Search Results

Search found 2226 results on 90 pages for 'promise raid'.

Page 16/90 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

• Benefits of a RAID BBU in addition to a double UPS + PS system

  - by Wikser

  Today I roughly measured the benefits of enabling write-back on the RAID controller on a server at work. It got no RAID battery-backup-unit (BBU) so the write-cache is currently disabled. As the server is not used to capacity (by far), the results in most test were spectacular, e.g.: Database CRUD: before 35s, after 4s Saving a 1MB Excel file: before: 20s (!), after: 0.5s Of course having a BBU is always recommended, but what are the main benefits of installing a BBU to a system, which got redundant power supplies and is attached to UPSs? Does this depend on the type of the system (database, file, terminal)? What is a realistic fail scenario which could be prevented by a BBU? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• HighPoint RAID Controller can't see drives

  - by Satellite

  I've just built a system with a HighPoint 2720 RAID controller. Everything appears to be OK, except that the controller doesn't see any of my drives - the RAID BIOS displays "ERROR. No Suitable disks". I have tried a WD SATA, Seagate SATA, and OCZ Vertex 3 SATA. I am using MiniSAS to 4x SATA breakout cables. How do I get this working? I've tried to sign up for HighPoint support, but their support site doesn't appear to be functioning correctly.

  Read the article

• Raid1+0: create stripe over two /dev/mdx on partition or not?

  - by Chris

  Given that I haven't found a way to define how a Raid10 is created with mdadm, i went the Raid1+0 solution. How to display/define Mirror/Stripping pairs with mdadm mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdf1 mdadm --create /dev/md1 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdg1 /dev/sdh1 mdadm --create /dev/md10 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/md0 /dev/md1 My question is about the stripe. For the mirror I create a primary partition over the full HD and set partition type to FD. So, should I do the same for the Stripe? Create partition on /dev/md0 and /dev/md1 (primary over full 'HDD', set partition type correctly) and then do the stripe on the partition? Is there a correct way here or are there any advantages/disadvantages to a solution? Thank you

  Read the article

• Most efficient RAID configuration with 6 disks?

  - by Bob King

  I have a hand-me-down server that I'm setting up at home and it's got 6 72Gb hard disks (as well as 2 18Gb drives that I'm using for the OS). What is the best way to configure those 6 drives? Should I RAID 5 or 6, or go with something simpler, like mirroring? I'm planning to use it to hold a source control repository, and possibly data for a development SQL server. The machine has a hardware raid controller. It is an old IBM server.

  Read the article

• RAID 1 in ubuntu 12.04

  - by Bavly Hanna

  Right now I have a small file server to which I have loaded ubuntu 12.04 desktop on a small 160gb harddrive. This harddrive is the primary drive from which the OS boots. I want to move all my data to my file server so it can be shared on the network (contain in 2x2TB harddrives in my desktop. The 2TB drivers are in raid 1 (hardware). I simply want to move them to the file server and set it up so that they are in software raid 1. If at all possible I'd like to be able to do this without losing any info on the drives. I've searched around and the guides i find describe raiding drives for boot driver, but these wouldn't be boot drives just regular storage drives. If someone could tell me how to perform this or point me in the right direction it would be much appreciated.

  Read the article

• Replacing a non-failing drive in a RAID-0 array [migrated]

  - by TallFurryMan

  I have a Windows 7 machine booting on a RAID-0 pair of 500GB disks, controlled by an ICH9R. One of those is indicating an end-To-end SMART failure. I added a spare disk as a temporary workaround, before receiving another to replace the failing one (prices are awful these days). The RAID-0 rebuilt on the spare and dropped the failing one from the array, as expected. Now that I received the new drive, what are my options to reintegrate it in the array? My first thought was to simply clone the temporary disk to the new one while the array is offline, but shouldn't there be a way to force a second rebuild, just as if the temporary drive had a warning, and drop that temporary from the array?

  Read the article

• linux raid 1: right after replacing and syncing one drive, the other disk fails - understanding what is going on with mdstat/mdadm

  - by devicerandom

  We have an old RAID 1 Linux server (Ubuntu Lucid 10.04), with four partitions. A few days ago /dev/sdb failed, and today we noticed /dev/sda had pre-failure ominous SMART signs (~4000 reallocated sector count). We replaced /dev/sdb this morning and rebuilt the RAID on the new drive, following this guide: http://www.howtoforge.com/replacing_hard_disks_in_a_raid1_array Everything went smooth until the very end. When it looked like it was finishing to synchronize the last partition, the other old one failed. At this point I am very unsure of the state of the system. Everything seems working and the files seem to be all accessible, just as if it synchronized everything, but I'm new to RAID and I'm worried about what is going on. The /proc/mdstat output is: Personalities : [raid1] [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md3 : active raid1 sdb4[2](S) sda4[0] 478713792 blocks [2/1] [U_] md2 : active raid1 sdb3[1] sda3[2](F) 244140992 blocks [2/1] [_U] md1 : active raid1 sdb2[1] sda2[2](F) 244140992 blocks [2/1] [_U] md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[2](F) 9764800 blocks [2/1] [_U] unused devices: <none> The order of [_U] vs [U_]. Why aren't they consistent along all the array? Is the first U /dev/sda or /dev/sdb? (I tried looking on the web for this trivial information but I found no explicit indication) If I read correctly for md0, [_U] should be /dev/sda1 (down) and /dev/sdb1 (up). But if /dev/sda has failed, how can it be the opposite for md3 ? I understand /dev/sdb4 is now spare because probably it failed to synchronize it 100%, but why does it show /dev/sda4 as up? Shouldn't it be [__]? Or [_U] anyway? The /dev/sda drive now cannot even be accessed by SMART anymore apparently, so I wouldn't expect it to be up. What is wrong with my interpretation of the output? I attach also the outputs of mdadm --detail for the four partitions: /dev/md0: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:07 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 9764800 (9.31 GiB 10.00 GB) Used Dev Size : 9764800 (9.31 GiB 10.00 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:27:33 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : a3b4dbbd:859bf7f2:bde36644:fcef85e2 Events : 0.7704 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 8 17 1 active sync /dev/sdb1 2 8 1 - faulty spare /dev/sda1 /dev/md1: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:15 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Used Dev Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 1 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:39:06 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : 8bcd5765:90dc93d5:cc70849c:224ced45 Events : 0.1508280 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2 2 8 2 - faulty spare /dev/sda2 /dev/md2: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:19 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Used Dev Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 2 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:46:44 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : 2885668b:881cafed:b8275ae8:16bc7171 Events : 0.2289636 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 8 3 - faulty spare /dev/sda3 /dev/md3: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:22 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 478713792 (456.54 GiB 490.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 478713792 (456.54 GiB 490.20 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 3 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:19:20 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 4 0 active sync /dev/sda4 1 0 0 1 removed 2 8 20 - spare /dev/sdb4 The active sync on /dev/sda4 baffles me. I am worried because if tomorrow morning I have to replace /dev/sda, I want to be sure what should I sync with what and what is going on. I am also quite baffled by the fact /dev/sda decided to fail exactly when the raid finished resyncing. I'd like to understand what is really happening. Thanks a lot for your patience and help. Massimo

  Read the article

• IBM Denies Breaking Its Open-Source Promise

  <b>eWeek:</b> "The open-source software community is up in arms over claims that IBM has broken a promise by asserting its patents against an open-source project. IBM denies that it has done so."

  Read the article

• SATA drive problems with two SIL RAID cards

  - by Jon Topper

  I've just put a second SiI 3114 SATARaid card in my home server so that I could add another pair of SATA drives and increase my storage space. Annoyingly, it doesn't seem to work: [ 32.816030] ata5: lost interrupt (Status 0x0) [ 32.816072] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [ 32.816091] ata5.00: cmd c8/00:08:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/e0 tag 0 dma 4096 in [ 32.816094] res 40/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [ 32.816101] ata5.00: status: { DRDY } [ 32.816117] ata5: hard resetting link [ 33.136082] ata5: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 0) [ 36.060940] irq 18: nobody cared (try booting with the "irqpoll" option) [ 36.060949] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31-20-generic #58-Ubuntu [ 36.060954] Call Trace: [ 36.060977] [] ? printk+0x18/0x1c [ 36.060997] [] __report_bad_irq+0x27/0x90 [ 36.061005] [] note_interrupt+0x150/0x190 [ 36.061011] [] handle_fasteoi_irq+0xac/0xd0 [ 36.061023] [] handle_irq+0x18/0x30 [ 36.061029] [] do_IRQ+0x47/0xc0 [ 36.061042] [] ? irq_exit+0x50/0x70 [ 36.061058] [] ? smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x57/0x90 [ 36.061065] [] common_interrupt+0x30/0x40 [ 36.061075] [] ? native_safe_halt+0x5/0x10 [ 36.061082] [] default_idle+0x46/0xd0 [ 36.061088] [] cpu_idle+0x8c/0xd0 [ 36.061103] [] rest_init+0x55/0x60 [ 36.061111] [] start_kernel+0x2e6/0x2ec [ 36.061117] [] ? unknown_bootoption+0x0/0x19e [ 36.061133] [] i386_start_kernel+0x7c/0x83 [ 36.061137] handlers: [ 36.061139] [] (sil_interrupt+0x0/0xb0) [ 36.061151] Disabling IRQ #18 [ 38.136014] ata5: hard resetting link [ 38.456022] ata5: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 0) [ 43.456013] ata5: hard resetting link [ 43.776022] ata5: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 0) [ 43.776035] ata5.00: disabled [ 43.776055] ata5.00: device reported invalid CHS sector 0 [ 43.776074] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE [ 43.776082] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] Sense Key : Aborted Command [current] [descriptor] [ 43.776092] Descriptor sense data with sense descriptors (in hex): [ 43.776097] 72 0b 00 00 00 00 00 0c 00 0a 80 00 00 00 00 00 [ 43.776112] 00 00 00 00 [ 43.776118] sd 4:0:0:0: [sde] Add. Sense: No additional sense information [ 43.776127] end_request: I/O error, dev sde, sector 0 [ 43.776136] Buffer I/O error on device sde, logical block 0 [ 43.776170] ata5: EH complete [ 43.776187] ata5.00: detaching (SCSI 4:0:0:0) root@core:~# cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 0: 47 IO-APIC-edge timer 1: 8 IO-APIC-edge i8042 6: 3 IO-APIC-edge floppy 7: 0 IO-APIC-edge parport0 8: 0 IO-APIC-edge rtc0 9: 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi acpi 14: 53069 IO-APIC-edge pata_sis 15: 53004 IO-APIC-edge pata_sis 17: 112265 IO-APIC-fasteoi sata_sil 18: 200002 IO-APIC-fasteoi sata_sil, SiS SI7012 19: 111140 IO-APIC-fasteoi eth0 20: 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi ohci_hcd:usb2 21: 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi ohci_hcd:usb3 23: 0 IO-APIC-fasteoi ehci_hcd:usb1 NMI: 0 Non-maskable interrupts LOC: 6650492 Local timer interrupts SPU: 0 Spurious interrupts CNT: 0 Performance counter interrupts PND: 0 Performance pending work RES: 0 Rescheduling interrupts CAL: 0 Function call interrupts TLB: 0 TLB shootdowns TRM: 0 Thermal event interrupts THR: 0 Threshold APIC interrupts MCE: 0 Machine check exceptions MCP: 160 Machine check polls ERR: 0 MIS: 0 root@core:~# lspci | grep Raid 00:09.0 RAID bus controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 3114 [SATALink/SATARaid] Serial ATA Controller (rev 02) 00:0a.0 RAID bus controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 3114 [SATALink/SATARaid] Serial ATA Controller (rev 02) root@core:~# lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 9.10 Release: 9.10 Codename: karmic root@core:~# uname -a Linux core.topper.me.uk 2.6.31-20-generic #58-Ubuntu SMP Fri Mar 12 05:23:09 UTC 2010 i686 GNU/Linux I've tried a combination of different kernel options (irqpoll, noapic, noacpi, pci=noapic) all to no avail. Does anyone have any bright ideas about how I can go about making this work? Swapping PCI cards around isn't an option as there are only two slots in this motherboard (an ASRock K7S41GX). The BIOS doesn't look to have too much in the way of configuration options regarding IRQ usage. Plan B is to ditch this server completely and buy a new QNAP for these drives to go in, but I was hoping to avoid doing this right now.

