Search Results

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

Page 17/356 | < Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • Hardware requirements for playing HD

    - by asdasd
    A friend of mine has some HD videos (720p and 1080p), so i would like what are the hardware requirements in order to play them correctly with no slowing-downs ? my computer is build of : Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.40GHz nvidia GeForce 5200 FX 768 RAM My friend said that it won't be possible to play the HD videos on my comp because of it's old hardware - is this true ? And again, what are the minimal hardware setup needed to play HD ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Hardware Acceleration on Windows Server 2008

    - by user1184598
    Does Windows Server 2008 have hardware acceleration? I tried to use WPF to make over 20,000 drawings. It only cause around 40% CPU in windows 7. However, I run the same program on Windows Server 2008 with the same hardware configuration except that it has a dedicated graphical display card (GT 9500) while Windows 7 has only an onboard display card, it cause over 80% CPU. So, does Windows Server 2008 have hardware acceleration? Or could I make it? And how do I change the hardware acceleration setting? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • hardware for pushing buttons

    - by Elazar Leibovich
    Many times I want my computer to interface old hardware. Such as radio, light switch, etc. This mostly involves pushing pressing and moving various buttons and switches. I don't want to buy new hardware I want my computer to interface the old hardware I already have. I thought about it and reached to the conclusion that what I need is a general purpose button-pusher hardware. I need a simple device I can interface by a computer and would be able to push most of the buttons we have in daily accessories, without damaging the button. Is there any such accessory availible?

    Read the article

  • Are mobo raid controllers based on Intel ICH10R southbridge still considered software Raid?

    - by Breadtruck
    So do you still need specific software/drivers (intel matrix?) installed to manage the raid controller, setup the array. If the raid chipset is on-board the motherboard and it uses the CPU, and say I am using a Core 2 Quad Q9550, would a hardware based card still out perform the motherboard chipset? This is for a home workstation and I could spend $300 on a areca ARC-1210 PCI-Express x8 SATA II but I want to be able to justify the money for the raid card. My motherboard is a GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3P UPDATE: I was going to RAID5 using 4 500 GB drives, and I was going to buy a controller card but this article got me thinking hmmm....Toms-Southbridge Battle

    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

  • Server Hardware on the Desktop

    - by jcnnghm
    When I rebuild my desktop, I'm thinking of using server hardware instead of desktop hardware. I want to do this so I can easily add a lot of ECC memory (~20GB), and possibly more than one processor. I know that video hardware could be a problem, especially because I use 4 monitors. I should be fine with this, as long as I have two pci-e channels. Are there any downsides to doing this? Anything I'm not seeing?

    Read the article

  • Server with 3 Disk, what's the best HD Configuration?

    - by aleroot
    I Have an HP Server with a quad core Opteron and 3 Disk 250Gb S-ATA Disk, i'm thinking about what's the best configuration of the disk for performance and reliability. There is mainly 2 scenario : -RAID 5 with these 3 HD (on the the array 100GB Partition for OS, Other Space for Data Partition) -RAID 1 + 1 Disk for OS (one single Disk OS Installation, RAID 1 Array for a Data Partition) What's the best configuration ? In the Server Run MySQL and Small Document File server, the OS to be installed is Windows Server 2008 ...

    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

  • Server Hardware on the Desktop

    - by jcnnghm
    When I rebuild my desktop, I'm thinking of using server hardware instead of desktop hardware. I want to do this so I can easily add a lot of ECC memory (~20GB), and possibly more than one processor. I know that video hardware could be a problem, especially because I use 4 monitors. I should be fine with this, as long as I have two pci-e channels. Are there any downsides to doing this? Anything I'm not seeing?

    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

  • mdadm auto grow raid

    - by johannes
    I have a raid0/1 on lvm logical volumes. I resized the logical volumes. Now I want to resize the raid to use the complete logical volumes. This can be done with mdadm /dev/md? --grow -z newsize But somehow I can't figure out how to calculate the newsize argument. Is there a way to tell mdadm to grow to the biggest possible size? If not, how do I calculate the biggest possible size of the raid to use for the newsize argument?

    Read the article

  • Is there any way to do 'software raid' without losing data?I

    - by user1706582
    I say software raid because that is a pretty tentative guess at what I actually want. I have two drives, both with stuff already on them which I want to combine. If they weren't full of stuff (data, not windows installation) I would use software raid to combine them into one big drive or make them into one partition. I could probably do this with some complicated reference system but really I just want to be able to keep saving things to X: without running out of space until both drives are full. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >