I have created a RAID 1 array under Ubuntu using mdadm. I used the manual at this link: https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-create-raid-arrays-with-mdadm-on-ubuntu-16-04
I created a RAID 1 array using two partitions (on different hard drives). I selected the NTFS file system in order to read the data under Windows later. So after I created the RAID 1 array, I wrote a file on the md0 device and loaded Windows XP to check that this file will be on both partitions. But I was not able to open partitions under Windows XP. Windows XP assigned a drive letter to both partitions but when I try to open them it says:
file system is not available.
Is it possible to have two partitions under NTFS in RAID 1 on Ubuntu so that it could be possible to access them from Windows?
[UPDATE] Sorry for not giving a detailed information. I have two drives. I have created an ntfs partitions on both. Then under Ubuntu i used mdadm to combine them into raid 1 array. I wrote a file into md0. Then i have booted Windows XP from a third drive. Not a VM. I see that two partitions have a drive letter. One for each. But i can't see my file in them. I expect it to bee on both partitions. The first partition is not empty (i see it from disk properties) but when i open it there is no file. Another partition is shown as empty and can't be opened.
I was expecting that linux mdadm works in a way that it just mirrors the file write to both paritions so that they can be read from any other operating system later.
[quote] Windows doesn't understand mdadm natively (nitpicking: neither does Linux considering mdadm has to be installed) hence Windows sees the 2 drives (and partitions) as independent so it attributes "letters" but can't read the contents obviously. [/quote]
ChanganAuto why can't file can't be read separately from any partition from raid 1 array? [/UPDATE]
mdadm
natively (nitpicking: neither does Linux consideringmdadm
has to be installed) hence Windows sees the 2 drives (and partitions) as independent so it attributes "letters" but can't read the contents obviously. It has nothing to do with VMs, actually the opposite of what you suggested first (...)