Search Results

Search found 8876 results on 356 pages for 'hardware raid'.

Page 12/356 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

• Building optimal custom machine for Sql Server

  - by Chad Grant

  Getting the hardware in the mail any day. Hardware related to my question: x10 15.5k RPM SAS Segate Cheetah's x2 Adaptec 5405 PCIe Raid cards Motherboard has integrated SAS raid. Was thinking I would build 2 RAID 10 arrays one for data and one for logs The remaining 2 drives a RAID 0 for TempDB Will probably throw in a drive for OS. Does putting the Sql Server application / exe's on a raid make a difference and is there any impact of leaving the OS on a relatively slow disk compared to the raid arrays? I have 5/6 DBs combined < 50 gigs. With a relatively good / constant load. Estimating 60-7% reads vs writes. Planning on using log shipping as well if that matters. Any advice or suggestions?

  Read the article

• Degraded RAID5 and no md superblock on one of remaining drive

  - by ark1214

  This is actually on a QNAP TS-509 NAS. The RAID is basically a Linux RAID. The NAS was configured with RAID 5 with 5 drives (/md0 with /dev/sd[abcde]3). At some point, /dev/sde failed and drive was replaced. While rebuilding (and not completed), the NAS rebooted itself and /dev/sdc dropped out of the array. Now the array can't start because essentially 2 drives have dropped out. I disconnected /dev/sde and hoped that /md0 can resume in degraded mode, but no luck.. Further investigation shows that /dev/sdc3 has no md superblock. The data should be good since the array was unable to assemble after /dev/sdc dropped off. All the searches I done showed how to reassemble the array assuming 1 bad drive. But I think I just need to restore the superblock on /dev/sdc3 and that should bring the array up to a degraded mode which will allow me to backup data and then proceed with rebuilding with adding /dev/sde. Any help would be greatly appreciated. mdstat does not show /dev/md0 # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [multipath] md5 : active raid1 sdd2[2](S) sdc2[3](S) sdb2[1] sda2[0] 530048 blocks [2/2] [UU] md13 : active raid1 sdd4[3] sdc4[2] sdb4[1] sda4[0] 458880 blocks [5/4] [UUUU_] bitmap: 40/57 pages [160KB], 4KB chunk md9 : active raid1 sdd1[3] sdc1[2] sdb1[1] sda1[0] 530048 blocks [5/4] [UUUU_] bitmap: 33/65 pages [132KB], 4KB chunk mdadm show /dev/md0 is still there # mdadm --examine --scan ARRAY /dev/md9 level=raid1 num-devices=5 UUID=271bf0f7:faf1f2c2:967631a4:3c0fa888 ARRAY /dev/md5 level=raid1 num-devices=2 UUID=0d75de26:0759d153:5524b8ea:86a3ee0d spares=2 ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid5 num-devices=5 UUID=ce3e369b:4ff9ddd2:3639798a:e3889841 ARRAY /dev/md13 level=raid1 num-devices=5 UUID=7384c159:ea48a152:a1cdc8f2:c8d79a9c With /dev/sde removed, here is the mdadm examine output showing sdc3 has no md superblock # mdadm --examine /dev/sda3 /dev/sda3: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 00.90.00 UUID : ce3e369b:4ff9ddd2:3639798a:e3889841 Creation Time : Sat Dec 8 15:01:19 2012 Raid Level : raid5 Used Dev Size : 1463569600 (1395.77 GiB 1498.70 GB) Array Size : 5854278400 (5583.08 GiB 5994.78 GB) Raid Devices : 5 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat Dec 8 15:06:17 2012 State : active Active Devices : 4 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Checksum : d9e9ff0e - correct Events : 0.394 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 0 8 3 0 active sync /dev/sda3 0 0 8 3 0 active sync /dev/sda3 1 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 2 8 35 2 active sync /dev/sdc3 3 3 8 51 3 active sync /dev/sdd3 4 4 0 0 4 faulty removed [~] # mdadm --examine /dev/sdb3 /dev/sdb3: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 00.90.00 UUID : ce3e369b:4ff9ddd2:3639798a:e3889841 Creation Time : Sat Dec 8 15:01:19 2012 Raid Level : raid5 Used Dev Size : 1463569600 (1395.77 GiB 1498.70 GB) Array Size : 5854278400 (5583.08 GiB 5994.78 GB) Raid Devices : 5 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat Dec 8 15:06:17 2012 State : active Active Devices : 4 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Checksum : d9e9ff20 - correct Events : 0.394 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 0 0 8 3 0 active sync /dev/sda3 1 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 2 8 35 2 active sync /dev/sdc3 3 3 8 51 3 active sync /dev/sdd3 4 4 0 0 4 faulty removed [~] # mdadm --examine /dev/sdc3 mdadm: No md superblock detected on /dev/sdc3. [~] # mdadm --examine /dev/sdd3 /dev/sdd3: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 00.90.00 UUID : ce3e369b:4ff9ddd2:3639798a:e3889841 Creation Time : Sat Dec 8 15:01:19 2012 Raid Level : raid5 Used Dev Size : 1463569600 (1395.77 GiB 1498.70 GB) Array Size : 5854278400 (5583.08 GiB 5994.78 GB) Raid Devices : 5 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat Dec 8 15:06:17 2012 State : active Active Devices : 4 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Checksum : d9e9ff44 - correct Events : 0.394 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 3 8 51 3 active sync /dev/sdd3 0 0 8 3 0 active sync /dev/sda3 1 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 2 8 35 2 active sync /dev/sdc3 3 3 8 51 3 active sync /dev/sdd3 4 4 0 0 4 faulty removed fdisk output shows /dev/sdc3 partition is still there. [~] # fdisk -l Disk /dev/sdx: 128 MB, 128057344 bytes 8 heads, 32 sectors/track, 977 cylinders Units = cylinders of 256 * 512 = 131072 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdx1 1 8 1008 83 Linux /dev/sdx2 9 440 55296 83 Linux /dev/sdx3 441 872 55296 83 Linux /dev/sdx4 873 977 13440 5 Extended /dev/sdx5 873 913 5232 83 Linux /dev/sdx6 914 977 8176 83 Linux Disk /dev/sda: 1500.3 GB, 1500301910016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 182401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 1 66 530113+ 83 Linux /dev/sda2 67 132 530145 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sda3 133 182338 1463569695 83 Linux /dev/sda4 182339 182400 498015 83 Linux Disk /dev/sda4: 469 MB, 469893120 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 114720 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Disk /dev/sda4 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdb: 1500.3 GB, 1500301910016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 182401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 1 66 530113+ 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 67 132 530145 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sdb3 133 182338 1463569695 83 Linux /dev/sdb4 182339 182400 498015 83 Linux Disk /dev/sdc: 1500.3 GB, 1500301910016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 182401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 1 66 530125 83 Linux /dev/sdc2 67 132 530142 83 Linux /dev/sdc3 133 182338 1463569693 83 Linux /dev/sdc4 182339 182400 498012 83 Linux Disk /dev/sdd: 2000.3 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 66 530125 83 Linux /dev/sdd2 67 132 530142 83 Linux /dev/sdd3 133 243138 1951945693 83 Linux /dev/sdd4 243139 243200 498012 83 Linux Disk /dev/md9: 542 MB, 542769152 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 132512 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Disk /dev/md9 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/md5: 542 MB, 542769152 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 132512 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Disk /dev/md5 doesn't contain a valid partition table

