On Tue, 6 May 2025 12:25:13 +0200
Daniel Buschke <damage@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 1. What exactly does this error message mean? I think replacing a failed
> drive with a new one is what RAID is for? So this shouldn't be an issue
> at all?
>
> 2. During my search I got the feeling that the problem is that the
> failed drive is somehow still "present" in the raid. Thus the add is
> handled as a "re add" which fails because there is no md superblock on
> the new device. Is my conclusion correct?
>
> 3. If 2. is correct how do I remove the failed but not really present
> device? Commands like "mdadm ... --remove failed" did not help.
>
> 4. I already replaced old devices in this RAID successfully before. What
> may have changed that this issue happens?
I agree that it is a weird error to get in this situation. "man mdadm" gives
something to try:
--add-spare
Add a device as a spare. This is similar to --add except that
it does not attempt --re-add first. The device will be added as
a spare even if it looks like it could be an recent member of
the array.
Another idea (from the same man page) would be "mdadm ... --fail detached".
--
With respect,
Roman
