About RAID member labels and consistency policies

  • I currently have two RAID arrays, one RAID5 (3x8TB) at /dev/md127 and a newly created RAID6 (5x12TB) at /dev/md0.

    I'll post the details here and then ask my questions below. To wit:


    From /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf:

    Code
    # definitions of existing MD arrays
    ARRAY /dev/md/PrimeRAID metadata=1.2 UUID=48766f2b:7657af02:cfdc3053:e72e22d1
    ARRAY /dev/md0 metadata=1.2 UUID=450ea103:fd5e7912:8984f17a:99d496cc


    Question 1:

    Can I rename the new RAID6 array from cubeserv:0 to Cubeserv:Custom_name_here? If this requires taking the array down and reassembling it, what are the steps to do so safely? (Note: I don't have any data stored on the new array yet; I did create a filesystem on it but can delete and re-create if needed.)


    Question 2:

    The older array (/dev/md127) was created under OMV 5 and uses a bitmap, whereas the new array uses a 'resync' policy. Is this due to changes between OMV versions?

    Should I enable the bitmap on the new array, or are there any disadvantages in doing so?


    Question 3: What is the /dev/md/PrimeRAID entry in mdadm.conf all about? Why wouldn't it just be /dev/md127?

  • Surprised that there haven't been any replies. :/ In any case, I happened to run into the daily anacron mdadm email issue and solved it (thanks to the linked-to thread). In the process, the significance of symlinks below /dev/md/ became apparent to me, so Question 3 is answered.


    As for Question 1, I was confused. The array itself does have the name I wanted, now I realize the RAID member disks don't need any renaming.


    Question 2? I went ahead and enabled the bitmap anyway... my old array had it and it sounds like a good idea.

  • cubemin

    Added the Label resolved

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!