Search Results

Search found 11240 results on 450 pages for 'partition boot sector'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 183/450 | < Previous Page | 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190  | Next Page >

  • Can I change the file system on the OS partition on Server 2008 R2?

    - by KCotreau
    I have a client using R1Soft Continuous Data Protection backup, and two of the Server 2008 R2 boxes were erroring out with these errors: Unable to obtain NTFS volume data for device '\\?\Volume{f612849e-7125-11e0-8772-806e6f6e6963}': Incorrect function. Unable to discover information for filesytem volume '\\?\Volume{f612849e-7125-11e0-8772-806e6f6e6963}'; Unable to obtain NTFS volume So I backed up all the registry entries with this, {f612849e-7125-11e0-8772-806e6f6e6963}, in it, and deleted them based on some VERY sparse info from R1Soft. I then decided to restore them before I rebooted, and do a system state backup first using MS backup, and even it errored out saying that there were FAT32 partitions. This was a major clue as the only two computers with problems had these FAT32 partitions. I figured if MS backup can't backup something, any other program is likely to have problems. Also, now that I realized the servers had FAT32 partitions on them, the error referencing NTFS takes on more weight. The partitions on both servers have the label "OS", but on one of the computers, it is given a letter, but on the other not. So I am thinking if I just convert the file systems from FAT32 to NTFS, it may solve the backup problem. So the question is this: Can I just convert those partitions, and does anyone have any concrete knowledge of any major downsides, like the servers not coming back up (of course, I would do one at a time)? My thinking is that the answer is probably at least 95% no, but they are production servers, so I wanted to get some second opinions.

    Read the article

  • Real server, Multiple IP Addresses, HyperV Virtual Server, How to partition IPs across real and Virtual NICs

    - by Steven_W
    This is a slightly difficult problem to explain without same basic background information - I'll try and refine the question later as necessary Originally, I have a single hosted server (Win 2008R2) with the following range of 8 IP addresses. - Single NIC - IP: x.x.128.72 -> x.x.128.79 - Subnet: x.x.255.192 - GW: x.x.128.65 After installing Hyper-V and setting up a single virtual server on the same box, I then wanted to assign one of the IP addresses to the virtual server, leaving everything else running normally. -- Firstly, I tried using the "External" network, but (even after setting IPs on the "Virtual Adapter" similar to Here but struggled to get networking running at all. I needed to keep the server running (otherwise I would have spent more time pursuing this approach) Q1 ... Was this a sensible thing to do ? Should I have carried on down this route ? -- I then decided to try different approach - Set the HyperV network to "Internal" (visible to Management OS) - Physical NIC - IP: x.x.128.72 -> x.x.128.75 - Subnet: x.x.255.192 - GW: x.x.128.65 - Virtual NIC - IP: x.x.128.78 - Subnet: x.x.255.252 - GW: x.x.128.72 ... { The same as the IP of the physical NIC ) - Virtual OS-NIC - IP: x.x.128.77 - Subnet: x.x.255.252 - GW: x.x.128.78 ... { The same as the IP of the host virtual-NIC ) -- Surprisingly enough, this approach actually worked, and I was able to connect from all the following: - Internet to/from physical NIC (x.x.128.72) - physical NIC (x.x.128.72) to virtual-OS-NIC (x.x.128.77) e.g. testing via ping + FTP - Internet to/from virtual-OS-NIC (x.x.128.72) -- The problem I have is that this approach seems to only last for a short while (a few hours). After this time, it seems that I lose the ability to connect from Virtual-OS-NIC to/from the internet (but I can still connect from the host-OS to the virtual-OS and from the host-OS to the internet) I have re-tested this a couple of times with the same results ... I leave the server on for a few hours (e.g. overnight), and when I come back in the morning, the Virtual-OS loses the ability to route to the internet -- I'm not quite sure what to look at next (or whether I'm going about this completely the wrong way ) One "possible relevant item" is that the host-OS is also running RRAS (Routing and Remote Access), but this is only to run a simple VPN -- Q2 - Wheat should I be looking at next ? (Any good references / recommendations of what to try) Would appreciate any thoughts or comments (even if you tell me I'm going about this the wrong way)

    Read the article

  • How can I do Ubuntu Lucid Desktop installation with HTTP preseed file and desktop installation CD?

    - by netvope
    Installation media: ubuntu-10.04-desktop-i386.iso I tried a lot of different boot parameters, but either the installer ignored the preseed configuration, or it boot itself directly as LiveCD. An example of the boot parameters I've tried: auto url=http://mydomain.com/path/preseed.cfg boot=casper only-ubiquity initrd=/casper/initrd.lz quiet splash -- If I remove only-ubiquity, it boots as a LiveCD. If I remove boot=casper, it won't boot. If I add vga=normal locale=en_US console-setup/layoutcode=us console-setup/ask_detect=false interface=auto, it still can't do automatic install. If I remove auto, it's the same. What am I missing? From the apache log of the server hosting preseed.cfg, I see that the installer has no problems fetching the preseed file. My preseed file is almost identical to the one at https://help.ubuntu.com/10.04/installation-guide/example-preseed.txt. Moreover, I have run debconf-set-selections -c preseed.cfg to ensure that the preseed file is correct. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How can I recover a huge folder that's been converted to a zero kb file on an NTFS partition?

    - by aalaap
    I have a 1TB drive with two 500GB partitions. One of them is being used as a Mac OS X Time Machine back up drive and the other one was NTFS and being used for storage. I had my entire 'iTunes Music' folder stored on it. Recently, there were some errors on the NTFS drive that caused chkdsk to run when in Windows, and it removed a lot of corrupt files. In this process, it converted my 'iTunes Music' folder into one zero KB file. How can I recover this? The partitions are intact and the other data on the disk is still accessible. It's just the 'iTunes Music' folder that's gone.

    Read the article

  • Package upgrade on Ubuntu raid server and grub setup issue

    - by RecNes
    I have remote Ubuntu 10.10 server running on raid system. I did package upgrade yesterday night for security reasons. During the upgrade, grub installation screen appeared and asked me which partition I wanted to install grub. Options are sda,sdb,md1 and md2. I decide to install them on both sda and sdb partitions. I wondering, was I make true decision? If machine get reboot is it can be boot up safely? You can find fdisk output and fstab mount points below: Fstab: proc /proc proc defaults 0 0 none /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0 /dev/md0 none swap sw 0 0 /dev/md1 /boot ext3 defaults 0 0 /dev/md2 / ext3 defaults 0 0 Fdisk: Disk /dev/sda: 750.2 GB, 750156374016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 91201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00029bb5 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 1 262 2102562 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sda2 263 295 265072+ fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sda3 296 91201 730202445 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/md0: 2152 MB, 2152923136 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 525616 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/md1: 271 MB, 271319040 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 66240 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md1 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/md2: 747.7 GB, 747727224832 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 182550592 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md2 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdb: 750.2 GB, 750156374016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 91201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00088969 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 262 2102562 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb2 263 295 265072+ fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb3 296 91201 730202445 fd Linux raid autodetect

    Read the article

  • WBadmin script to backup System State into another partition failed ?

    - by Albert Widjaja
    Hi Everyone, I tried numerous time but it is still failed like the following script on cmd prompt. Is there any way to create automated script to backup system state on my Windows Server 2008 using WBAdmin into D drive inside a directory ? any help would be greatly appreciated. C:\Users\Administratorwbadmin START SYSTEMSTATEBACKUP -backuptarget:D:\Admin\Backup wbadmin 1.0 - Backup command-line tool (C) Copyright 2004 Microsoft Corp. Starting System State Backup [12/02/2011 4:22 AM] Retrieving volume information... This would backup the system state from volume(s) SYS(C:) to D:\Admin\Backup. Do you want to start the backup operation? [Y] Yes [N] No Y ERROR - Specified backup location could not be found. C:\Users\Administratorwbadmin START SYSTEMSTATEBACKUP -backuptarget:D:\Admin wbadmin 1.0 - Backup command-line tool (C) Copyright 2004 Microsoft Corp. Starting System State Backup [12/02/2011 4:22 AM] Retrieving volume information... This would backup the system state from volume(s) SYS(C:) to D:\Admin. Do you want to start the backup operation? [Y] Yes [N] No Y ERROR - Specified backup location could not be found. C:\Users\Administratorwbadmin START SYSTEMSTATEBACKUP -backuptarget:"D:\Admin\Backup" -quiet wbadmin 1.0 - Backup command-line tool (C) Copyright 2004 Microsoft Corp. Starting System State Backup [12/02/2011 4:23 AM] Retrieving volume information... This would backup the system state from volume(s) SYS(C:) to D:\Admin\Backup. ERROR - Specified backup location could not be found. C:\Users\Administratorwbadmin START SYSTEMSTATEBACKUP -backuptarget:D:\ -quiet wbadmin 1.0 - Backup command-line tool (C) Copyright 2004 Microsoft Corp. Starting System State Backup [12/02/2011 4:23 AM] Retrieving volume information... This would backup the system state from volume(s) SYS(C:) to D:. ERROR - Specified backup location could not be found. C:\Users\Administrator

    Read the article

  • How to use Hardware RAID in Ubuntu Server

    - by user2071938
    I have an Adaptec RAID-Controller and created an RAID-1(Mirroring) succesfully. Now I have installed Ubuntu Server 12.04.3. When I type fdisk -l I get this output: bf@fileserver:~$ sudo fdisk -l Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/sda doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdb: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/sdb doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdc: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders, total 156301488 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: 0x0004c454 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 * 2048 499711 248832 83 Linux /dev/sdc2 501758 156301311 77899777 5 Extended /dev/sdc5 501760 156301311 77899776 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/mapper/fileserver--vg-root: 75.6 GB, 75606523904 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9191 cylinders, total 147668992 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/mapper/fileserver--vg-root doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/mapper/ddf1_Data: 1000.1 GB, 1000065728512 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121584 cylinders, total 1953253376 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/mapper/ddf1_Data doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/mapper/fileserver--vg-swap_1: 4160 MB, 4160749568 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 505 cylinders, total 8126464 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/mapper/fileserver--vg-swap_1 doesn't contain a valid partition table The 80 GB HDD is for the System The 1000.2 GB HDD should be for my data. But I'm a bit confused becauser there are listed two 1000.2 GB HDDs, due the Hardware RAID shoudln't there be only one HDD vissible to the OS? (I have two 1000.2 GB HDDs in an Raid-1 Array) dmraid gives me bf@fileserver:~$ sudo dmraid -r /dev/sdb: ddf1, ".ddf1_disks", GROUP, ok, 1953253376 sectors, data@ 0 /dev/sda: ddf1, ".ddf1_disks", GROUP, ok, 1953253376 sectors, data@ 0 so It seems to be ok? But how do I partitionate this disks and which one should I mount(sdb or sda?) Hope you can help me thx Florian

    Read the article

  • RAID 50 24Port Fast Writes Slow Reads - Ubuntu

    - by James
    What is going on here?! I am baffled. serveradmin@FILESERVER:/Volumes/MercuryInternal/test$ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/Volumes/MercuryInternal/test/test.fs bs=4096k count=10000 10000+0 records in 10000+0 records out 41943040000 bytes (42 GB) copied, 57.0948 s, 735 MB/s serveradmin@FILESERVER:/Volumes/MercuryInternal/test$ sudo dd if=/Volumes/MercuryInternal/test/test.fs of=/dev/null bs=4096k count=10000 10000+0 records in 10000+0 records out 41943040000 bytes (42 GB) copied, 116.189 s, 361 MB/s OF NOTE: My RAID50 is 3 sets of 8 disks. - This might not be the best config for SPEED. OS: Ubuntu 12.04.1 x64 Hardware Raid: RocketRaid 2782 - 24 Port Controller HardDriveType: Seagate Barracuda ES.2 1TB Drivers: v1.1 Open Source Linux Drivers. So 24 x 1TB drives, partitioned using parted. Filesystem is ext4. I/O scheduler WAS noop but have changed it to deadline with no seemingly performance benefit/cost. serveradmin@FILESERVER:/Volumes/MercuryInternal/test$ sudo gdisk -l /dev/sdb GPT fdisk (gdisk) version 0.8.1 Partition table scan: MBR: protective BSD: not present APM: not present GPT: present Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT. Disk /dev/sdb: 41020686336 sectors, 19.1 TiB Logical sector size: 512 bytes Disk identifier (GUID): 95045EC6-6EAF-4072-9969-AC46A32E38C8 Partition table holds up to 128 entries First usable sector is 34, last usable sector is 41020686302 Partitions will be aligned on 2048-sector boundaries Total free space is 5062589 sectors (2.4 GiB) Number Start (sector) End (sector) Size Code Name 1 2048 41015625727 19.1 TiB 0700 primary To me this should be working fine. I can't think of anything that would be causing this other then fundamental driver errors? I can't seem to get much/if any higher then the 361MB a second, is this hitting the "SATA2" link speed, which it shouldn't given it is a PCIe2.0 card. Or maybe some cacheing quirk - I do have Write Back enabled. Does anyone have any suggestions? Tests for me to perform? Or if you require more information, I am happy to provide it! This is a video fileserver for editing machines, so we have a preference for FAST reads over writes. I was just expected more from RAID 50 and 24 drives together... EDIT: (hdparm results) serveradmin@FILESERVER:/Volumes/MercuryInternal$ sudo hdparm -Tt /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: Timing cached reads: 17458 MB in 2.00 seconds = 8735.50 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 884 MB in 3.00 seconds = 294.32 MB/sec EDIT2: (config details) Also, I am using a RAID block size of 256K. I was told a larger block size is better for larger (in my case large video) files. EDIT3: (Bonnie++ Results. Would love some guidance with this!)

    Read the article

  • Recover RAID 5 data after created new array instead of re-using

    - by Brigadieren
    Folks please help - I am a newb with a major headache at hand (perfect storm situation). I have a 3 1tb hdd on my ubuntu 11.04 configured as software raid 5. The data had been copied weekly onto another separate off the computer hard drive until that completely failed and was thrown away. A few days back we had a power outage and after rebooting my box wouldn't mount the raid. In my infinite wisdom I entered mdadm --create -f... command instead of mdadm --assemble and didn't notice the travesty that I had done until after. It started the array degraded and proceeded with building and syncing it which took ~10 hours. After I was back I saw that that the array is successfully up and running but the raid is not I mean the individual drives are partitioned (partition type f8 ) but the md0 device is not. Realizing in horror what I have done I am trying to find some solutions. I just pray that --create didn't overwrite entire content of the hard driver. Could someone PLEASE help me out with this - the data that's on the drive is very important and unique ~10 years of photos, docs, etc. Is it possible that by specifying the participating hard drives in wrong order can make mdadm overwrite them? when I do mdadm --examine --scan I get something like ARRAY /dev/md/0 metadata=1.2 UUID=f1b4084a:720b5712:6d03b9e9:43afe51b name=<hostname>:0 Interestingly enough name used to be 'raid' and not the host hame with :0 appended. Here is the 'sanitized' config entries: DEVICE /dev/sdf1 /dev/sde1 /dev/sdd1 CREATE owner=root group=disk mode=0660 auto=yes HOMEHOST <system> MAILADDR root ARRAY /dev/md0 metadata=1.2 name=tanserv:0 UUID=f1b4084a:720b5712:6d03b9e9:43afe51b Here is the output from mdstat cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid5 sdd1[0] sdf1[3] sde1[1] 1953517568 blocks super 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [3/3] [UUU] unused devices: <none> fdisk shows the following: fdisk -l Disk /dev/sda: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000bf62e Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 1 9443 75846656 83 Linux /dev/sda2 9443 9730 2301953 5 Extended /dev/sda5 9443 9730 2301952 82 Linux swap / Solaris Disk /dev/sdb: 750.2 GB, 750156374016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 91201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000de8dd Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 91201 732572001 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/sdc: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00056a17 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 1 60801 488384001 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/sdd: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000ca948 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 121601 976760001 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/dm-0: 1250.3 GB, 1250254913536 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 152001 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/dm-0 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sde: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x93a66687 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sde1 1 121601 976760001 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/sdf: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0xe6edc059 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdf1 1 121601 976760001 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/md0: 2000.4 GB, 2000401989632 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 488379392 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 524288 bytes / 1048576 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table Per suggestions I did clean up the superblocks and re-created the array with --assume-clean option but with no luck at all. Is there any tool that will help me to revive at least some of the data? Can someone tell me what and how the mdadm --create does when syncs to destroy the data so I can write a tool to un-do whatever was done? After the re-creating of the raid I run fsck.ext4 /dev/md0 and here is the output root@tanserv:/etc/mdadm# fsck.ext4 /dev/md0 e2fsck 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010) fsck.ext4: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks... fsck.ext4: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/md0 The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2 filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2 filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock: e2fsck -b 8193 Per Shanes' suggestion I tried root@tanserv:/home/mushegh# mkfs.ext4 -n /dev/md0 mke2fs 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010) Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=4096 (log=2) Fragment size=4096 (log=2) Stride=128 blocks, Stripe width=256 blocks 122101760 inodes, 488379392 blocks 24418969 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=0 Maximum filesystem blocks=0 14905 block groups 32768 blocks per group, 32768 fragments per group 8192 inodes per group Superblock backups stored on blocks: 32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632, 2654208, 4096000, 7962624, 11239424, 20480000, 23887872, 71663616, 78675968, 102400000, 214990848 and run fsck.ext4 with every backup block but all returned the following: root@tanserv:/home/mushegh# fsck.ext4 -b 214990848 /dev/md0 e2fsck 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010) fsck.ext4: Invalid argument while trying to open /dev/md0 The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2 filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2 filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock: e2fsck -b 8193 <device> Any suggestions? Regards!

    Read the article

  • On a Mac, how can I find all files on a NTFS partition that have the same name, given case *in*sensi

    - by SCdF
    Here's the deal, I have a huge mess of files on an external drive that is formatted as NTFS. I wish to copy all of these files onto my MacBook Pro. NTFS, like sane filesystems, is case sensitive. HFS is not. There is, somewhere in the mess of tens of thousands of files and directories, one or more 'duplicates' in the eyes of HFS. Theses are preventing me from copying the entire directory of data onto my mac. (MacOSX rather unhelpfully throws a general error explaining the problem, but not the exact file. It also doesn't give you an option to skip) What is the best approach to solve this? Does anyone know a tool that can find files and directories that have the same case-insensitive name?

    Read the article

  • How to mount a HFS partition in Ubuntu as Read/Write?

    - by GiH
    I plugged in my external harddrive (which was formatted on my Mac into HFS+ journaled) to my Ubuntu desktop 9.04 64bit. I am not able to get the drive to mount with write capability, how do I do that? Right now all I'm getting is read access, I tried sudo mount -t hfsplus /dev/sdf2 /media/"Portable HD" but that still gave me only read access... ideas??

    Read the article

  • How can I recover my system after running 'mkfs' on the system partition?

    - by Filip Podgórny
    I am not a Linux user, and was doing some homework, I blindly typed sudo mkfs ext3 dev/sda2 (I had Ubuntu as Windows installation). I've done few more things, and turned Ubuntu off to switch on Windows back. No operating system installed - this is the message I'm getting. I plugged my HDD onto another computer and all my files are still there. What should I do to get my windows installation back? df -l (before mkfs) /dev/loop0 29G 2,0G 27G 8% / udev 3,0G 4,0K 3,0G 1% /dev tmpfs 1,2G 900K 1,2G 1% /run none 5,0M 0 5,0M 0% /run/lock none 3,0G 1,3M 3,0G 1% /run/shm /dev/sda3 455G 123G 333G 27% /host /dev/sdb1 1,9G 820M 1,1G 43% /media/PHONE CARD mkfs output (polish, sorry) mke2fs 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010) Etykieta systemu plików= Typ OS: Linux Rozmiar bloku=1024 (log=0) Rozmiar fragmentu=1024 (log=0) Stride=0 bloków, szerokosc Stripe=0 bloków 25688 i-wezlów, 102400 bloków 5120 bloków (5.00%) zarezerwowanych dla superuzytkownika Pierwszy blok danych=1 Maksymalna liczba bloków systemu plików=67371008 13 grup bloków 8192 bloków w grupie, 8192 fragmentów w grupie 1976 i-wezlów w grupie Kopie zapasowe superbloku zapisane w blokach: 8193, 24577, 40961, 57345, 73729 Zapis tablicy i-wezlów: zakonczono Tworzenie kroniki (4096 bloków): wykonano Zapis superbloków i podsumowania systemu plików: wykonano Ten system plików bedzie automatycznie sprawdzany co kazde 30 montowan lub co 180 dni, zaleznie co nastapi pierwsze. Mozna to zmienic poprzez tune2fs -c lub -i.

    Read the article

  • Building uEFI bootable ISO and USB for Windows 7 deployment

    - by Darragh
    I have been trying to build up a window's 7 and 2k8 EFI deployment ISO or USB. But struggling to to even get an ISO to boot from even VMware Workstation EFI implementation. The problem is there is no clear requirement to what the EFI bootloader is looking for, "e.g EFI boot file" even ISO's and USB's that are bootable don't find the required .efi file. I'd like to know what is the process EFI bootloader follows to boot the EFI file. e.g; in a EFI windows system its; C:\Windows\Boot\EFI\bootmgfw.efi From DVD it's; F:\efi\microsoft\boot\cdboot.efi from what people tell me it's on USB; G:\efi\boot\bootx64.efi (bootmgfw.efi renamed) I've been testing on a HP notebook with EFI 2.0 and VMware Workstation 8.0 with .vmx file firmware = "efi"

    Read the article

  • Is it possible create a 4TB bootable partition in the x86 edition of Windows Server 2003 Enterprise?

    - by Giffyguy
    I'd like to find out if there is any way to accomplish this, since it would benifit my storage server greatly. I am using a Promise FastTrak 8660 and five Seagate ST31000340NS 1TB drives in a RAID 5 array. I figure that if the x86 ENTERPRISE edition of Server 2003 can handle 64GB of RAM, it should have no problem supporting larger HDD volumes as well. I've read (somewhere...) that the Windows Server operating systems are not limited to the standard 2TB like Windows XP and 2000 are. I'm hoping it's something that just needs to be turned on, similar to the way PAE works for the 4GB RAM limit in x86 servers.

    Read the article

  • How to partition and format multiple disks using a batch script?

    - by chandu
    I am trying to format 'n' number of disks using a batch script. My script goes like this. diskpart /s "abc.txt" where abc.txt is: sel disk 1 create part primary format FS=NTFS label=label2 quick compress My Problem here is I want to 'loop' the commands in abc.txt for the number of disks that exists. But I cannot send an argument like %1 to abc.txt file as it is a .txt file. and my diskpart /s can only take a .txt file as an argument. how to overcome this... could anybody please help?

    Read the article

  • Increasing a Linux partition once VM size increased in vSphere?

    - by dannymcc
    I have a Ubuntu 12.04 VM running on VMWares ESXi 5.1. The server (VM) itself has run out of space, the results of df -h are as follows: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda1 19G 17G 1.2G 94% / udev 490M 4.0K 490M 1% /dev tmpfs 200M 232K 199M 1% /run none 5.0M 0 5.0M 0% /run/lock none 498M 0 498M 0% /run/shm The original VM HDD size was just under 19GB which is I have now increased to 100GB within the vCenter GUI: Is there a simple way of doing this? The VM doesn't seem to acknowledge the increase at all.

    Read the article

  • convert full-disk RAID5 array to partition-based array?

    - by Delan Azabani
    I have a RAID 5 array, md0, with three full-disk (non-partitioned) members, sdb, sdc, and sdd. My computer will hang during the AHCI BIOS if AHCI is enabled instead of IDE, if these drives are plugged in. I believe it may be because I'm using the whole disk, and the AHCI BIOS expects an MBR to be on the drive (I don't know why it would care). Is there a way to convert the array to use members sdb1, sdc1 and sdd1, partitioned MBR with 0xFD RAID partitions?

    Read the article

  • How can I upgrade Ubuntu from 9.10 to 10.04 on a netbook with a 4GB root partition?

    - by Blorgbeard
    I have an Asus EeePC 901, running Ubuntu 9.10. I'd like to upgrade it to 10.04. I don't want to reinstall, since I have a bunch of scripts and programs all set up. However, when I attempt to upgrade using sudo apt-get dist-upgrade, I get an error asking me to free up another ~600MB on /. My / is mounted on sda0, which is a 4GB SSD. I do not have 600MB worth of deletable stuff on /. I've emptied my trash, and done apt-get autoremove and apt-get clean. I do have plenty of space in /home, mounted on sda1 (a 16GB SSD). Is there some way I can tell apt-get to use a different download/temp directory?

    Read the article

  • System won't boot: Gigabyte HD 7790 1GB OC GPU issue or Corsair VS550 PSU issue?

    - by MGOwen
    Installed a new GPU, and PC won't boot. Turn it on and: No monitor signal at all (tried HDMI and VGA via DVI, on 2 working monitors). CPU and GPU fans DO spin, but No system beeps, no sounds from drives (they might make a small noise in the first 1 second or so, but there's definitely no OS loading or anything like that) If hit "power off" button it turns off immediately (no holding down for 3 seconds like usual) If I put my old HD 5670 GPU back in, everything works fine. But (plot twist!) card is not totally dead. My friend put it in his PC, and it works fine (he even played a game for 15 minutes, no issues). He has a Corsair TX850 850W and a Gigabyte MB. So my main theory is: the GPU isn't getting enough power from the PSU. But is it: Bad PSU? Seems unlikely, since it works fine with the other GPU. Also, the PSU Is brand new and 550W (single 42A/504W 12V rail). Overkill for this GPU. Corsair is a decent brand, but maybe just mine is faulty? Bad GPU? Could it be drawing more power than it should be, somehow, or something? Supposedly HD 7790 needs only 21A/75W on the 12v rail, though this one is factory overclocked a bit... but should that triple the power requirement? Something else? Could there be a motherboard incompatibility somehow? Both MB and GPU are less than a year old and PCI Express 3.0 x16. Things I've tried: Re-seating the video card Testing PC with old GPU (works fine, same PCIe slot). Checked AMD's stated amp/watt requirements of a 7790 and my PSU (see above). My PSU can output twice the amps (single rail) and 5x the Wattage a 7790 needs. Here are the full specs: Gigabyte HD 7790 1GB OC GPU Corsair VS550 550W PSU 4GB RAM AsRock H61M U3S3 motherboard i3-2100 500GB SATA HDD (2007-ish) blu-ray drive (new) PCI 802.11g card Edit: Motherboard BIOS Update seems to have fixed it. (If anyone has same problem and it doesn't work, comment here).

    Read the article

  • Linux script that indicates time the server was offline?

    - by RD
    Below is data taken from my dedicated server: root@namhost [~]# last root pts/0 XXX Tue May 18 09:46 still logged in root pts/0 XXX Mon May 17 08:51 - 12:18 (03:26) reboot system boot XXX Mon May 17 08:49 (1+00:59) root pts/0 XXX Sun May 16 11:50 - 13:15 (01:25) root@namhost [~]# last | grep "system boot" reboot system boot 2.6.18-164.15.1. Mon May 17 08:49 (1+01:02) reboot system boot 2.6.18-164.el5 Tue May 11 04:20 (7+05:31) reboot system boot 2.6.18-164.el5 Tue May 11 03:53 (7+05:58) reboot system boot 2.6.18-128.el5 Mon Oct 5 22:40 (-3:-50) .... I need a script that I can run on an hourly basis that will: 1. Calculate the total downtime since the first date 2. The overall downtime percentage 3. Store this data in a file at /home/bla/file.txt, in the following format: TotalDowntime=03:02:02 Average=0.01% How do I go about doing this?

    Read the article

  • My NTFS Partition keeps becoming "unusable" on Ubuntu, Any Ideas?

    - by gopherman
    I just purchased a new 2TB Drive External Seagate, My main system uses both Windows and Ubuntu So I am pretty much stuck with keeping my drive as NTFS. I have done this without any problems before but since I got this new drive I have been having issues. When I first load up Ubuntu the drive mounts and runs fine, after an unspecified amount of time i start getting Input/Output errors when accessing the drive. When I goto the Disk Utility I get a message stating the drive is "Unknown or Unused", If I disconnect and reconnect the drive or reboot everything is fine again. There's no errors coming up with S.M.A.R.T and it seems to work fine while under windows. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • My NTFS Partition keeps becoming "unusable" on Ubuntu, Any Ideas?

    - by gopherman
    I just purchased a new 2TB Drive External Seagate, My main system uses both Windows and Ubuntu So I am pretty much stuck with keeping my drive as NTFS. I have done this without any problems before but since I got this new drive I have been having issues. When I first load up Ubuntu the drive mounts and runs fine, after an unspecified amount of time i start getting Input/Output errors when accessing the drive. When I goto the Disk Utility I get a message stating the drive is "Unknown or Unused", If I disconnect and reconnect the drive or reboot everything is fine again. There's no errors coming up with S.M.A.R.T and it seems to work fine while under windows. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Unable to location existing XP system partition during Windows 7 upgrade install.

    - by glenneroo
    I have Windows XP 32-bit installed on this computer. I just purchased a Windows 7 64-bit as an ISO download upgrade version which I promptly burned to DVD and attempted to perform an upgrade installation. Here is the error message I am getting: Firstly, where are these "Setup log files" located? Second, does this mean I need to find compatible (64-bit?) drivers for the Mainboard and put them on floppy?

    Read the article

  • Unable to locate existing XP system partition during Windows 7 upgrade install.

    - by glenneroo
    I have Windows XP 32-bit installed on this computer. I just purchased a Windows 7 64-bit as an ISO download upgrade version which I promptly burned to DVD and attempted to perform an upgrade installation. Here is the error message I am getting: Firstly, where are these "Setup log files" located? Second, does this mean I need to find compatible (64-bit?) drivers for the Mainboard and put them on floppy?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190  | Next Page >