[CentOS] Recover RAID
jsadino.queens at gmail.com
Mon Mar 8 23:10:27 UTC 2010
Thanks to everyone who helped me to learn about RAIDs, starting at the end
and working backwards :)
I brought my system back up, minus the raid0 partition that was corrupted.
My question now is what's the best way to back up my server? Basically, I
have one more (software?) raid1 array, a cluster setup on 5 subnodes (but I
don't see any of their data here, so prob just all scratch and OS space),
and then a hardware RAID controller (10.54.1.100) attached to 2 raid setups
(scratch, apps, and data as one setup and then last week we added the shacks
as a seperate 12TB array. It came as a RAID, but I think we had to decouple
it b/c our OS couldn't read it), and then we have the computer with mounts
referencing our main Windows server (10.1.1.17), which is backed up by our
Should I use the empty shacks as backup space?
I hope that all makes sense. If not, please let me know. I really want to
back up and ensure thsi never happens again. Thank you!
This is the output from `df -h`:
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use%
/dev/sda1 9.8G 7.5G 2.3G
none 4.0G 0 4.0G
/dev/md0 459G 140G 296G 33%
/dev/sda2 2.0G 1.4G 561M 72%
tmpfs 241M 3.8M 238M
10.54.1.100:/mnt/RAID/FSDATA 1.1T 812G 223G 79% /data
10.54.1.100:/mnt/RAID/apps 1.1T 812G 223G 79% /apps
10.54.1.100:/scratch 72G 13G 55G 19% /scratch
10.54.1.100:/mnt/shack1 2.0T 103M 1.9T 1% /mnt/shack1
10.54.1.100:/mnt/shack2 1.8T 238G 1.5T 14% /mnt/fs3
10.54.1.100:/mnt/shack3 1.8T 285G 1.5T 17% /mnt/fs4
10.54.1.100:/mnt/shack4 1.8T 100M 1.7T 1% /mnt/shack4
10.54.1.100:/mnt/shack5 1.8T 100M 1.7T 1% /mnt/shack5
10.54.1.100:/mnt/shack6 1.7T 101M 1.6T 1% /mnt/shack6
//10.1.1.17/Scanner_data2 11T 4.7T 5.4T 47%
//10.1.1.17/SCANNER_DATA 11T 4.7T 5.4T 47% /mnt/scanner_data
//10.1.1.17/shared 11T 4.7T 5.4T 47%
//10.1.1.17/fMRI 11T 4.7T 5.4T 47%
//10.1.1.17/USERS 11T 4.7T 5.4T 47%
/export/home/fs431 459G 140G 296G 33%
/export/home/coreg 459G 140G 296G 33%
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 7:26 PM, John R Pierce <pierce at hogranch.com> wrote:
> Jeff Sadino wrote:
> > Thank you John. The thing is my data was not overwritten, corrupted,
> > etc. Some was, but I know which parts. Basically, I just cleared the
> > file system designation. So if a file is 64K, does the first 32K on
> > drive 1 contain the first half of the file and the first 32K on drive
> > 2 contain the second half, or are the 32 size chunks on random locations?
> didn't you say you did a mkfs ext3 over this stripe's partition? that
> would have overwirtten all the root directory areas, made a total mess
> of things.
> ifyou -just- used a fdisk program to change the partition type, quick,
> change it back to what it was, and put it all back.
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CentOS