Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 00:22:16 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des@des.no> Cc: FreeBSD current users <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: ata0-raid oddness. Message-ID: <20040131082216.GG18624@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <xzpbrous0tw.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0401231406000.41030-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <40119E16.1010802@FreeBSDsystems.COM> <xzpbrous0tw.fsf@dwp.des.no>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 12:27:07AM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: > Lanny Baron <lnb@FreeBSDsystems.COM> writes: > > That is correct. ad0 and ad1 are subdisks of respective ar* > > it is *not* correct - ad0 and ad1 should not be shown when they are > members of an active array, as any attempt to partition and label them > directly is likely to corrupt the array. older ATA didn't show the members of an active array. ATAng started showing them. :-( I asked sos about it and he said they'ed be exposed for a while until he finished some things he was working on. Maybe sos can update us on the state of things and the plans.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040131082216.GG18624>