[lkml]   [2010]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Linux mdadm superblock question.
    On Sat, 13 Feb 2010, Michael Evans wrote:

    > On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
    > <> wrote:
    >>> 0.90 has a very bad problem, which is that it is hard to distinguish
    >>> between a RAID partition at the end of volume and a full RAID device.
    >>> This is because 0.90 doesn't actually tell you the start of the device.
    >>> Then, of course, there are a lot of limitations on size, number of
    >>> devices, and so on in 0.90.
    >> but it is the only format supporting autodetection.
    >> So - when will autodetection be introduced with 1.X? And if not, why not?
    >> All I found was 'autodetection might be troublesome' and nothing else.
    >>  But dealing with initrds is troublesome too. Pure evil even.
    >> Gl?ck Auf,
    >> Volker
    >> --
    >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
    >> the body of a message to
    >> More majordomo info at
    > I remember hearing that 1.x had /no/ plans for kernel level
    > auto-detection ever. That can be accomplished in early-userspace
    > leaving the code in the kernel much less complex, and therefore far
    > more reliable.
    > In other words, 'auto-detection' for 1.x format devices is using an
    > initrd/initramfs.

    hmm, I've used 1.x formats without an initrd/initramfs (and without any
    conifg file on the server) and have had no problem with them being
    discovered. I haven't tried to use one for a boot/root device, so that may
    be the difference.

    David Lang
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-02-14 08:25    [W:0.022 / U:8.156 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site