Search Results

Search found 1864 results on 75 pages for 'raid 5'.

Page 14/75 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

• Unable to access intel fake RAID 1 array in Fedora 14 after reboot

  - by Sim

  Hello everyone, 1st I am relatively new to linux (but not to *nix). I have 4 disks assembled in the following intel ahci bios fake raid arrays: 2x320GB RAID1 - used for operating systems md126 2x1TB RAID1 - used for data md125 I have used the raid of size 320GB to install my operating system and the second raid I didn't even select during the installation of Fedora 14. After successful partitioning and installation of Fedora, I tried to make the second array available, it was possible to make it visible in linux with mdadm --assembe --scan , after that I created one maximum size partition and 1 maximum size ext4 filesystem in it. Mounted, and used it. After restart - a few I/O errors during boot regarding md125 + inability to mount the filesystem on it and dropped into repair shell. I commented the filesystem in fstab and it booted. To my surprise, the array was marked as "auto read only": [root@localhost ~]# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] md125 : active (auto-read-only) raid1 sdc[1] sdd[0] 976759808 blocks super external:/md127/0 [2/2] [UU] md127 : inactive sdc[1](S) sdd[0](S) 4514 blocks super external:imsm md126 : active raid1 sda[1] sdb[0] 312566784 blocks super external:/md1/0 [2/2] [UU] md1 : inactive sdb[1](S) sda[0](S) 4514 blocks super external:imsm unused devices: <none> [root@localhost ~]# and the partition in it was not available as device special file in /dev: [root@localhost ~]# ls -l /dev/md125* brw-rw---- 1 root disk 9, 125 Jan 6 15:50 /dev/md125 [root@localhost ~]# But the partition is there according to fdisk: [root@localhost ~]# fdisk -l /dev/md125 Disk /dev/md125: 1000.2 GB, 1000202043392 bytes 19 heads, 10 sectors/track, 10281682 cylinders, total 1953519616 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: 0x1b238ea9 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/md125p1 2048 1953519615 976758784 83 Linux [root@localhost ~]# I tried to "activate" the array in different ways (I'm not experienced with mdadm and the man page is gigantic so I was only browsing it looking for my answer) but it was impossible - the array would still stay in "auto read only" and the device special file for the partition it will not be in /dev. It was only after I recreated the partition via fdisk that it reappeared in /dev... until next reboot. So, my question is - How do I make the array automatically available after reboot? Here is some additional information: 1st I am able to see the UUID of the array in blkid: [root@localhost ~]# blkid /dev/sdc: UUID="b9a1149f-ae11-4fc8-a600-0d77354dc42a" SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3" /dev/sdd: UUID="b9a1149f-ae11-4fc8-a600-0d77354dc42a" SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3" /dev/md126p1: UUID="60C8D9A7C8D97C2A" TYPE="ntfs" /dev/md126p2: UUID="3d1b38a3-b469-4b7c-b016-8abfb26a5d7d" TYPE="ext4" /dev/md126p3: UUID="1Msqqr-AAF8-k0wi-VYnq-uWJU-y0OD-uIFBHL" TYPE="LVM2_member" /dev/mapper/vg00-rootlv: LABEL="_Fedora-14-x86_6" UUID="34cc1cf5-6845-4489-8303-7a90c7663f0a" TYPE="ext4" /dev/mapper/vg00-swaplv: UUID="4644d857-e13b-456c-ac03-6f26299c1046" TYPE="swap" /dev/mapper/vg00-homelv: UUID="82bd58b2-edab-4b4b-aec4-b79595ecd0e3" TYPE="ext4" /dev/mapper/vg00-varlv: UUID="1b001444-5fdd-41b6-a59a-9712ec6def33" TYPE="ext4" /dev/mapper/vg00-tmplv: UUID="bf7d2459-2b35-4a1c-9b81-d4c4f24a9842" TYPE="ext4" /dev/md125: UUID="b9a1149f-ae11-4fc8-a600-0d77354dc42a" SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3" /dev/sda: TYPE="isw_raid_member" /dev/md125p1: UUID="420adfdd-6c4e-4552-93f0-2608938a4059" TYPE="ext4" [root@localhost ~]# Here is how /etc/mdadm.conf looks like: [root@localhost ~]# cat /etc/mdadm.conf # mdadm.conf written out by anaconda MAILADDR root AUTO +imsm +1.x -all ARRAY /dev/md1 UUID=89f60dee:e46a251f:7475814b:d4cc19a9 ARRAY /dev/md126 UUID=a8775c90:cee66376:5310fc13:63bcba5b ARRAY /dev/md125 UUID=b9a1149f:ae114fc8:a6000d77:354dc42a [root@localhost ~]# here is how /proc/mdstat looks like after I recreate the partition in the array so that it becomes available: [root@localhost ~]# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] md125 : active raid1 sdc[1] sdd[0] 976759808 blocks super external:/md127/0 [2/2] [UU] md127 : inactive sdc[1](S) sdd[0](S) 4514 blocks super external:imsm md126 : active raid1 sda[1] sdb[0] 312566784 blocks super external:/md1/0 [2/2] [UU] md1 : inactive sdb[1](S) sda[0](S) 4514 blocks super external:imsm unused devices: <none> [root@localhost ~]# Detailed output regarding the array in subject: [root@localhost ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md125 /dev/md125: Container : /dev/md127, member 0 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 976759808 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 976759940 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Update Time : Fri Jan 7 00:38:00 2011 State : clean Active Devices : 2 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : 30ebc3c2:b6a64751:4758d05c:fa8ff782 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 1 8 32 0 active sync /dev/sdc 0 8 48 1 active sync /dev/sdd [root@localhost ~]# and /etc/fstab, with /data commented (the filesystem that is on this array): # # /etc/fstab # Created by anaconda on Thu Jan 6 03:32:40 2011 # # Accessible filesystems, by reference, are maintained under '/dev/disk' # See man pages fstab(5), findfs(8), mount(8) and/or blkid(8) for more info # /dev/mapper/vg00-rootlv / ext4 defaults 1 1 UUID=3d1b38a3-b469-4b7c-b016-8abfb26a5d7d /boot ext4 defaults 1 2 #UUID=420adfdd-6c4e-4552-93f0-2608938a4059 /data ext4 defaults 0 1 /dev/mapper/vg00-homelv /home ext4 defaults 1 2 /dev/mapper/vg00-tmplv /tmp ext4 defaults 1 2 /dev/mapper/vg00-varlv /var ext4 defaults 1 2 /dev/mapper/vg00-swaplv swap swap defaults 0 0 tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0 devpts /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0 sysfs /sys sysfs defaults 0 0 proc /proc proc defaults 0 0 [root@localhost ~]# Thanks in advance to everyone that even read this whole issue :-)

  Read the article

• Cannot reactivate RAID-5 volume: The size of the plex member is invalid

  - by Ian Boyd

  We had a 3-drive Windows Server 2008 R2 RAID-5 fail (operating in redundancy mode): WDC 1 TB WDC 1 TB WDC 1 TB We removed the failed hard drive, and put a WDC 1 TB drive (that we had standing by) into the machine. When launched, Disk Manager, asked permission to "initialize" the disk as either: Master Boot Record (MBR) Guid Partition Table (GPT) We initialized the disk as GPT, converted it to dynamic, and tried to use the Repair Volume command - except it was greyed out. (which is a terrifying thing on a failed production server hosting 3 virtual servers) i tried from the diskpart command line tool. First we look for our RAID-5 volume that is in Failed Rd mode: DISKPART> list volume Volume ### Ltr Label Fs Type Size Status Info ---------- --- ----------- ----- ---------- ------- --------- -------- Volume 0 E VMs (Raid5) NTFS RAID-5 1863 GB Failed Rd Volume 1 D DVD-ROM 0 B No Media Volume 2 System Rese NTFS Partition 100 MB Healthy System Volume 3 C NTFS Partition 1862 GB Healthy Boot There, Volume 0. Make that our active context: DISKPART> select volume 0 Volume 0 is the selected volume. Now we need to find the disk we will be repairing the volume with: DISKPART> list disk Disk ### Status Size Free Dyn Gpt -------- ------------- ------- ------- --- --- Disk 0 Online 931 GB 0 B * Disk 1 Online 931 GB 931 GB * Disk 2 Online 1863 GB 0 B Disk 3 Online 931 GB 0 B * Disk M0 Missing 0 B 0 B * The disk with 931 GB free, Disk 1. Now we just need to repair the volume: DISKPART> repair disk=1 Virtual Disk Service error: The size of the plex member is invalid.

  Read the article

• Bad disk performance on HP DL360 with Smarty Array P400i RAID controller

  - by sarge

  I have a HP DL360 server with 4x 146GB SAS disks and a Smart Array P400i RAID controller with 256MB cache. The disks are in RAID 5 (3 disks + 1 hot spare). The server is running VMware ESX 3i. The disk write performance is really bad. Here are some numbers: ns1:~# hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 3364 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1685.69 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 18 MB in 3.79 seconds = 4.75 MB/sec ns1:~# time sh -c "dd if=/dev/zero of=ddfile bs=8k count=125000 && sync" 125000+0 records in 125000+0 records out 1024000000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 282.307 s, 3.6 MB/s real 4m52.003s user 0m2.160s sys 3m10.796s Compared to another server those number are terrible: Dell R200, 2x 500GB SATA disks, PERC raid controller (disks are mirrored). web4:~# hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 6584 MB in 2.00 seconds = 3297.79 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 316 MB in 3.02 seconds = 104.79 MB/sec web4:~# time sh -c "dd if=/dev/zero of=ddfile bs=8k count=125000 && sync" 125000+0 records in 125000+0 records out 1024000000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 35.2919 s, 29.0 MB/s real 0m36.570s user 0m0.476s sys 0m32.298s The server isn't very loaded and the VMware Infrastructure Client performance monitor is showing 550KBps average read and 1208KBps average write for the last 30 minutes (highest write rate: 6.6MBps). This has been a problem from the start. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Disable raid member check upon mount to mount damaged nvidia raid1 member

  - by Halfgaar

  Hi, A friend of mine destroyed his Nvidia RAID1 array somehow and in trying to fix it, he ended up with a non-working array. Because of the RAID metadata, the actual disk data was stored at an offset from the beginning. I was able to identify this offset with dd and a hexeditor and then I used losetup to create a loop device with the proper offset, so that I could mount the partition. It was then that I ran into problems, namely that mount says: "mount: unknown filesystem type 'nvidia_raid_member'". I also had this when trying to mount a Linux MD component the other day, and because I can remember that doing that in the past worked, I surmised that it may be some kind of protection. I therefore booted an old Sysrescue CD and tried it there, which worked (because of the older version of mount/libc/kernel/whatever). I still need to try to get more data, and because I don't want to keep using that SysrecueCD, I'd like to be able to mount the disk on my normal system. So, my question is: can the check for a disk being a raid member be disabled? I guess I could also zero out blocks that look like the raid block, but I'd rather not... I made an image of the disk with par2 data, so it's revertable, but still...

  Read the article

• raid md device is not remove from memory, how to overcome this problem

  - by santhosha

  i create raid 10 , i removed two arrays form md11 one by one , after that i going to editing the contents those are mounted ( it will be not responding stage), after i try for remove arrays those are left it is shows device or resource busy ( is not removed from memory). i try to terminate process this is also not work, i absorve from 4 days resync will be 8.0% it can not modifying. cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] [raid0] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [linear] [raid10] md11 : active raid10 sde1[3] sdj14 286743936 blocks 64K chunks 2 near-copies [4/1] [___U] [1:2:3:0] [=...................] resync = 8.0% (23210368/286743936) finish=289392.6min speed=15K/sec mdadm -D /dev/md11 /dev/md11: Version : 00.90.03 Creation Time : Sun Jan 16 16:20:01 2011 Raid Level : raid10 Array Size : 286743936 (273.46 GiB 293.63 GB) Device Size : 143371968 (136.73 GiB 146.81 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 11 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Sun Jan 16 16:56:07 2011 State : active, degraded, resyncing Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Layout : near=2, far=1 Chunk Size : 64K Rebuild Status : 8% complete UUID : 5e124ea4:79a01181:dc4110d3:a48576ea Events : 0.23 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 0 0 1 removed 4 8 145 2 faulty spare rebuilding /dev/sdj1 3 8 65 3 active sync /dev/sde1 umount /dev/md11 umount: /dev/md11: not mounted mdadm -S /dev/md11 mdadm: fail to stop array /dev/md11: Device or resource busy lsof /dev/md11 COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE NODE NAME mount 2128 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 mount 5018 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 mdadm 27605 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 mount 30562 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 badblocks 30591 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 kill -9 2128 kill -9 5018 kill -9 27605 kill -9 30562 kill -3 30591 mdadm -S /dev/md11 mdadm: fail to stop array /dev/md11: Device or resource busy lsof /dev/md11 COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE NODE NAME mount 2128 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 mount 5018 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 mdadm 27605 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 mount 30562 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 badblocks 30591 root 3r BLK 9,11 4058 /dev/md11 cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] [raid0] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [linear] [raid10] md11 : active raid10 sde1[3] sdj14 286743936 blocks 64K chunks 2 near-copies [4/1] [___U] [1:2:3:0] [=...................] resync = 8.0% (23210368/286743936) finish=289392.6min speed=15K/sec

  Read the article

• RAID 5 Install on Ubuntu Server 12.04 [closed]

  - by tarabyte

  Environment: Ubuntu Server 12.04, installing from bootable flash drive Error: No root file system is defined. Please correct this from the partitioning menu. I'm trying to set up a personal file server with software RAID 5. I just got three hard drives for this, but haven't found any solid documentation. I'm unsure what the basic way to partition my hard drives is. Can someone upload a screenshot of their "partition disks" screen so that I can compare with mine (attached)? Should I set the bootable flag? Do I need a /home partition? A /boot partition? Should I "Use [my partition] as: Ext4 journaling file system"? Or make that field "physical volume for RAID"? I am an engineer, but I have only a cursory knowledge of all-things-linux. If you know of any good learning resources I'd be happy to hear about those too (that way I don't have to blindly follow deprecated tutorials online). well, image would be here but i don't have a high enough reputation yet (please vote up :)) Thank you, References I've looked into: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/SoftwareRAID https://help.ubuntu.com/12.04/serverguide/advanced-installation.html http://forevergeeks.com/setup-ubuntu-server-with-raid-5/

  Read the article

• Degraded RAID-5 array with lvm2 lost superblock and partition table

  - by Fred Phillips

  I have a RAID-5 array of 4x1TB hard disks with one lvm2 partition on Ubuntu Linux 10.04 LTS. One of the disks has failed. I have re-assembled the array without this failed disk but now mdadm --examine claims the array has no superblock and fdisk says it has no partition table. What can I do to recover the data? # mdadm -D /dev/md0 /dev/md0: Version : 1.2 Creation Time : Sat Mar 5 14:43:49 2011 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 2930276352 (2794.53 GiB 3000.60 GB) Used Dev Size : 976758784 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Sat Mar 5 15:06:49 2011 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 3 Working Devices : 3 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 512K Name : boba:1 (local to host boba) UUID : 52eb4bc9:c3d8aab5:e0699505:e0e1aa05 Events : 18 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 1 0 active sync /dev/sda1 1 8 65 1 active sync /dev/sde1 2 8 49 2 active sync /dev/sdd1 3 0 0 3 removed 4 8 17 - faulty spare /dev/sdb1 # mdadm --examine /dev/md0 mdadm: No md superblock detected on /dev/md0. # fdisk -l /dev/md0 Disk /dev/md0: 3000.6 GB, 3000602984448 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 732569088 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 524288 bytes / 1572864 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] md0 : active raid5 sdb1[4](F) sda1[0] sdd1[2] sde1[1] 2930276352 blocks super 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_] unused devices: <none>

  Read the article

• Move OS from RAID5 array to RAID 1 arrays

  - by Antoine

  I want to give a last boost to my old ProLiant ML350 G5 server which just needs to be reliable for a few more year only ! With a defined budget of about 1500$ (I do not have more), i plan to replace the CPU (+ adding a second one), the battery cache of my raid controller (E200i), double the RAM, and change all hard drives. I have 7 HDD (SAS 10krpm, 72Gb) + 1 spare in RAID5, and my system is all FULL (no empty tray, full disks). in my current RAID5 array, I have 2 partitions: - 1 OS partition, 20Gb - 1 data partition, 350 Gb I plan to replace these 8 disks with : - 2 x 300Gb SAS 15krpm in RAID 1 (= 1 partition for OS) - 2 x 2Tb SATA 7.2krpm in RAID 1 (= 1 partition for DATA) My biggest constraint is that I have only 01 day to upgrade my server. Therefore, I'm looking for cloning all my files (OS + data partition) to my new arrays, i.e : - the OS partition shall be cloned to the RAID1 "2x300Gb array" - the data partition shall be cloned to the RAID1 "2x2Tb array" My second problem is that I need to physically remove all the old hard drives before inserting the new ones. I'm running Windows Server 2003 R2, and even if MS support will expire soon, I cannot buy a new licence and spent time in configuration. Obviously, with 1500$, I cannot also buy a new server that I could start configuring from now ! Thought about ASR (NTBackup), but I have no floppy drive (and do not really want to invest in one !) Thought about a clonezilla clone, and read this interesting link : Windows Server 2003 - move C: partition to a new SAS disk , but i'm not so confident in using Clonezilla with RAID5. What should be the best option to quickly and easily (if possible!) "copy/paste" my OS (so no need to reinstall and reconfigure all) and DATA / programs / services, etc... ? Thanks for your comments

  Read the article

• VMWare ESXi 5 - Expanded RAID 5 array - cannot access datastore

  - by Dayton Brown

  I'm using VMWare ESXi 5 and had a 2 TB RAID 5 setup on an HP DL360 with a P400i RAID card. I added two more 1 TB drives and using the SmartStart ACU, added the drives and expanded the logical disk. Now after booting back to ESXi, the server boots, but lists no available persistent storage. I've rescanned multiple times to no avail: the Datastore doesn't show up. I booted to GParted and the 1.8TB partition shows up, but it shows as unknown. Anyone have any good ideas? EDIT: Final Solution So after much gnashing of teeth, it was fairly simple to solve. I purchased an eSata 2 TB external drive and a PCI eSata card for my server. I then used Clonezilla to image the current partitions to my new external drive. You have to check "don't check drive sizes" in advanced mode, otherwise it will yell at you for have a smaller drive. For some reason my PCI card wouldn't boot on my HP server, so I hooked the drive up to another desktop I had, booted to VMWare, and copied the vmdk's to another drive. I'm going to blow out the RAID config and then create 1.5TB logical drives.

  Read the article

• Reusing slot numbers in Linux software RAID arrays

  - by thkala

  When a hard disk drive in one of my Linux machines failed, I took the opportunity to migrate from RAID5 to a 6-disk software RAID6 array. At the time of the migration I did not have all 6 drives - more specifically the fourth and fifth (slots 3 and 4) drives were already in use in the originating array, so I created the RAID6 array with a couple of missing devices. I now need to add those drives in those empty slots. Using mdadm --add does result in a proper RAID6 configuration, with one glitch - the new drives are placed in new slots, which results in this /proc/mdstat snippet: ... md0 : active raid6 sde1[7] sdd1[6] sda1[0] sdf1[5] sdc1[2] sdb1[1] 25185536 blocks super 1.0 level 6, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [6/6] [UUUUUU] ... mdadm -E verifies that the actual slot numbers in the device superblocks are correct, yet the numbers shown in /proc/mdstat are still weird. I would like to fix this glitch, both to satisfy my inner perfectionist and to avoid any potential sources of future confusion in a crisis. Is there a way to specify which slot a new device should occupy in a RAID array? UPDATE: I have verified that the slot number persists in the component device superblock. For the version 1.0 superblocks that I am using that would be the dev_number field as defined in include/linux/raid/md_p.h of the Linux kernel source. I am now considering direct modification of said field to change the slot number - I don't suppose there is some standard way to manipulate the RAID superblock?

  Read the article

• After RAID failure SBS 2008 issues logging in and Exchange store does not mount

  - by Josh R

  today has been one of those days. Yesterday a hard drive in our Dell Poweredge 2900 server failed and the RAID array didn't degrade gracefully, so I called Dell (Server still under warranty) and got an engineer to work though the RAID issues with me. He was a nice guy but didn't do too much. We tried to put the RAID in a state where it was bootable and even though we only lost one disk there are still issues with the server. Once we got the server to boot there was an error message saying that the logonui.exe was corrupted and we needed to run chkdsk. I clicked through the error messages and the login screen never came up. So I power cycled the server and it chkdsk automatically but the login screen didn't appear. I tried safe mode, no difference there either. So the issues I am currently having are: 1) The server boots up, the loading windows screen comes up then it dumps me into a black screen where I can only see my mouse cursor. Ctrl+Esc doesn't work Ctrl+Alt+Del doesn't work 2) Some of the services come up: DHCP, DNS, DFS, and Print come up 3) The exchange information store and transport service don't start - I tried using mmc to connect to services.msc on the computer and start them but they throw an error message of "Can't start because group or dependency failed" Has anyone had a problem like this? Can anyone offer some guidance? Thanks a bunch!

  Read the article

• Reusing Raid 5 Drive?

  - by User125

  We have two servers (ML530 G2 and DL380G2) w/ identical HP 10K RPM SCSI drives w/ a raid 5. One is decommissioned and the other will be decommissioned shortly. However, one of the drives on the production server had a drive failure. My hope was to take one of the drives from the decommissioned server and pop it into the production server. Both are running RAID 5. I broke the array on the decomm. server. To my knowledge, that should have wiped out all the volume and partition information. However, I do not know if it is safe to then take a drive from the decomm'ed server and replace the failed drive. Will the existing array see it as a replacement drive, wipe it and rebuild? Or will it fail because it was used in an array before. Are there any remnant data that resides on the drives after deleting a raid 5 array? These servers are 10-15 years old, so we're just trying to keep them alive until we decommission it. I'm not looking to pay a premium to find a vendor that still sells replacement drives for this system.

  Read the article

• Raid1 with active and spare partition

  - by Daniel Baron

  I am having the following problem with a RAID1 software raid partition on my Ubuntu system (10.04 LTS, 2.6.32-24-server in case it matters). One of my disks (sdb5) reported I/O errors and was therefore marked faulty in the array. The array was then degraded with one active device. Hence, I replaced the harddisk, cloned the partition table and added all new partitions to my raid arrays. After syncing all partitions ended up fine, having 2 active devices - except one of them. The partition which reported the faulty disk before, however, did not include the new partition as an active device but as a spare disk: md3 : active raid1 sdb5[2] sda5[1] 4881344 blocks [2/1] [_U] A detailed look reveals: root@server:~# mdadm --detail /dev/md3 [...] Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 2 8 21 0 spare rebuilding /dev/sdb5 1 8 5 1 active sync /dev/sda5 So here is the question: How do I tell my raid to turn the spare disk into an active one? And why has it been added as a spare device? Recreating or reassembling the array is not an option, because it is my root partition. And I can not find any hints to that subject in the Software Raid HOWTO. Any help would be appreciated. Current Solution I found a solution to my problem, but I am not sure that this is the actual way to do it. Having a closer look at my raid I found that sdb5 was always listed as a spare device: mdadm --examine /dev/sdb5 [...] Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 2 8 21 2 spare /dev/sdb5 0 0 0 0 0 removed 1 1 8 5 1 active sync /dev/sda5 2 2 8 21 2 spare /dev/sdb5 so readding the device sdb5 to the array md3 always ended up in adding the device as a spare. Finally I just recreated the array mdadm --create /dev/md3 --level=1 -n2 -x0 /dev/sda5 /dev/sdb5 which worked. But the question remains open for me: Is there a better way to manipulate the summaries in the superblock and to tell the array to turn sdb5 from a spare disk to an active disk? I am still curious for an answer.

  Read the article

• How do I configure my 2 RAID drives so I can use it as /home?

  - by Kenn

  I've installed Ubuntu 11 64-bit to a 2 TB drive. it is on /dev/sda - port 1 of SATA Host Adaptor. This contains /dev/sda1 (1 MB boot), /dev/sda2 (2TB EXT4), /dev/sda3 8.6GB SWAP. I also have: /dev/sdb 2TB RAID COMPONENT /dev/sdc 2TB RAID COMPONENT which also show as /dev/dm-0 not partitioned /dev/dm-2 not partitioned which is mounted as /media/RAID_HOME I'm completely stumped as to how to use this version of Ubuntu to make these drives seem as just one raid mirrored drive and then how to transfer /home onto it.

  Read the article

• 12.04 Software "RAID 0" on desktop replacement, 2 HDD?

  - by gregzeng

  Hardware: HP Pavilion DV7 notebook: 8GB DDR3, 2x 750GB SATA2 HDD, I7 c+ Radeon GPU, eSATA, Bluray, etc. Currently multiboot with Win7-64 + choice of 5 'buntu-64. Prefer Xubuntu-64-alternate, but not able to install software RAID-0 at the last active partition on both HDDs. Tried many types: real boot partition, etc. All my Linux op sys boot successfully from the extended partitions on both drives, but without RAID of any kind. Theory - yes. But has anyone really succeeded with 12.04 software RAID-0?

  Read the article

• Can I have a single solid state drive and a RAID array on the same machine?

  - by jaminto

  Hi- To summarize, i'm looking to use a single solid state drive as my primary drive, and two conventional sata drives in a RAID 1 configuration for data. I am trying to install 64-bit Windows 7 onto this configuration. Is this possible? Here are the details: I built a desktop that has been running 64-bit Vista on two 500Gb in a RAID 1 array for a few years. I just purchased an Intel X25-M 80Gb Sata Solid-State Drive, and was planning on using this a my primary drive, and keeping the RAID 1 array as my data drive. I added the SSD drive and in the RAID setup, configured it as a RAID 0 array of only one disk. Then, I tried to do a clean install of windows 7 64-bit, but got stuck in the "Missing driver for CD/DVD drive" black hole of selecting driver files and Windows telling me that i don't have the appropriate driver for my hardware. The missing hardware is NOT a CD/DVD drive, since i'm installing off of my only CD/DVD drive. Plus at one point i was able to point it at a driver for my raid controller, and then my hard drives magically showed up as browsable sources for finding drivers for some other unnamed device that setup couldn't recognize. After a few hours of trying drivers (this was a very slow process) i decided to reboot and look at the BIOS settings. I'm using an ASUS M2A-VM motherboard which has an ATI SB600 RAID controller on board. I switched the "On board SATA Type" setting from "SATA" to "AHCI" thinking that since AHCI is an Intel thing, this would help. Unfortunately, this abandoned my RAID configuration, and my previously mirrored drives are showing up as separate drives when i boot into my current windows installation. Am i trying to do the impossible here? Should i just buy a separate SATA/RAID PCI card and plug the SSD into that? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• LSI MegaRAID LINUX got Optimal after degradation but strange POST message

  - by kesrut

  Linux server box with LSI MegaRAID controller got degraded. But after some time RAID status changed to Optimal. Adapter 0 -- Virtual Drive Information: Virtual Drive: 0 (Target Id: 0) Name : RAID Level : Primary-1, Secondary-0, RAID Level Qualifier-0 Size : 2.727 TB Mirror Data : 2.727 TB State : Optimal Strip Size : 256 KB Number Of Drives per span:2 Span Depth : 3 Default Cache Policy: WriteBack, ReadAdaptive, Cached, No Write Cache if Bad BBU Current Cache Policy: WriteThrough, ReadAdaptive, Cached, No Write Cache if Bad BBU Default Access Policy: Read/Write Current Access Policy: Read/Write Disk Cache Policy : Disk's Default Encryption Type : None Is VD Cached: No But now I'm getting RAID BIOS POST message: Your battery is either charging, bad or missing, and you have VDs configured for write-back mode. Because the battery is not currently usable, these VDs willl actually run in write-through mode until the battery is fully charged or replaced if it is bad or missing. (Image: http://cl.ly/image/1h1O093b1i2d) So may it be battery issue caused problem ? I get information about battery: BatteryType: iBBU Voltage: 4001 mV Current: 0 mA Temperature: 22 C Battery State : Operational BBU Firmware Status: Charging Status : None Voltage : OK Temperature : OK Learn Cycle Requested : No Learn Cycle Active : No Learn Cycle Status : OK Learn Cycle Timeout : No I2c Errors Detected : No Battery Pack Missing : No Battery Replacement required : No Remaining Capacity Low : No Periodic Learn Required : No Transparent Learn : No No space to cache offload : No Pack is about to fail & should be replaced : No Cache Offload premium feature required : No Module microcode update required : No Where can be problem ? I'm disabled alarms, but get them if enabled. But don't know how find root of problem.

  Read the article

• How do I configure a new (non-OS) raid device under Windows 7?

  - by GregH

  I recently installed 3 new 1TB drives in my Windows 7 (64 bit) system. These are in addition to the 10k rpm disk that I already have running the Windows 7 OS. My intent is to create a RAID 5 volume with the 3 disks. I don't seem to have a problem configuring the bios and creating the resulting 1.9 TB RAID volume. I run in to the problem when I try booting in to Windows. I get a quick flash of a blue screen and then am prompted by windows to do a repair. It tries to repair and then reboots. This sequence lasts indefinitely. If I re-configure the bios back to non-RAID (ACHI) then windows boots fine. The strange thing is that the 1.9 TB volume I configured through the bios actually shows up in windows! Strange since the motherboard is not set up with RAID. I assume that I somehow have to install the RAID drivers from the mobo manufacturer. How do I do this? Is the reason I'm getting the blue screen a result of not having the RAID drivers installed? It's strange because I can find plenty of documentation on how to set up RAID and do a fresh install Windows on to the RAID device, but nothing on how to set up a RAID device on an already running system. Advice is appreciated.

  Read the article

• Raid1 with active and spare partition

  - by Daniel Baron

  I am having the following problem with a RAID1 software raid partition on my Ubuntu system (10.04 LTS, 2.6.32-24-server in case it matters). One of my disks (sdb5) reported I/O errors and was therefore marked faulty in the array. The array was then degraded with one active device. Hence, I replaced the harddisk, cloned the partition table and added all new partitions to my raid arrays. After syncing all partitions ended up fine, having 2 active devices - except one of them. The partition which reported the faulty disk before, however, did not include the new partition as an active device but as a spare disk: md3 : active raid1 sdb5[2] sda5[1] 4881344 blocks [2/1] [_U] A detailed look reveals: root@server:~# mdadm --detail /dev/md3 [...] Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 2 8 21 0 spare rebuilding /dev/sdb5 1 8 5 1 active sync /dev/sda5 So here is the question: How do I tell my raid to turn the spare disk into an active one? And why has it been added as a spare device? Recreating or reassembling the array is not an option, because it is my root partition. And I can not find any hints to that subject in the Software Raid HOWTO. Any help would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Bad performance with Linux software RAID5 and LUKS encryption

  - by Philipp Wendler

  I have set up a Linux software RAID5 on three hard drives and want to encrypt it with cryptsetup/LUKS. My tests showed that the encryption leads to a massive performance decrease that I cannot explain. The RAID5 is able to write 187 MB/s [1] without encryption. With encryption on top of it, write speed is down to about 40 MB/s. The RAID has a chunk size of 512K and a write intent bitmap. I used -c aes-xts-plain -s 512 --align-payload=2048 as the parameters for cryptsetup luksFormat, so the payload should be aligned to 2048 blocks of 512 bytes (i.e., 1MB). cryptsetup luksDump shows a payload offset of 4096. So I think the alignment is correct and fits to the RAID chunk size. The CPU is not the bottleneck, as it has hardware support for AES (aesni_intel). If I write on another drive (an SSD with LVM) that is also encrypted, I do have a write speed of 150 MB/s. top shows that the CPU usage is indeed very low, only the RAID5 xor takes 14%. I also tried putting a filesystem (ext4) directly on the unencrypted RAID so see if the layering is problem. The filesystem decreases the performance a little bit as expected, but by far not that much (write speed varying, but 100 MB/s). Summary: Disks + RAID5: good Disks + RAID5 + ext4: good Disks + RAID5 + encryption: bad SSD + encryption + LVM + ext4: good The read performance is not affected by the encryption, it is 207 MB/s without and 205 MB/s with encryption (also showing that CPU power is not the problem). What can I do to improve the write performance of the encrypted RAID? [1] All speed measurements were done with several runs of dd if=/dev/zero of=DEV bs=100M count=100 (i.e., writing 10G in blocks of 100M). Edit: If this helps: I'm using Ubuntu 11.04 64bit with Linux 2.6.38. Edit2: The performance stays approximately the same if I pass a block size of 4KB, 1MB or 10MB to dd.