  Read the article

• 3Ware 9650SE RAID-6, two degraded drives, one ECC, rebuild stuck

  - by cswingle

  This morning I came in the office to discover that two of the drives on a RAID-6, 3ware 9650SE controller were marked as degraded and it was rebuilding the array. After getting to about 4%, it got ECC errors on a third drive (this may have happened when I attempted to access the filesystem on this RAID and got I/O errors from the controller). Now I'm in this state: > /c2/u1 show Unit UnitType Status %RCmpl %V/I/M Port Stripe Size(GB) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ u1 RAID-6 REBUILDING 4%(A) - - 64K 7450.5 u1-0 DISK OK - - p5 - 931.312 u1-1 DISK OK - - p2 - 931.312 u1-2 DISK OK - - p1 - 931.312 u1-3 DISK OK - - p4 - 931.312 u1-4 DISK OK - - p11 - 931.312 u1-5 DISK DEGRADED - - p6 - 931.312 u1-6 DISK OK - - p7 - 931.312 u1-7 DISK DEGRADED - - p3 - 931.312 u1-8 DISK WARNING - - p9 - 931.312 u1-9 DISK OK - - p10 - 931.312 u1/v0 Volume - - - - - 7450.5 Examining the SMART data on the three drives in question, the two that are DEGRADED are in good shape (PASSED without any Current_Pending_Sector or Offline_Uncorrectable errors), but the drive listed as WARNING has 24 uncorrectable sectors. And, the "rebuild" has been stuck at 4% for ten hours now. So: How do I get it to start actually rebuilding? This particular controller doesn't appear to support /c2/u1 resume rebuild, and the only rebuild command that appears to be an option is one that wants to know what disk to add (/c2/u1 start rebuild disk=<p:-p...> [ignoreECC] according to the help). I have two hot spares in the server, and I'm happy to engage them, but I don't understand what it would do with that information in the current state it's in. Can I pull out the drive that is demonstrably failing (the WARNING drive), when I have two DEGRADED drives in a RAID-6? It seems to me that the best scenario would be for me to pull the WARNING drive and tell it to use one of my hot spares in the rebuild. But won't I kill the thing by pulling a "good" drive in a RAID-6 with two DEGRADED drives? Finally, I've seen reference in other posts to a bad bug in this controller that causes good drives to be marked as bad and that upgrading the firmware may help. Is flashing the firmware a risky operation given the situation? Is it likely to help or hurt wrt the rebuilding-but-stuck-at-4% RAID? Am I experiencing this bug in action? Advice outside the spiritual would be much appreciated. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Xenserver 5.5 doesn't see RAID volume

  - by Roy Chan

  Hi Gurus, I am trying to install Xenserver on a Dell precision 490 workstation. After booting into the install wizard and next-ed a few times, On the disk step, it only shows physical harddrive but not the RAID (RAID-10) volume that I set up on the Dell RAID. Is there a special option that I have to set on the boot? or do I need a special driver for this? Please Advise Thanks

  Read the article

• RAID options for a LAMP web server

  - by jetboy

  I'm due to set up a LAMP web server with four drives and a RAID controller to act as a web server. The drives are 146Gb SAS, and the machine has two quad core processors and 16Gb RAM. There will be very few write operations to the MySQL database, and I'll be using as much caching as possible to reduce disk I/O. Question is: Would I be better off splitting the drives into two RAID 1 arrays, splitting up sequential and random disk I/O, or would I get better overall performance putting them all in a single RAID 1+0 array?

  Read the article

• Windows 7 won't boot from raid-1 disks until secondary non-bootable disks are removed

  - by PaulP

  I have an ASUS X58 motherboard with a Intel ICH10R southbridge raid controller. Bootable raid-1 SATA disks are on channels 4, 5. Secondary raid-1 SATA disks are on channels 0,1. Everything was working OK until one time I removed the secondary disks and booted successfully but after I shut down and reinstalled the secondary disks rebooting fails with a "Please insert proper boot item" error. If I remove the secondary disks and reboot then do a hot-install of the disks after booting completes, then all is OK. Do I have a raid setup problem or is it something I can fix with Disk Manager.

  Read the article

• Which is faster? 4x10k SAS Drives in RAID 10 or 3x15k SAS Drives in RAID 5?

  - by Jenkz

  I am reviewing quote for a server upgrade. (RHEL). The server will have both Apache and MySQL on it, but the reason for upgrade is to increase DB performance. CPU has been upgraded massively, but I know that disk speed is also a factor. So RAID 10 is faster performance than RAID 5, but how much difference does the drive speed make? (The 15k discs in the RAID 5 config is at the top of my budget btw, hence not considdering 4x15k discs in RAID 10, which I assume would be the optimum.)

  Read the article

• Resizing RAID 1 Array on Dell PowerEdge with Perc 4/Di & Windows SBS 2003

  - by Scott McKinney

  I have a Dell PowerEdge 2600 with Perc 4/Di RAID card and Windows SBS 2003 installed. The original system drive was a set of 17GB drives in a RAID 1 array. Over the years, these drives have failed (individually) and been replaced by a set of 73GB drives, but the RAID array is still 17GB in size. Is there a safe procedure to resize the RAID 1 array to use the entire 73GB without destroying/corrupting the data on the array? The Perc documentation mentions a Reconstruct option with Online Capacity Expansion, but is a woefully short on the exact details. Has anyone performed this procedure successfully (or unsuccessfully)? What were the steps? Are there any gotchas I should watch out for?

  Read the article

• Can I use plain RAID on a Drobo?

  - by cringe

  I'm thinking about a RAID device and the Drobo is on top of my list (followed by the WD ShareSpace). But I don't want to be in another walled garden with Drobos BeyondRAID technology. Can I use the Drobo with a plain RAID setup? So I can take my HDDs and connect it to another RAID controller and go on?