  Read the article

• explain md's raid10,f2

  - by xenoterracide

  I know how most of the various RAID's work. But I stumbled on the recommended raid10,f2 mode while researching linux software raid. I don't really understand how it works on 2 or 3 disks. could someone explain it to me? or point me to a really good article that explains it?

  Read the article

• Areca 1280ml RAID6 volume set failed

  - by Richard

  Today we hit some kind of worst case scenario and are open to any kind of good ideas. Here is our problem: We are using several dedicated storage servers to host our virtual machines. Before I continue, here are the specs: Dedicated Server Machine Areca 1280ml RAID controller, Firmware 1.49 12x Samsung 1TB HDDs We configured one RAID6-set with 10 discs that contains one logical volume. We have two hot spares in the system. Today one HDD failed. This happens from time to time, so we replaced it. Upon rebuilding a second disc failed. Normally this is no fun. We stopped heavy IO-operations to ensure a stable RAID rebuild. Sadly the hot-spare disc failed while rebuilding and the whole thing stopped. Now we have the following situation: The controller says that the raid set is rebuilding The controller says that the volume failed It is a RAID 6 system and two discs failed, so the data has to be intact, but we cannot bring the volume online again to access the data. While searching we found the following leads. I don't know whether they are good or bad: Mirroring all the discs to a second set of drives. So we would have the possibility to try different things without loosing more than we already have. Trying to rebuild the array in R-Studio. But we have no real experience with the software. Pulling all drives, rebooting the system, changing into the areca controller bios, reinserting the HDDs one-by-one. Some people are saying that the brought the system online by this. Some are saying that the effect is zero. Some say, that they blew the whole thing. Using undocumented areca commands like "rescue" or "LeVel2ReScUe". Contacting a computer forensics service. But whoa... primary estimates by phone exceeded 20.000€. That's why we would kindly ask for help. Maybe we are missing the obvious? And yes of course, we have backups. But some systems lost one week of data, thats why we'd like to get the system up and running again. Any help, suggestions and questions are more than welcome.

  Read the article

• Does chunk size affect the read performance of a Linux md software RAID1 array?

  - by OldWolf

  This came up in relation to this question on determining chunk size of an existing RAID array. The general consensus seems to be that chunk size does not apply to RAID1 as it is not striped. On the other hand, the Linux RAID Wiki claims that it will have an affect on read performance. However, I cannot find any benchmarks testing/proving that. Can anyone point to conclusive documentation that it either does or does not affect read performance?

  Read the article

• Adaptec 6405 RAID controller turned on red LED

  - by nn4l

  I have a server with an Adaptec 6405 RAID controller and 4 disks in a RAID 5 configuration. Staff in the data center called me because they noticed a red LED was turned on in one of the drive bays. I have then checked the status using 'arcconf getconfig 1' and I got the status message 'Logical devices/Failed/Degraded: 2/0/1'. The status of the logical devices was listed as 'Rebuilding'. However, I did not get any suspicious status of the affected physical device, the S.M.A.R.T. setting was 'no', the S.M.A.R.T. warnings were '0' and also 'arcconf getsmartstatus 1' returned no problems with any of the disk drives. The 'arcconf getlogs 1 events tabular' command gives lots of output (sorry, can't paste the log file here as I only have remote console access, I could post a screenshot though). Here are some sample entries: eventtype FSA_EM_EXPANDED_EVENT grouptype FSA_EXE_SCSI_GROUP subtype FSA_EXE_SCSI_SENSE_DATA subtypecode 12 cdb 28 00 17 c4 74 00 00 02 00 00 00 00 data 70 00 06 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 The 'arcconf getlogs 1 device tabular' command reports mediumErrors 1 for two of the disks. Today, I have checked the status of the controller again. Everything is back to normal, the controller status is now 'Logical devices/Failed/Degraded: 2/0/0', the logical devices are also all back to 'Optimal'. I was not able to check the LED status, my guess is that the red LED is off again. Now I have a lot of questions: what is a possible cause for the medium error, why it is not reported by the SMART log too? Should I replace the disk drives? They were purchased just a month ago. The rebuilding process took one or two days, is that normal? The disks are 2 TByte each and the storage system is mostly idling. the timestamp of the logs seem to show the moment of the log retrieval, not the moment of the incident. Please advise, all help is very appreciated.

  Read the article

• RAID 5 - DELL 2850 and others

  - by Kiara

  I have installed Ubuntu on a DELL 2850 and I have configured an array of 5 disks (SCSI 73GB 10K) in RAID5. I wanted to simulate a drive error so in the middle of something I just took one of the drives out and put it back again after a bit. Then the drive shows an orange light and seems to be rebuilding but actually is taking hours and hours with no results. So I went to the PERC utility (Ctrl+M) and the disk shows "REBLD". But it never gets to an online state. So I went to Objects - Physical drives - Rebuilding - View rebuild process. And in here I can see a bar moving from 0%... but if I reboot before finishing and get into the PERC Utility again, it seems to start again rebuilding from 0% - so it is not rebuilding automatically. My concern is: what would happen in a real situation? Do I have to just switch the server off and go to the Perc utility to start the rebuilding manually? I thought the whole point was to have this done automatically and without the need of stopping the server. Or does it perhaps rebuild automatically indeed but needs to have enough time without rebooting because otherwise the rebuilding process will start from scratch? It seems to take more than 3h for a 73gb disk! My second question is: can I mix then hard drives? So if I have a RAID of 5x73GB 10K can I use different size (146GB) or speeds (15K)? Apparently someone said it is OK in here Poweredge 2850: replace disk with larger in RAID?

  Read the article

• Raid-1 Western Digital Green AARS, cloning and WD Align Utility

  - by Jaguar

  Hello all, My current setup runs on top of 2x Western Digital 2500KS drives on Raid-1, using the motherboard's 780G raid controller, on WinXP. Everything is fine, but the drives are a bit noisy. I am considering buying 2x WD6400AARS disks which are the 640GB slower 'green' drives, but also feature the Advanced Formatting 4KB sectors. This means that for WinXP the partition will have to be aligned to work properly, else there is a performance penalty. There are 2 questions here: The Green drives from WD are all slower and are (according to WD) susceptible to drop-out's from the controller. Has anyone any experience in this matter? Is there a possibility the controller will drop a drive? If so, can i do anything about it? Secondly, western digital gives a utility to perform the alignment on the partition. The thing is, will the utility see the drives in question as the operating system only sees 1 logical disk? I will be making the transition using a cloning tool (most probably norton ghost) unless i don't find a solution or a clear answer, in which case i'll just buy a win 7 license and make a clean install... thx in advance

  Read the article

• Ubuntu raid 1 write errors

  - by Micah

  I have an Ubuntu server set up with two SATA drives in a RAID 1 configuration with MDADM. The machine is used to record raw video, which involves a lot of writing to the disk. Sometimes during video recording the computer will crash, will the following errors in kern.log: Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629864] ata2.00: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x400100 action 0x6 Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629870] ata2.00: BMDMA stat 0x26 Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629875] ata2.00: SError: { UnrecovData Handshk } Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629880] ata2.00: failed command: WRITE DMA EXT Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629889] ata2.00: cmd 35/00:00:28:6d:f6/00:04:06:00:00/e0 tag 0 dma 524288 out Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629891] res 51/84:b1:77:6e:f6/84:02:06:00:00/e0 Emask 0x30 (host bus error) Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629896] ata2.00: status: { DRDY ERR } Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629899] ata2.00: error: { ICRC ABRT } Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629910] ata2.00: hard resetting link Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.973009] ata2.01: hard resetting link Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414502.482642] ata2.00: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414502.482658] ata2.01: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300) Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414502.546160] ata2.00: configured for UDMA/133 Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414502.546203] ata2: EH complete Is this the result of faulty drives? Is software RAID just not performant enough for data rates ~15 MB/s, even with a quad-core i7? Thanks for your help. Edit: cat /proc/mdstat returns this: Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0] 976760768 blocks [2/2] [UU] unused devices: <none>

  Read the article

• Slow parity initialization of RAID-5 array on HP Smart Array 411 controller

  - by Rob Nicholson

  On 29th October 2011, I built a RAID-5 array using 4 x 146.8GB Seagate SAS ST3146855SS drives running at 15k connected to a PowerEdge R515 with HP Smart Array P411 controller running Windows 2008 (so nothing particularly unusual). I know that parity initialisation of a RAID-5 array can take some time but it's still running after 2.5 weeks which seems a little unusual. I'd previously built another array on the same controller using 4 x 2TB SATA-2 drives and that did take a while to complete but a) I'm sure it was less than 2.5 weeks, b) that array was ~12 times bigger and c) during initialization, the percentrage slowly increased each day. At the moment, the status display for this new 2nd array simply says "Parity Initialization Status: In Progress" and it's said that since the start. It's this lack of change on the status that worries me the most - feels like it's not actually doing anything. Do you think something has gone wrong or am I being unpatient and for some reason, the status not increasing is normal? I kind of expected a much smaller array on faster drives (15k SAS versus 7.5k SATA-2) to build in a few days. This is our primary SAN running StarWind so my "have a play" options are very limited. This 2nd array is currently in use for one small virtual disk so I could shut the target machine down, move the virtual disk to another drive and try rebuilding.

  Read the article

• Dell R320 RAID 10 with CacheCade

  - by Geekman

  I'm looking for a higher-performance build for our 1RU Dell R320 servers, in terms of IOPS. Right now I'm fairly settled on: 4 x 600 GB 3.5" 15K RPM SAS RAID 1+0 array This should give good performance, but if possible, I want to also add an SSD Cache into the mix, but I'm not sure if there's enough room? According to the tech-specs, there's only up to 4 total 3.5" drive bays available. Is there any way to fit at least a single SSD drive along-side the 4x3.5" drives? I was hoping there's a special spot to put the cache SSD drive (though from memory, I doubt there'd be room). Or am I right in thinking that the cache drives are simply drives plugged in "normally" just as any other drive, but are nominated as CacheCade drives in the PERC controller? Are there any options for having the 4x600GB RAID 10 array, and the SSD cache drive, too? Based on the tech-specs (with up to 8x2.5" drives), maybe I need to use 2.5" SAS drives, leaving another 4 bays spare, plenty of room for the SSD cache drive. Has anyone achieved this using 3.5" drives, somehow?

  Read the article

• Rebuilding LVM after RAID recovery

  - by Xiong Chiamiov

  I have 4 disks RAID-5ed to create md0, and another 4 disks RAID-5ed to create md1. These are then combined via LVM to create one partition. There was a power outage while I was gone, and when I got back, it looked like one of the disks in md1 was out of sync - mdadm kept claiming that it only could find 3 of the 4 drives. The only thing I could do to get anything to happen was to use mdadm --create on those four disks, then let it rebuild the array. This seemed like a bad idea to me, but none of the stuff I had was critical (although it'd take a while to get it all back), and a thread somewhere claimed that this would fix things. If this trashed all of my data, then I suppose you can stop reading and just tell me that. After waiting four hours for the array to rebuild, md1 looked fine (I guess), but the lvm was complaining about not being able to find a device with the correct UUID, presumably because md1 changed UUIDs. I used the pvcreate and vgcfgrestore commands as documented here. Attempting to run an lvchange -a y on it, however, gives me a resume ioctl failed message. Is there any hope for me to recover my data, or have I completely mucked it up?

  Read the article

• Disk Activity Alert Windows SBS 2003 on Dell PowerEdge 830 with Raid

  - by Ron Whites

  Background: I have a Dell PowerEdge 830 Server running Windows SB Server 2003. It has 4gbs of RAM and a ATA CERC SATA 6CH controller with 3 160gb drives in a Raid 5 configuration. The Problem I am seeing Admin ---"Disk Activity Alert on Server" emails These often occur when disk backups, de-frag or high disk usage is going on. Generally the server isn't over stressed. The Disk Alert emails say in part ... The following disk has low idle time, which may cause slow response time when reading or writing files to the disk. Disk: 0 C: F: D: Review the Disk Transfers/sec and % Idle Time counters for the PhysicalDisk performance object. If the Disk Transfers/sec counter is consistently below 150 while the % Idle Time counter remains very low (close to 0), there may be a problem with the disk driver or hardware. The Questions I have: With what utility can I review the Disk Transfers/sec and Idle Time? It appears there is no utility for that on the server! I think I may need to download a very large (two DVD) Dell "OpenManage" utility to be able to monitor the raid system and see what is a problem is that true?

  Read the article

• Removing a device in "removed" state from Linux software RAID array

  - by Sahasranaman MS

  My workstation has two disks(/dev/sd[ab]), both with similar partitioning. /dev/sdb failed, and cat /proc/mdstat stopped showing the second sdb partition. I ran mdadm --fail and mdadm --remove for all partitions from the failed disk on the arrays that use them, although all such commands failed with mdadm: set device faulty failed for /dev/sdb2: No such device mdadm: hot remove failed for /dev/sdb2: No such device or address Then I hot swapped the failed disk, partitioned the new disk and added the partitions to the respective arrays. All arrays got rebuilt properly except one, because in /dev/md2, the failed disk doesn't seem to have been removed from the array properly. Because of this, the new partition keeps getting added as a spare to the partition, and its status remains degraded. Here's what mdadm --detail /dev/md2 shows: [root@ldmohanr ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md2 /dev/md2: Version : 1.1 Creation Time : Tue Dec 27 22:55:14 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 52427708 (50.00 GiB 53.69 GB) Used Dev Size : 52427708 (50.00 GiB 53.69 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Intent Bitmap : Internal Update Time : Fri Nov 23 14:59:56 2012 State : active, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Name : ldmohanr.net:2 (local to host ldmohanr.net) UUID : 4483f95d:e485207a:b43c9af2:c37c6df1 Events : 5912611 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2 1 0 0 1 removed 2 8 18 - spare /dev/sdb2 To remove a disk, mdadm needs a device filename, which was /dev/sdb2 originally, but that no longer refers to device number 1. I need help with removing device number 1 with 'removed' status and making /dev/sdb2 active.

  Read the article

• Use old raid drive as boot device without data loss

  - by Gabriel

  There were two disks in sw-raid. There were /dev/md1 as swap, /dev/md2 as boot and a /dev/md3 with ext4. The sw-raid was disabled by stopping and removing mdadm and then zeroing the superblock on each /dev/mdX partition with: sudo mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sda1 sudo mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sda2 sudo mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sda3 In the disk that is the first boot device, I don't know if it's relevant, the system type of each partition was set back from fd to 82 or 83 with fdisk, /etc/fstab was updated, changing /dev/mdX to /dev/sdaX, and grub was reinstalled on the boot partition (/dev/sda2) with grub-instal. But the system wont boot. What else should I do to use this disk as the boot device without reinstall or data loss? Current output of fdisk Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 2048 33556480 16777216+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sda2 * 33558528 34607104 524288+ 83 Linux /dev/sda3 34609152 3907027120 1936208984+ 83 Linux With it doesn't boot I mean that it stops in the grub console (with the grub> symbol). A ls command says: (hd0) (hd0,msdos3) (hd0,msdos2) (hd0,msdos1) (hd1) (hd1,msdos1) It's weird because hd1 was formatted with ext4...

  Read the article

• Ubuntu 12.04 can't boot after installing with software RAID 1

  - by Bill

  I've been trying to install Ubuntu with software RAID on my server and there is obviously something that I don't understand about the process. This is the guide that I followed: https://help.ubuntu.com/11.04/serverguide/advanced-installation.html I have two identical 1 TB disks in my server. I went through the initial install process and manually set up my partitions. On each disk I set up: (1) 100 MB partition for EFI boot (I didn't originally have this but added it based on a forum post I found after my original install failed to boot, I ended up with EFIboot since that was what the 'guided partitioning' decided to do) (1) 970 MB partition for / (1) 30 MB partition for swap I then created new RAID 1 disks combining the two partitions, one from each disk, such that each partition is mirrored. I then configured their usage as stated above. After saving the configuration I said yes to boot in a degraded state. The rest of the setup went normally, no errors of any kind. I saw GRUB being installed and again no errors. However, after rebooting the server I get the dreaded 'Insert boot media' and nothing happens. I loaded up the recovery disk and the mdadm configuration looks correct. md0 is my EFIBoot partition md1 is my \ partition using ext4 md2 is my swap partition Running file -s /dev/md0 doesn't indicate that GRUB is there and so I attempted to reinstall GRUB using the recovery disk. I selected the md0 disk and it appeared to install just fine. Running file -s /dev/md1 shows the error needs journal recovery, I'm not sure if that's related or not or how to fix that. Rebooting gives me the same problem, no boot media found. I've searched around the internet but can't figure out what to do next or more importantly how to troubleshoot what exactly is going wrong. Thanks!

  Read the article

• How do I install GRUB on a RAID system installation?

  - by root45

  I'm trying to setup and install Ubuntu on a RAID 1 setup. I have two disks, sdb and sdc. I've been following this guide https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/SoftwareRAID which more or less works for getting everything set up and Ubuntu installed. The problem is at the end of the installation, it tries to install GRUB. By default it tries my "first disk", which gives a "fatal error". I've tried installing it on a specific partion, e.g. sdb1 as well as RAID devices, e.g. md0, md1, etc.. Nothing seems to work. Edit: The actual error is "Unable to install GRUB in /dev/sdb Executing 'grub-install '/dev/sdb' failed. This is a fatal error." Then I'm taken back to the main install menu. If I choose "Install the GRUB boot loader on a hard disk" option, I can pick the partition, but entering sdb2 or md1 gives the same error. So I went ahead an just didn't install GRUB, which means now I presumably have a working Ubuntu installation, but I can't boot it. I've tried booting from the LiveCD to install GRUB, but I can't chroot into my system because it doesn't seem to recognize that my disk is a Linux disk. There's an error about it being a RAID partition. So basically I would really like to know how you know to which device to install GRUB at installation, or at the very least, how to install it on to my system now. I suppose I should also mention that sda is a Windows 7 installation that I would like to keep around and be able to access at boot. Thanks for any help.

  Read the article

• Is the Alternate Ubuntu installer still required for LVM or Software RAID setup?

  - by jimp

  Over the past 5 years, I have been setting up Ubuntu servers using the Alternate installer. I need to provision a new server today, and I'm curious if the Alternate CD is still the only way to setup LVM/RAID at installation time. I'm my limited experience with Red Hat Enterprise Linux, I noticed it's single installer configures LVM automatically. Has Ubuntu's installer, at least the standard "Server" installer, added support for LVM/RAID, or is the Alternate installer still required for that kind of server setup? http://mirror.anl.gov/pub/ubuntu-iso/DVDs/ubuntu/12.04.1/release/ Alternate install CD The alternate install CD allows you to perform certain specialist installations of Ubuntu. It provides for the following situations: setting up automated deployments; upgrading from older installations without network access; LVM and/or RAID partitioning; installs on systems with less than about 384MiB of RAM (although note that low-memory systems may not be able to run a full desktop environment reasonably). LVM has always been fundamental for our server needs, so I'm surprised if it is still not considered a server-worthy feature.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >