possible to bring it up
read-only?

-- 
 - mdz