Help, my disk array has one dead member

[Xen]

Bruce Ferrell schreef op 23-03-2017 0:12:
> On 3/22/17 3:37 PM, Xen wrote:
>> Bruce Ferrell schreef op 22-03-2017 22:36:
>> 
>>> Simple raid0 is destroyed with a member drive or partition out so no
>>> copy is needed/possible.
>> 
>> He said that one of the drives was damaged, but still readable. The 
>> other was fine.
>> 
> Yes and he also said it's an md raid.  As I said, the devil is in the
> details;  If it's raid1 (or higher) and one of the elements is
> damaged, the others cover for that with speed degradation.

He said it was raid0.

> raid0, do NOT use any dd variant on the physical disk.  md has
> internal data structures on the physical disks and doesn't transplant
> well to new drives.

He didn't try to do that because there's no point in that if it has a 
stripe, right.

> You *might* be able to get away with dd on the md device, but that is
> active and managed by the md subsystem.  I was taught NEVER use dd on
> active devices... Unless you want trash data.

I don't see a reason against it. The block volume is managed from the 
outside by the filesystem. The filesystem manages the logical block 
space. It has no interference with the md subsystem.

In place of the filesystem, you can also use dd on the block device. It 
makes no difference.

You also can't trash data on any device just by reading, usually.

> Use tar and you may have to be selective about what you copy but then
> again maybe sector relocation can help you get past the damage for
> tar.

Maybe, but filesystem recovery is a step after you secure the data, I 
think.

> Where this get's REALLY dicey; damaged data may have been mirrored
> back to the good drive from the bad one.  NASTY!

It was a raid0. He said it was a stripe.

> Bottom line, one size never fits all...  poke, prod (gently) and use
> trouble shooting steps to make a determination of what's needed to
> recover and NEVER blindly follow "just do this..." instructions

It wasn't a blanket just do it instruction. It was geared to his 
particular use case.

Anyway, sorry for responding again still.