  Read the article

• Disabling RAID feature on HP Smart Array P400

  - by Arie K

  I'm planning to use ZFS on my system (HP ML370 G5, Smart Array P400, 8 SAS disk). I want ZFS to manage all disks individually, so it can utilize better scheduling (i.e. I want to use software RAID feature in ZFS). The problem is, I can't find a way to disable RAID feature on the RAID controller. Right now, the controller aggregates all of the disks into one big RAID-5 volume. So ZFS can't see individual disk. Is there any way to acomplish this setup?

  Read the article

• ML 350 additional SATA RAID controller (mirror only)

  - by Nicholas

  I have a Proliant ML350 G8 with two SAS raid arrays currently set up - thereby maxing the default P420i raid controller. I need to set up a large video dump space in addition to this existing set-up (for non backed up, non-critical, temporary storage). I had planned to just add a 2TB SATA disk and plug it into the motherboard. However I it occurred to me the motherboard might have built-in mirror RAID support? Therefore I could use two SATA disks and have some semblance of redundancy. Is this possible? Or would I need to get a cheap raid card? Any recommendations?

  Read the article

• Steps to install Windows 7 64bit on RAID 0 (striping)?

  - by marco.ragogna

  I will receive in some days 2x500 GB hard disks (ST3500418AS) and an ASRock 890GX Extreme 3. My idea is to install onto it Windows 7 64-bit in RAID0 configuration (striping). I wondering which steps should I follow, due to the fact I never did it before. Should I install Windows 7 on a single disk and apply the RAID0 later, or should I perform some step through BIOS first and install then Windows 7? If you can, please list me all necessary steps I should follow. Thank you in advance, Marco

  Read the article

• HP DL 380G7 Raid swap drives

  - by dean

  disks 0 and 1 are raid redundant (OS) and the remaining 6 drives are in raid 5 I believe. i would like to pull out disks 0 and 1 and install new drives to build a new OS. I need to be able to reinsert the old drives and reboot back to the original OS. (swap) I had a serious problem in the past attempting this. does the raid require (look for) the drives based on a serial number or something? just dont want to lose data. thanks

  Read the article

• choosing the right RAID level

  - by student

  Recently, we bought a "HP-DL380 G6 Server" with 6 146GB (SCSI)HDD for our colleague course management application and website with 10000 daily visitors. we want to choose the best RAID level. how can we choose the right RAID level ? what is the best RAID level for our application ?

  Read the article

• choosing the right RAID level

  - by student

  Recently, we bought a "HP-DL380 G6 Server" with 6 146GB (SCSI)HDD for our colleague course management application and website with 10000 daily visitors. we want to choose the best RAID level. how can we choose the right RAID level ? what is the best RAID level for our application ?

  Read the article

• RAID - software vs. hardware

  - by Robert MacLean

  I have always used hardware based raid because it (IMHO) it's on the right level (feel free to dispute this) and that OS failures are more common to me than hardware issues. Thus if the OS fails the raid is gone and so is the data, where on a hardware level regardless of OS the data remains. However on a recent Stack Overflow podcast they stated they would not used hardware raid as the software raid is better developed and thus runs better. So my question is, is there any reasons to choose one over the other?

  Read the article

• How do I mount a raid disk

  - by Devator

  So I screwed up my grub.conf file on a CentOS system and I'm in recovery right now (it's only a test dedicated server). My disks are /dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1 (RAID 1). Now I need to mount /dev/sda1 and make changes to the grub file, however those changed need to be reflected on the second disk aswell. How do I mount these RAID disks? I can mount one using mount -t ext3however it will damage the RAID array.

  Read the article

• Raid configuration

  - by priyadarshi

  please give suggestion raid hard drive configuration in windows 2003 server.How it will used and advantages of raid.

  Read the article

• Re-assembling the RAID-5 array reboots my CentOS-5 machine

  - by xraminx

  I have 3 HDD's, each divided into 3 partitions. I had created a RAID-1 for boot partition md0 created from sda0, sdb0 and had also created two RAID-5 arrays: md1 created from sda1, sdb1, sdc1 md2 created from sda2, sdb2, sdc2 It used to work fine but one day I had to power off the machine (cold reboot) to get any response from the machine. After that, when the system started booting, it tried for a while to reconstruct the RAID arrays but after a few minutes it crashed silently. I booted the system in linux rescue mode from the DVD and tried to re-assemble the RAID devices manually. I was able to re-assemble md0 and md1 using: mdadm --assemble --scan /dev/md0 mdadm --assemble --scan /dev/md1 But when I try to re-assemble md2 using: mdadm --assemble --scan /dev/md2 the system reboots silently again. How can I fix this problem?

  Read the article

• Replacing all disks in a non-OS RAID 5 volume

  - by molecule

  Hi all, We currently have a server with 8 x HDD slots. It is a HP DL380G5 with a P400 controller. 2 x HDD are in a RAID 1+0 config and this hosts the OS. 6 x HDD are in a RAID 5 config and holds an Oracle DB. Basically the RAID 5 volume is running out of space and we would like to swap all 6 with higher capacity disks. Excuse my ignorance as I am pretty new to this... I believe we will need to backup the data, delete the RAID volume, insert the new disks, recreate the volume, and restore the data. 2 questions: Do we need to worry about the OS partition or is it completely independent so we can simply take out the 6 and insert 6 new disks and get the controller to recognize the 6 new disks and form a new RAID 5 volume? We should not need to reinstall OS or Oracle correct? Since we are going to restore the data on the volume from another source (our vendor will take care of this) but we would like to keep the existing data on the 6 disks just in case we run into issues and want to fall back, is this possible? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• looking for a solution for a Software Raid on my XP computer

  - by Yigang Wu

  Recently, I purchase 2x1TB drives for my XP computer, I want to use RAID 1 for the redundancy, but the motherboard is little old and can't support that. Some articles introduce how to make it happen in windows xp, but all are failed in my machine. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windowsxp-make-raid-5-happen,925.html I would like to know is there any existing software RAID solution available in market? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Linux software RAID 10 implementation

  - by fabrik

  Hello there! I don't want to force anybody to make it on behalf of me but trust me: i've looked hundreds of sites and i can't find a good starting point for this. I have 4x500Gb HDD's which i want to set up in RAID 10. The most promising description is here, but it's a little old and unclear for me, above all i prefer Debian over Ubuntu (i know there are slight or no differences). Is it possible to build RAID 10 with Debian's installer or i need to build RAID 1 first in the installer then use mdadm later? What is the best practice for building software RAID 10 under Linux (Debian)? Thanks for your time, fabrik

  Read the article

• raid 6 vs raid 10? which would you choose.

  - by dasko

  my choice would be raid 6 for a file server since you can lose two drives and it does not matter which set of two can die. from what i understand with raid 10 you can lose two drives but if they happen to be off the same raid 1 then you are a out of luck? any suggestions? basic file server with about 200gb of data and it would act as a single point of backup for other workstations and servers. thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Mac Pro Boot Camp w/ RAID card

  - by churnd

  If I configure a Mac Pro with a RAID card and two 15k RPM drives, and leave the drives JBOD (no RAID configured), can I install Windows on the second drive? I guess the question really is, does Windows recognize the RAID card? I know it's probably just a rebadged LSI or Adaptec but wanted to see if anyone's actually done it...

  Read the article

• Cannot load from raid with grub

  - by Andrew Answer

  I have a RAID1 array on my Ubuntu 12.04 LTS and my /sda HDD has been replaced several days ago. I use this commands to replace: # go to superuser sudo bash # see RAID state mdadm -Q -D /dev/md0 # State should be "clean, degraded" # remove broken disk from RAID mdadm /dev/md0 --fail /dev/sda1 mdadm /dev/md0 --remove /dev/sda1 # see partitions fdisk -l # shutdown computer shutdown now # physically replace old disk by new # start system again # see partitions fdisk -l # copy partitions from sdb to sda sfdisk -d /dev/sdb | sfdisk /dev/sda # recreate id for sda sfdisk --change-id /dev/sda 1 fd # add sda1 to RAID mdadm /dev/md0 --add /dev/sda1 # see RAID state mdadm -Q -D /dev/md0 # State should be "clean, degraded, recovering" # to see status you can use cat /proc/mdstat After bebuilding completion "fdisk -l" says what I have not valid partition table /dev/md0. So 1) "update-grub" find only /sda and /sdb Linux, not /md0 2) "dpkg-reconfigure grub-pc" says "GRUB failed to install the following devices /dev/md0" I cannot load my system except from /sdb1 and /sda1, but in DEGRADED mode... This is my partial fdisk -l output: Disk /dev/sdb: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders, total 976773168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000667ca Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 63 940910984 470455461 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb2 940910985 976768064 17928540 5 Extended /dev/sdb5 940911048 976768064 17928508+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris Disk /dev/md0: 481.7 GB, 481746288640 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 117613840 cylinders, total 940910720 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table Anybody can resolve this issue? I have big headache with this.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >