Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have a RAID-5 array of 4x1TB hard disks with one lvm2 partition on Ubuntu Linux 10.04 LTS. One of the disks has failed. I have re-assembled the array without this failed disk but now mdadm --examine claims the array has no superblock and fdisk says it has no partition table. What can I do to recover the data?

# mdadm -D /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
        Version : 1.2
  Creation Time : Sat Mar  5 14:43:49 2011
     Raid Level : raid5
     Array Size : 2930276352 (2794.53 GiB 3000.60 GB)
  Used Dev Size : 976758784 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB)
   Raid Devices : 4
  Total Devices : 4
    Persistence : Superblock is persistent

    Update Time : Sat Mar  5 15:06:49 2011
          State : clean, degraded
 Active Devices : 3
Working Devices : 3
 Failed Devices : 1
  Spare Devices : 0

         Layout : left-symmetric
     Chunk Size : 512K

           Name : boba:1  (local to host boba)
           UUID : 52eb4bc9:c3d8aab5:e0699505:e0e1aa05
         Events : 18

    Number   Major   Minor   RaidDevice State
       0       8        1        0      active sync   /dev/sda1
       1       8       65        1      active sync   /dev/sde1
       2       8       49        2      active sync   /dev/sdd1
       3       0        0        3      removed

       4       8       17        -      faulty spare   /dev/sdb1


# mdadm --examine /dev/md0
mdadm: No md superblock detected on /dev/md0.

# fdisk -l /dev/md0

Disk /dev/md0: 3000.6 GB, 3000602984448 bytes
2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 732569088 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 524288 bytes / 1572864 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000

Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table

# cat /proc/mdstat 
Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] 
md0 : active raid5 sdb1[4](F) sda1[0] sdd1[2] sde1[1]
      2930276352 blocks super 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]

unused devices: <none>
share|improve this question
    
You do not need to have partition, most probably you have got lvm on whole /dev/md0 –  Ency Mar 5 '11 at 16:30
    
I did create this a long time ago, but I seem to remember making one large partition. And even so, pvscan does not recognise md0 as a physical volume. –  fophillips Mar 5 '11 at 17:34
    
What does pvscan report? What about pvdisplay and vgdisplay? It's not surprising that mdadm --examine doesn't find a superblock on /dev/md0, since the superblocks are only visible on the underlying component devices (sda1, sdb1, etc.). And finally, there's no reason to expect there would be a partition table on /dev/md0 if it's an LVM physical volume. –  Steven Monday Mar 6 '11 at 0:48
    
pvscan, cannot find any physical volumes, pvdisplay and vgdisplay have no output. –  fophillips Mar 6 '11 at 12:37
    
Any chance your LVM filters in /etc/lvm/lvm.conf are excluding /dev/md0? I realize this would be a strange thing to just up and change but it's worth considering if there is a possibility that you LVMed the whole RAID device instead of using a partition. –  rthomson Apr 14 '11 at 14:43

2 Answers 2

This looks like your in single user mode.

Is your volumegroup and logicalvolume listed in /dev/ ?

If not, you need to run lvchange -ay to activate the logical volume.

For fsck you should be using /dev/volgroup00/logvol00 as the target.

share|improve this answer

The first thing I would try is to examine all the individual drives on the array with:

mdadm --examine /dev/sda1
mdadm --examine /dev/sdb1
mdadm --examine /dev/sdd1
mdadm --examine /dev/sde1

Then, you want to make sure that they have superblocks, and the drive numbers line up with your results from /dev/md0. I have had an instance where my array did not re-assemble with the drives in the correct order. It may be that you just need to re-assemble it the right way.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.