  Read the article

• Can I have a single solid state drive and a RAID array on the same machine? [closed]

  - by jaminto

  Hi- To summarize, i'm looking to use a single solid state drive as my primary drive, and two conventional sata drives in a RAID 1 configuration for data. I am trying to install 64-bit Windows 7 onto this configuration. Is this possible? Here are the details: I built a desktop that has been running 64-bit Vista on two 500Gb in a RAID 1 array for a few years. I just purchased an Intel X25-M 80Gb Sata Solid-State Drive, and was planning on using this a my primary drive, and keeping the RAID 1 array as my data drive. I added the SSD drive and in the RAID setup, configured it as a RAID 0 array of only one disk. Then, I tried to do a clean install of windows 7 64-bit, but got stuck in the "Missing driver for CD/DVD drive" black hole of selecting driver files and Windows telling me that i don't have the appropriate driver for my hardware. The missing hardware is NOT a CD/DVD drive, since i'm installing off of my only CD/DVD drive. Plus at one point i was able to point it at a driver for my raid controller, and then my hard drives magically showed up as browsable sources for finding drivers for some other unnamed device that setup couldn't recognize. After a few hours of trying drivers (this was a very slow process) i decided to reboot and look at the BIOS settings. I'm using an ASUS M2A-VM motherboard which has an ATI SB600 RAID controller on board. I switched the "On board SATA Type" setting from "SATA" to "AHCI" thinking that since AHCI is an Intel thing, this would help. Unfortunately, this abandoned my RAID configuration, and my previously mirrored drives are showing up as separate drives when i boot into my current windows installation. Am i trying to do the impossible here? Should i just buy a separate SATA/RAID PCI card and plug the SSD into that? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• How to fix missing RAID1 drive

  - by Sodved

  I had to do some fiddling about with my cables inside thebox and now I am getting a "Critical Error" about the RAID disks during startup. I have a gigabyte GA-MA770T-UD3 motherboard. Aparently the RAID controller is an AMD SB710 chip. I'm pretty sure I know what happenned. The first time I rebooted I had forgotten the power cable on one of the disks in the RAID1 (mirror) and let it boot up. So I shut down and put the power back in. So now when it boots up I go into the RAID admin interface (between the BIOS screen and the OS loading): it shows the RAID1 as in error the logical device has one disk and says the other is disconnected or missing the other physical disk shows up as a single disk If I boot to the OS (Windows 7 32 bit) the data all seems to be there. If I go into computer management it says my partition is on a disk and working OK. But the other disk is offline because: "The disk is offline because it has a signature collision with another disk that is online" So I am guessing because I STUPIDLY booted up with only one of the disks powered on, the other disk fell out of synch with the mirror and so now cannot rejoin the mirror. How do I fix this? I want to get the RAID1 mirror working again. There does not appear to be any "Repair" option in the basic RAID admin tool which I get into during startup before the OS boots. I have not made any explicit changes to the online one (but I guess the OS has probably written some admin data).

  Read the article

• Remote RAID Control ESXi Dell PowerEdge 2950 OpenManage

  - by yoyomommy

  I was wondering how one can add a drive into an existing RAID array while ESXi is still running. I have read that you are able to use Dell OpenManage to do this. I have installed OMSA 7.0 on the VMWare ESXi host (5.0 and fully updated) and I've installed OpenManage Essentials on a Windows Server 2008 R2 guest. The issue that I'm having is that OpenManage is unable to see my RAID controller. I have seen videos and photos as parts of guides on how to do this online, so I would assume that the functionality exists and I just have it set up wrong.

  Read the article

• Grub install fails while installing Ubuntu on RAID

  - by Warren Pena

  I'm trying to install Ubuntu 9.10 using the alternate install CD, but I keep getting stuck. I get through the first few steps of the install process easily enough (telling it what partition to install to, what user ID and password to create, time zone, etc.), but then it suddenly pops up a menu asking me what the next step in the install process is. It has "Install the GRUB boot loader on a hard disk" selected by default. When I select it, it goes to another screen with a progress bar and a label "Installing the 'grub2' package." The progress bar gets to 16%, and then I get returned to the same menu. No matter how many times I try to install grub, the exact same thing happens. I'm trying to install Ubuntu on a two disk RAID-1 array. This is the RAID card I'm using: http://www.siig.com/ViewProduct.aspx?pn=SC-SAER12-S2. Any ideas what may be causing this to happen and how I can fix it? Thanks!

  Read the article

• software RAID array not starting in initramfs on Debian

  - by Jasper

  One of my Debian servers (kernel 2.6.30-AMD64) refuses to start the software RAID array that houses the root partition in initramfs. It dumps me with a busybox console. When I follow the necessary steps to continue booting it works fine (start the array with mdadm -A and then have LVM scan the volumes with pvscan and then vgchange -ay). I've tried starting with boot options rootdelay=10 to no avail. Also I've updated the initramfs and unpacked it to inspect whether it really tries to assemble the raid array (it does). Output before dumping to console : mount: mounting none on /dev failed: No such device W: devtmpfs not available, falling back to tpmfs for /dev and then some lvm messages saying it can't find the volumes holding the root partitions. Does anybody have a clue how I could fix this?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >