Search Results

Search found 8238 results on 330 pages for 'dynamic disks'.

Page 115/330 | < Previous Page | 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122  | Next Page >

• Best way to grow Linux software RAID 1 to RAID 10

  - by Hans Malherbe

  mdadm does not seem to support growing an array from level 1 to level 10. I have two disks in RAID 1. I want to add two new disks and convert the array to a four disk RAID 10 array. My current strategy: Make good backup. Create a degraded 4 disk RAID 10 array with two missing disks. rsync the RAID 1 array with the RAID 10 array. fail and remove one disk from the RAID 1 array. Add the available disk to the RAID 10 array and wait for resynch to complete. Destroy the RAID 1 array and add the last disk to the RAID 10 array. The problem is the lack of redundancy at step 5. Is there a better way?

  Read the article

• Best way to grow Linux software RAID 1 to RAID 10

  - by Hans Malherbe

  mdadm does not seem to support growing an array from level 1 to level 10. I have two disks in RAID 1. I want to add two new disks and convert the array to a four disk RAID 10 array. My current strategy: Make good backup. Create a degraded 4 disk RAID 10 array with two missing disks. rsync the RAID 1 array with the RAID 10 array. fail and remove one disk from the RAID 1 array. Add the available disk to the RAID 10 array and wait for resynch to complete. Destroy the RAID 1 array and add the last disk to the RAID 10 array. The problem is the lack of redundancy at step 5. Is there a better way?

  Read the article

• How to view status of software RAID 1 resynching?

  - by tputkonen

  I have two 500 GB disks and yesterday I mirrored first drive to the second one using software RAID 1. PC has now been on for 30 hours. Both disks say "Resynching", but there is no progress indicator. In addition, there is a small yellow exclamation mark on both disks. My questions are: How long could the synch take for 500 GB drive with about 150 GB of data? PC has 4 GBs of RAM and AMD dual core 4000+ Is there a way to monitor status of the synching? How can I check what the exclamation mark means?

  Read the article

• Issues with non-HP harddisk in HP ML 350 server?

  - by Torben Warberg Rohde

  I'm looking to buy some extra disk space for a HP ML 350 G5 server. It is for simple file-serving - not OS/system stuff. HP harddisks are insanely expensive, so I'm tempted to buy some other brand instead. I have heard that they sometime use special firmware on their disks, but I suspect that might just be HP spreading rumors to sell disks. Does anyone have experience using non-HP disks? Any features not working, or not being able to build the RAID at all? I'm looking at 2.5" SAS Seagate drives - Constellation 500 GB (7.2k) or Savvio 600 GB (10k).

  Read the article

• What is the safest and least expensive way to store 10 terabytes of data?

  - by Josh T

  I'm a member of a production company and we're preparing for our first feature film. We've been discussing methods of data storage to keep all of our original content safe (for as long as possible). While we understand data is never 100% safe, we'd like to find the safest solution for us. We've considered: 16TB NAS for on-site storage 4-5 2TB hard drives (cheap, but not redundant), copy original footage to drives then seal in static free bag Burn data to Blu-Ray disks (time consuming and expensive: 200 disks == $5000) Tape drive(s)? I know the least about tape drives, except the fact that they're more reliable than disks. Any experience/knowledge with this amount of data is hugely appreciated.

  Read the article

• Methodologies for performance-testing a WAN link

  - by Chopper3

  We have a pair of new diversely-routed 1Gbps Ethernet links between locations about 200 miles apart. The 'client' is a new reasonably-powerful machine (HP DL380 G6, dual E56xx Xeons, 48GB DDR3, R1 pair of 300GB 10krpm SAS disks, W2K8R2-x64) and the 'server' is a decent enough machine too (HP BL460c G6, dual E55xx Xeons, 72GB, R1 pair of 146GB 10krpm SAS disks, dual-port Emulex 4Gbps FC HBA linked to dual Cisco MDS9509s then onto dedicated HP EVA 8400 with 128 x 450GB 15krpm FC disks, RHEL 5.3-x64). Using SFTP from the client we're only seeing about 40Kbps of throughput using large (2GB) files. We've performed server to 'other local server' tests and see around 500Mbps through the local switches (Cat 6509s), we're going to do the same on the client side but that's a day or so away. What other testing methods would you use to prove to the link providers that the problem is theirs?

  Read the article

• win2008 R2 server core software RAID

  - by shimonyk

  I am trying to set up software raid on a win2008 R2 server core. I have the disks configured as dynamic. In the server manager gui, i can see the disks, but when i right click, the option to set up "new mirrored volume" is not listed. I tried it with the command line using diskpart, and it gives the error "Virtual Disk Service Error: The size of the extent is less than the minimum." The drive are a new pair of 1Tb disks. Is this not supported in server core, or am i missing something else? Thank you

  Read the article

• PostgreSQL RAID configuration

  - by Yoldar-Zi

  I'm stuck how best to configure disk array. We have Hp P2000 G3 disk array with 24 SAS physical disks 300Gb each. We need to configure this array got 2 copies of PostgreSQL 9.2 because two different system. As we know it's recommended to store database and transaction logs(pg_xlog) files on separate disks. So we must setup 4 logical disk: 2 for transaction logs with RAID 1 2 for database with RAID 10 Is this right scheme of distribution? Or may be it is best to just make one big RAID 10 with 4 logical disks?

  Read the article

• What RAID level for a backup server?

  - by ispirto

  I'm building a server with 12 x 3TB disks to use daily backups. I'm thinking to use RAID50 to get a good 27TB usable space. The disks will be used brutally to backup 9 servers with 1.5TB of data once a day. I'll keep the backups for 2 days. So for each server I'll have 3TB of separate partitions. Do you think this kind of huge backups would stress the disks too much and make them fail? Should I better go with RAID10? Oktay

  Read the article

• choosing the right RAID level for PostgresQL database

  - by Sergey

  Hi, I got an disk array appliance of 8 disks 1T each (UltraStor RS8IP4). It will be used solely by PostgresQL database and I am trying to choose the best RAID level for it. The most priority is for read performance since we operate large data sets (tables, indexes) and we do lots of searches/scans. With the old disks that we have now the most slowdowns happen on SELECTs. Fault tolerance is less important, it can be 1 or 2 disks. Space is the least important factor. Even 1T will be enough. Which RAID level would you recommend in this situation. The current options are 60, 50 and 10, but probably other options can be even better.

  Read the article

• LVM mirroring VS RAID1

  - by syrenity

  Hi. Having learned a bit about LVM mirroring, I thought about replacing the current RAID-1 scheme I'm using to gain some flexibility. Problem is that according to what I found on the Internet, LVM is: 1) Slower then RAID-1, at least in reading (as only single volume being used for reading). 2) Non-reliable on power interrupts, and requires disk cache disabling for prevention of data loss. http://www.joshbryan.com/blog/2008/01/02/lvm2-mirrors-vs-md-raid-1/ Also it seems, at least to several setup guides I read (http://www.tcpdump.com/kb/os/linux/lvm-mirroring/intro.html), that one actually requires a 3rd disk for storing the LVM log. This makes the setup completely unusable on 2 disks installations, and lowers the amount of used mirror disks on higher amount of disks. Can anyone comment the above facts, and let me know his experience of using LVM mirroring? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Changed array composition, mdadm --detail still shows the old array size

  - by Prody

  I have a machine with 8 disks. I installed it with my hoster's install automation (it's OVH, I don't have physical access to it). The machine installed correctly, but it made an array that I wanted to change. It created a raid5 array across 5/8 disks and I've changed it to raid10 across 8 disks. I've done this by first --stopping the old array and then --creating the new array. It warned me that a previous array was there, but I chose to continue. So it created the array, spent 10ish hours syncing it and now that it's ready I get this strange behavior: When I fdisk p on it, I see the correct size. But when I mdadm --detail it I see the old array's size even tho I get the new composition and level. When I try to pvcreate on it, i get the old size again for some reason. Did I have to do something else? Did I miss something?

  Read the article

• Any experience with SATA SAS Interposer Cards?

  - by korkman

  Driven by the current price difference between SATA and SAS disks on one side and the potentially bad behaviour of SATA disks in bigger storage arrays on the other side, I have found so-called SATA-to-SAS interposer cards. Advertised as "seamlessly adding SAS capabilities to existing SATA disk drives", I wonder if anyone here has had some experience with these or similar products. The major benefits I can identify are the increased cable voltage (if all drives are SAS connected), the ability to power-cycle the drive and multipath (if desired). Obviously the SATA drive will still have to be RAID edition. The question is: Do these cards indeed increase the overall reliability of a storage system, or will failing SATA disks cause trouble nevertheless? Edit: I'm not asking for hypothetical answers, only actual experience please. I'm well aware that the typical 10k SAS drive is more reliable (and better performing) than 7200 SATA drives. But how does a nearline SAS, which is phyiscally the same disk as its SATA counterpart, compare to the SATA version with interposer?

  Read the article

• Maximum burn speed keeps decreasing from Nero?

  - by Bob King

  I have a 16x DL DVD burner in my work machine (XP SP3). I'm using 8x TDK DVD+R media. The first dozen or so disks burned fine using Nero, but after that I started to coaster every disk. I asked Nero to calculate the maximum speed, and it calculated it at 4x. This worked for a few disks, then the same issues. I'm currently burning at 1.2x. I've since tried other brands and full 16x compatible disks, I can't get my burn speed to be recognized as any faster than what it's currently at. I've tried uninstalling Nero. I've tried burning directly in Windows, and also tested an MP3 CD in iTunes, and no luck. Any suggestions, short of reinstalling Windows, would be great!

  Read the article

• Issue with broken disk on Solaris with raidctl - how to proceed

  - by weismat

  I have a SunFire T2000 server which has 2 mirrored disks pairs. The server required an exchange of the system battery. After swaping the battery first no disks were found. After booting from CD we managed to find the disks, but now one disk is broken and the raidctl reports a failed synchronisation. The boot process stops now when trying to mount the file systems. The power light of the broken drive is not even blinking. What is the best way to proceed now ? Fortunately I could live with loosing the data on the drive as it is backed up, but I would like to keep the rest of the data as it contains /etc and get the server booting again.

  Read the article

• Formatting a 5.25" floppy disk

  - by Spütnik

  So after the massive trouble of finding a 5.25" floppy drive and a connecting it up, then changing the BIOS so it's set as my A: drive, I tried to format a couple of high-density 1.2MB floppy disks using the "format A:" command in Command Prompt. Both times it formatted only 160KB and left it at that. If I then check the amount of space on those disks, it then comes up as 160KB. Why is this the case? How can I get my the full value out of my 1.2MB? For reference, I have a Mitsubishi MF504C-318UG, which should support 1.2MB disks.

  Read the article

• Force RAID to read exiled disk?

  - by user198847

  user user197015 asked on 1th of November the following question: "We have a RAID 6 array (Infortrend EonStor DS S16F) that recently had two disks fail. Immediately prior to replacing these two disks, a third, good, disk was accidentally ejected from the array. After reinserting this disk it is marked as "exiled" by the array's firmware, and so even after replacing the two failed disks with new ones the array refuses to rebuild the logical volume and remains inaccessible. Since the temporarily-ejected disk is still functional and nothing has been written to the array since it was ejected, it seems that it should theoretically be possible to recover all the data on the array, but how can we convince the array to use the data from the "exiled" disk? Thanks for any help or advice you can offer." Now I've got quite the same problem. The post has been deleted by the user, so I don#t know if he was successful. Is there anybody who can help me? Thank you!

  Read the article

• Unreadable sectors reported by smartd, is it serious?

  - by stribika

  I have a RAID 5 array of 4 disks. In the last 2 days I began to see these messages in the log: Jun 13 23:01:05 localhost smartd[4537]: Device: /dev/sda [SAT], 1 Currently unreadable (pending) sectors Jun 13 23:01:05 localhost smartd[4537]: Device: /dev/sdb [SAT], 2 Currently unreadable (pending) sectors If I have 2 faulty disks then the array should not show all disks OK: md0 : active raid1 sdd1[3] sdb1[1] sdc1[2] sda1[0] 64128 blocks [4/4] [UUUU] Strangely there are no other problems just the log messages. I am worried because sda is new and I previously had problems with sdb. (Completely died but the guy who sold it to me fixed it somehow.) Am I in danger of losing data? What should I do now?

  Read the article

• How to arrange 2 SSD with 2 SATA?

  - by alfish

  I like to have best io performance as well as good capaciyy and reliability out of a server that hosts a busy forum, which involves loads of static files download. I am wondering what is the best plan to format and use the disks given that the server has only 4 disk bays and I have 2 SSD and 2 SATA disks at hand. I am currently thinking about putting the disks in RAID 10 so that SSD contains /var/lib/mysql as well as most of the OS (Likely to be Debian) and SATA disk to contain /path/to/static/files. However I'd like to hear your expert opinion on this. Thanks

  Read the article

• What VMWare should I choose?

  - by wbad

  I'm new to VMWare stuff. What I need to do is pretty basic: Just to install two different Windows 2008 versions on a server with 2x 4core CPU and 2x 3TB hard disks. I asked my datacenter to install the free version (VMware ESXi 4.1) but apparently it did not recognize 3TB disks. Now I'm wondering whether VMWare 5 can handle 3TB disks, and if so, what variant? There is a huge array of options there and some prices are astonishingly high: http://www.vmware.com/products/datacenter-virtualization/vsphere/pricing.html So I'm really confused and I appreciate your hints.

  Read the article

• RAID 0 disk failure, how to recover the RAID?

  - by user7985

  Situation is this. A PC with 2 hard disks, in an RAID 0 Array. The electronics on one of the disks has failed. I can not find the same board for the disk (I've tried this, removed board from the OK disk, and the second, the damaged one, works fine). I've made an image with "dd" on linux on a new hard drive (same size, not same model) and now I get "Offline member" in the RAID config screen. Will I succeed to recover the data which is stored on the drives, any help, any experience with this kind of problem. And surly, I know it was stupid to put the disks in RAID 0 and store data on them :(

  Read the article

• Server refuses to boot when Raid5 disk is disconnected - /root/ missing

  - by Ronni

  I recently set up a NAS server running a Debian OS (6.0.4) It contains 4 disks, 3 of them are in a Raid5 array, while the last one is used for the OS. To simulate a disk-failure I unplugged one of the raid disks, which resulted in the OS being unable to boot. It started the boot, recognized that md0 (the raid array) was running on 2/3 disks, and then threw a few errors. It was unable to find the following directories: /dev/root on /root, /dev on /root/dev, /sys on /root/sys, /proc on /root/proc It appears this happens regardless of which raid disk is removed. These directories are supposed to be on /dev/sdd my system disk. Output from fstab and blkid : http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6017799/NASOutput.txt If you need additional info, please let me know.

  Read the article

• Why doesn't HDDlife® work onmy computer?

  - by Chenthurij

  Why doesn't HDDlife® work on my computer? Instead, it displays the message that no disks are found. First, make sure that you use the latest drivers for your system. We encountered compatibility problems with the following drivers: Intel Application Accelerator, nVidia nForce platform drivers, and VIA 4-in-1. But, all these problems are fixed in the latest versions of the drivers. To be safe, download the most recent version from the manufacturer's site and install it. HDDlife® supports only IDE and Serial ATA disks, but does not support RAID disks. IS it correct way?

  Read the article

• Restoring an Ubuntu Server using ZFS RAIDZ for data

  - by andybjackson

  Having become disillusioned with hacking Buffalo NAS devices, I've decided to roll my own Home server. After some research, I have settled on an HP Proliant Microserver with Ubuntu Server and ZFS (OS on 1 Ext4 disk, Data on 3 RAIDZ disks). As Joel Spolsky and Geoff Atwood say with regards to backup, I can't rest until I have done a restore in all of the failure scenarios that I am seeking to protect against. Q: How to configure Ubuntu Server to recognise a pre-existing RAIDZ array? Clearly if one of the data disks die - then that is a resilvering scenario, which is well documented. If two of the data disks die, then I am into regular backup/restore land. If the OS dies and I can restore, also an easy scenario. But if the OS dies and I can't restore, then I need to recreate an Ubuntu server. But how do I get this to recognise my RAID-Z array? Is the necessary configuration information stored within and across the RAIZ array and simply need to be found (if so, how)? Or does it reside on the OS ext4 disk (in which case how do I recreate it)?

  Read the article

• Creating properly aligned partitions on a replacement disk

  - by Marius Gedminas

  I've a typical small office server with two hard disks configured for RAID-1 (mirroring). Each disk has several partitions: one for swap, the others paired in several /dev/mdX arrays. Every couple of years one of the disks dies and is replaced. The replacement typically goes something like this: # copy partition table from the remaining good disk to the empty replacement disk # (instead of /dev/good_disk and /dev/new_disk I use /dev/sda and /dev/sdb, as appropriate) sfdisk -d /dev/good_disk | sfdisk /dev/new_disk # install boot loader grub-install /dev/new_disk # create swap partition reusing the same UUID, so I don't need to edit /etc/fstab mkswap /dev/new_disk1 -U xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx # hot-add the new partitions to my RAID arrays mdadm /dev/md0 -a /dev/new_disk2 mdadm /dev/md1 -a /dev/new_disk5 mdadm /dev/md2 -a /dev/new_disk6 mdadm /dev/md3 -a /dev/new_disk7 mdadm /dev/md4 -a /dev/new_disk8 The disks were originally partitioned with cfdisk back in 2009, and so the partition table is aligned traditionally to cylinder boundaries (255 heads * 63 sectors). This is not the optimum configuration for new 4K-sector drives. My question is: how can I create a set of partitions for the new disk and ensure they're properly aligned, and have correct sizes for my RAID arrays (rounding up is acceptable, I suppose, but rounding down is definitely not)?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122  | Next Page >