Search Results

Search found 227 results on 10 pages for 'raid5'.

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 2/10 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  | Next Page >

  • How to create a software raid5 array without a spare

    - by Yannick M.
    I am trying to create a software raid5 array using mdadm: $ linux # mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --level=5 --raid-devices=4 --spare-devices=0 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1 mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric mdadm: chunk size defaults to 64K mdadm: array /dev/md0 started. However when inspecting /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] md0 : active raid5 sdd1[4] sdc1[2] sdb1[1] sda1[0] 2930279808 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_] [>....................] recovery = 0.3% (2970496/976759936) finish=186.1min speed=87172K/sec unused devices: <none> It seems one drive isn't active, so I check the details of the array: /dev/md0: Version : 00.90.03 Creation Time : Tue Jul 21 16:29:53 2009 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 2930279808 (2794.53 GiB 3000.61 GB) Used Dev Size : 976759936 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Jul 21 16:29:53 2009 State : clean, degraded, recovering Active Devices : 3 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Rebuild Status : 0% complete UUID : ce8b2f40:821d003c:0027688e:a70977ec Events : 0.1 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 1 0 active sync /dev/sda1 1 8 17 1 active sync /dev/sdb1 2 8 33 2 active sync /dev/sdc1 4 8 49 3 spare rebuilding /dev/sdd1 And it seems there are only 3 active devices, with one spare. Is it just me, or something wrong here?

    Read the article

  • How to force mdadm to stop RAID5 array?

    - by lucek
    I have /dev/md127 RAID5 array that consisted of four drives. I managed to hot remove them from the array and currently /dev/md127 does not have any drives: cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid1 sdd1[0] sda1[1] 304052032 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU] md1 : active raid0 sda5[1] sdd5[0] 16770048 blocks super 1.2 512k chunks md127 : active raid5 super 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/0] [____] unused devices: <none> and mdadm --detail /dev/md127 /dev/md127: Version : 1.2 Creation Time : Thu Sep 6 10:39:57 2012 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 8790402048 (8383.18 GiB 9001.37 GB) Used Dev Size : 2930134016 (2794.39 GiB 3000.46 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Fri Sep 7 17:19:47 2012 State : clean, FAILED Active Devices : 0 Working Devices : 0 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 512K Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 0 0 1 removed 2 0 0 2 removed 3 0 0 3 removed I've tried to do mdadm --stop /dev/md127 but: mdadm --stop /dev/md127 mdadm: Cannot get exclusive access to /dev/md127:Perhaps a running process, mounted filesystem or active volume group? I made sure that it's unmounted, umount -l /dev/md127 and confirmed that it indeed is unmounted: umount /dev/md127 umount: /dev/md127: not mounted I've tried to zero superblock of each drive and I get (for each drive): mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sde1 mdadm: Unrecognised md component device - /dev/sde1 Here's output of lsof|grep md127: lsof|grep md127 md127_rai 276 root cwd DIR 9,0 4096 2 / md127_rai 276 root rtd DIR 9,0 4096 2 / md127_rai 276 root txt unknown /proc/276/exe What else can I do? LVM is not even installed so it can't be a factor.

    Read the article

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

    - by ark1214
    This is actually on a QNAP TS-509 NAS. The RAID is basically a Linux RAID. The NAS was configured with RAID 5 with 5 drives (/md0 with /dev/sd[abcde]3). At some point, /dev/sde failed and drive was replaced. While rebuilding (and not completed), the NAS rebooted itself and /dev/sdc dropped out of the array. Now the array can't start because essentially 2 drives have dropped out. I disconnected /dev/sde and hoped that /md0 can resume in degraded mode, but no luck.. Further investigation shows that /dev/sdc3 has no md superblock. The data should be good since the array was unable to assemble after /dev/sdc dropped off. All the searches I done showed how to reassemble the array assuming 1 bad drive. But I think I just need to restore the superblock on /dev/sdc3 and that should bring the array up to a degraded mode which will allow me to backup data and then proceed with rebuilding with adding /dev/sde. Any help would be greatly appreciated. mdstat does not show /dev/md0 # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [multipath] md5 : active raid1 sdd2[2](S) sdc2[3](S) sdb2[1] sda2[0] 530048 blocks [2/2] [UU] md13 : active raid1 sdd4[3] sdc4[2] sdb4[1] sda4[0] 458880 blocks [5/4] [UUUU_] bitmap: 40/57 pages [160KB], 4KB chunk md9 : active raid1 sdd1[3] sdc1[2] sdb1[1] sda1[0] 530048 blocks [5/4] [UUUU_] bitmap: 33/65 pages [132KB], 4KB chunk mdadm show /dev/md0 is still there # mdadm --examine --scan ARRAY /dev/md9 level=raid1 num-devices=5 UUID=271bf0f7:faf1f2c2:967631a4:3c0fa888 ARRAY /dev/md5 level=raid1 num-devices=2 UUID=0d75de26:0759d153:5524b8ea:86a3ee0d spares=2 ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid5 num-devices=5 UUID=ce3e369b:4ff9ddd2:3639798a:e3889841 ARRAY /dev/md13 level=raid1 num-devices=5 UUID=7384c159:ea48a152:a1cdc8f2:c8d79a9c With /dev/sde removed, here is the mdadm examine output showing sdc3 has no md superblock # mdadm --examine /dev/sda3 /dev/sda3: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 00.90.00 UUID : ce3e369b:4ff9ddd2:3639798a:e3889841 Creation Time : Sat Dec 8 15:01:19 2012 Raid Level : raid5 Used Dev Size : 1463569600 (1395.77 GiB 1498.70 GB) Array Size : 5854278400 (5583.08 GiB 5994.78 GB) Raid Devices : 5 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat Dec 8 15:06:17 2012 State : active Active Devices : 4 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Checksum : d9e9ff0e - correct Events : 0.394 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 0 8 3 0 active sync /dev/sda3 0 0 8 3 0 active sync /dev/sda3 1 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 2 8 35 2 active sync /dev/sdc3 3 3 8 51 3 active sync /dev/sdd3 4 4 0 0 4 faulty removed [~] # mdadm --examine /dev/sdb3 /dev/sdb3: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 00.90.00 UUID : ce3e369b:4ff9ddd2:3639798a:e3889841 Creation Time : Sat Dec 8 15:01:19 2012 Raid Level : raid5 Used Dev Size : 1463569600 (1395.77 GiB 1498.70 GB) Array Size : 5854278400 (5583.08 GiB 5994.78 GB) Raid Devices : 5 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat Dec 8 15:06:17 2012 State : active Active Devices : 4 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Checksum : d9e9ff20 - correct Events : 0.394 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 0 0 8 3 0 active sync /dev/sda3 1 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 2 8 35 2 active sync /dev/sdc3 3 3 8 51 3 active sync /dev/sdd3 4 4 0 0 4 faulty removed [~] # mdadm --examine /dev/sdc3 mdadm: No md superblock detected on /dev/sdc3. [~] # mdadm --examine /dev/sdd3 /dev/sdd3: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 00.90.00 UUID : ce3e369b:4ff9ddd2:3639798a:e3889841 Creation Time : Sat Dec 8 15:01:19 2012 Raid Level : raid5 Used Dev Size : 1463569600 (1395.77 GiB 1498.70 GB) Array Size : 5854278400 (5583.08 GiB 5994.78 GB) Raid Devices : 5 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat Dec 8 15:06:17 2012 State : active Active Devices : 4 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Checksum : d9e9ff44 - correct Events : 0.394 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 3 8 51 3 active sync /dev/sdd3 0 0 8 3 0 active sync /dev/sda3 1 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 2 8 35 2 active sync /dev/sdc3 3 3 8 51 3 active sync /dev/sdd3 4 4 0 0 4 faulty removed fdisk output shows /dev/sdc3 partition is still there. [~] # fdisk -l Disk /dev/sdx: 128 MB, 128057344 bytes 8 heads, 32 sectors/track, 977 cylinders Units = cylinders of 256 * 512 = 131072 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdx1 1 8 1008 83 Linux /dev/sdx2 9 440 55296 83 Linux /dev/sdx3 441 872 55296 83 Linux /dev/sdx4 873 977 13440 5 Extended /dev/sdx5 873 913 5232 83 Linux /dev/sdx6 914 977 8176 83 Linux Disk /dev/sda: 1500.3 GB, 1500301910016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 182401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 1 66 530113+ 83 Linux /dev/sda2 67 132 530145 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sda3 133 182338 1463569695 83 Linux /dev/sda4 182339 182400 498015 83 Linux Disk /dev/sda4: 469 MB, 469893120 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 114720 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Disk /dev/sda4 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/sdb: 1500.3 GB, 1500301910016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 182401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 1 66 530113+ 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 67 132 530145 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sdb3 133 182338 1463569695 83 Linux /dev/sdb4 182339 182400 498015 83 Linux Disk /dev/sdc: 1500.3 GB, 1500301910016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 182401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 1 66 530125 83 Linux /dev/sdc2 67 132 530142 83 Linux /dev/sdc3 133 182338 1463569693 83 Linux /dev/sdc4 182339 182400 498012 83 Linux Disk /dev/sdd: 2000.3 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 66 530125 83 Linux /dev/sdd2 67 132 530142 83 Linux /dev/sdd3 133 243138 1951945693 83 Linux /dev/sdd4 243139 243200 498012 83 Linux Disk /dev/md9: 542 MB, 542769152 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 132512 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Disk /dev/md9 doesn't contain a valid partition table Disk /dev/md5: 542 MB, 542769152 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 132512 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Disk /dev/md5 doesn't contain a valid partition table

    Read the article

  • Move OS from RAID5 array to RAID 1 arrays

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

    Read the article

  • Is Error Recovery Control or TLER necessary for software RAID5 using LVM

    - by Vincent Davis
    I ave been told that for RAID configurations you don't what to use standard desktop drives because they when/if they enter a error recovery mode they might time out and get dropped from the raid. Is this true for LVM software RAID or this this a hardware RAID issue primarily?. We are running this server primarily as a backup server and would like to take advantage of the lower price of the desktop drives.

    Read the article

  • [Ubuntu 10.04] mdadm - Can't get RAID5 Array To Start

    - by Matthew Hodgkins
    Hello, after a power failure my RAID array refuses to start. When I boot I have to sudo mdadm --assemble --force /dev/md0 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1 /dev/sde1 /dev/sdf1 /dev/sdg1 to get mdadm to notice the array. Here are the details (after I force assemble). sudo mdadm --misc --detail /dev/md0: /dev/md0: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Sun Apr 25 01:39:25 2010 Raid Level : raid5 Used Dev Size : 1465135872 (1397.26 GiB 1500.30 GB) Raid Devices : 6 Total Devices : 6 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Thu Jun 17 23:02:38 2010 State : active, Not Started Active Devices : 6 Working Devices : 6 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 128K UUID : 44a8f730:b9bea6ea:3a28392c:12b22235 (local to host hodge-fs) Events : 0.1249691 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 65 0 active sync /dev/sde1 1 8 81 1 active sync /dev/sdf1 2 8 97 2 active sync /dev/sdg1 3 8 49 3 active sync /dev/sdd1 4 8 33 4 active sync /dev/sdc1 5 8 17 5 active sync /dev/sdb1 mdadm.conf: # by default, scan all partitions (/proc/partitions) for MD superblocks. # alternatively, specify devices to scan, using wildcards if desired. DEVICE partitions /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdb1 # auto-create devices with Debian standard permissions CREATE owner=root group=disk mode=0660 auto=yes # automatically tag new arrays as belonging to the local system HOMEHOST <system> # definitions of existing MD arrays ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid5 num-devices=6 UUID=44a8f730:b9bea6ea:3a28392c:12b22235 Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • formatting before md device creation in RAID5

    - by kumar
    consider you are creating a raid5 device with three drives. mdadm --create /dev/md0 --leve=5 --raid-disk=3 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 After issuing this command , I can see the progress of md device creating using cat /proc/mdstat. During the progress ITSELF, can I create a file ssytem partition say ext2 on md0 device like: mkfs.ext2 /dev/md0. Actually I am able to create this and want to confirm whether doing this before 100% completion of md device creation is CORRECT?

    Read the article

  • Rebuild mdadm RAID5 array with fewer disks

    - by drjeep
    I have a 4 disk RAID5 array, one of which is starting to fail according to smartd. However, since I'm using less than half the space on /dev/md0, I'd like to rebuild the array without the failing disk. The closest scenario I've been able to find online has been this post, however it contains bits that don't apply to me (LVM volumes) and also doesn't explain how I go about resizing the partition after I'm done. Please note I have backups of important data, but I'd like to avoid rebuilding the array from scratch if possible.

    Read the article

  • Server refuses to boot when Raid5 disk is disconnected - /root/ missing

    - by Ronni
    I recently set up a NAS server running a Debian OS (6.0.4) It contains 4 disks, 3 of them are in a Raid5 array, while the last one is used for the OS. To simulate a disk-failure I unplugged one of the raid disks, which resulted in the OS being unable to boot. It started the boot, recognized that md0 (the raid array) was running on 2/3 disks, and then threw a few errors. It was unable to find the following directories: /dev/root on /root, /dev on /root/dev, /sys on /root/sys, /proc on /root/proc It appears this happens regardless of which raid disk is removed. These directories are supposed to be on /dev/sdd my system disk. Output from fstab and blkid : http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6017799/NASOutput.txt If you need additional info, please let me know.

    Read the article

  • Installing raid 5 on a pre-installed ubuntu server. 12.04

    - by Chris
    I have a ubuntu server with samba already set up and installed with a 1tb hdd. I am wanting to now install 3 more 1tb drives and create a raid array using raid 5. I have found a lot of documentation about installing raid when installing and setting up ubuntu server for the first time. However, I am struggling to find anything on installing a raid 5 array on a system already installed an configured. Can this be done, or does a clean install need to be done again?

    Read the article

  • RAID 5 heavy IO hard freezes Ubuntu: Why?

    - by Luke has no name
    I have a software RAID 5 partition on LVM in Ubuntu (desktop, actually, but I'm using it as a server). I have been rsyncing a ton of data to it, and the computer was hard freezing, as in I needed to press "Reset". So I thought it was rsync. But I decided I'd try a dd if=/dev/zero of=/path/to/raid5 and sure enough, the computer locked up. Did an identical dd to a JBOD partition on the same machine, and it didn't crash. Assuming a clean RAID5 partition, tri-core processor 2GB of ram, 6GB swap, what could be causing this?

    Read the article

  • How do I stop and repair a RAID 5 array that has failed and has I/O pending?

    - by Ben Hymers
    The short version: I have a failed RAID 5 array which has a bunch of processes hung waiting on I/O operations on it; how can I recover from this? The long version: Yesterday I noticed Samba access was being very sporadic; accessing the server's shares from Windows would randomly lock up explorer completely after clicking on one or two directories. I assumed it was Windows being a pain and left it. Today the problem is the same, so I did a little digging; the first thing I noticed was that running ps aux | grep smbd gives a lot of lines like this: ben 969 0.0 0.2 96088 4128 ? D 18:21 0:00 smbd -F root 1708 0.0 0.2 93468 4748 ? Ss 18:44 0:00 smbd -F root 1711 0.0 0.0 93468 1364 ? S 18:44 0:00 smbd -F ben 3148 0.0 0.2 96052 4160 ? D Mar07 0:00 smbd -F ... There are a lot of processes stuck in the "D" state. Running ps aux | grep " D" shows up some other processes including my nightly backup script, all of which need to access the volume mounted on my RAID array at some point. After some googling, I found that it might be down to the RAID array failing, so I checked /proc/mdstat, which shows this: ben@jack:~$ cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid5 sdb1[3](F) sdc1[1] sdd1[2] 2930271872 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [3/2] [_UU] unused devices: <none> And running mdadm --detail /dev/md0 gives this: ben@jack:~$ sudo mdadm --detail /dev/md0 /dev/md0: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Sat Oct 31 20:53:10 2009 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 2930271872 (2794.53 GiB 3000.60 GB) Used Dev Size : 1465135936 (1397.26 GiB 1500.30 GB) Raid Devices : 3 Total Devices : 3 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Mon Mar 7 03:06:35 2011 State : active, degraded Active Devices : 2 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K UUID : f114711a:c770de54:c8276759:b34deaa0 Events : 0.208245 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 3 8 17 0 faulty spare rebuilding /dev/sdb1 1 8 33 1 active sync /dev/sdc1 2 8 49 2 active sync /dev/sdd1 I believe this says that sdb1 has failed, and so the array is running with two drives out of three 'up'. Some advice I found said to check /var/log/messages for notices of failures, and sure enough there are plenty: ben@jack:~$ grep sdb /var/log/messages ... Mar 7 03:06:35 jack kernel: [4525155.384937] md/raid:md0: read error NOT corrected!! (sector 400644912 on sdb1). Mar 7 03:06:35 jack kernel: [4525155.389686] md/raid:md0: read error not correctable (sector 400644920 on sdb1). Mar 7 03:06:35 jack kernel: [4525155.389686] md/raid:md0: read error not correctable (sector 400644928 on sdb1). Mar 7 03:06:35 jack kernel: [4525155.389688] md/raid:md0: read error not correctable (sector 400644936 on sdb1). Mar 7 03:06:56 jack kernel: [4525176.231603] sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Unhandled sense code Mar 7 03:06:56 jack kernel: [4525176.231605] sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE Mar 7 03:06:56 jack kernel: [4525176.231608] sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Sense Key : Medium Error [current] [descriptor] Mar 7 03:06:56 jack kernel: [4525176.231623] sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] Add. Sense: Unrecovered read error - auto reallocate failed Mar 7 03:06:56 jack kernel: [4525176.231627] sd 0:0:1:0: [sdb] CDB: Read(10): 28 00 17 e1 5f bf 00 01 00 00 To me it is clear that device sdb has failed, and I need to stop the array, shutdown, replace it, reboot, then repair the array, bring it back up and mount the filesystem. I cannot hot-swap a replacement drive in, and don't want to leave the array running in a degraded state. I believe I am supposed to unmount the filesystem before stopping the array, but that is failing, and that is where I'm stuck now: ben@jack:~$ sudo umount /storage umount: /storage: device is busy. (In some cases useful info about processes that use the device is found by lsof(8) or fuser(1)) It is indeed busy; there are some 30 or 40 processes waiting on I/O. What should I do? Should I kill all these processes and try again? Is that a wise move when they are 'uninterruptable'? What would happen if I tried to reboot? Please let me know what you think I should do. And please ask if you need any extra information to diagnose the problem or to help!

    Read the article

  • Strange performance from RAID5 using WD RE4 disks

    - by Howard
    I've noticed a bit of a performance issue with some WD RE4 drives I'm using under AMD's hardware RAID solution. First a bit of background: Environment: Windows 7 home premium x64 HDD's: 3x 1TB WD Raid Edition 4 in a RAID 5 setup with 128 kbyte stripe (2TB usable space) Testing Tool: HD Tune, process set to "High Priority" Processor: AMD Phenom II x6 1100T Ram: 16GB DDR3/1600mhz Motherboard: MSI 970A-G45 The image below pretty much depicts the issue I'm having. Every test has the same thing, a period of similar length where the performance drops to a few megabytes a second. This can't be a TLER issue as the purpose of RE4's is to work around that. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • HP E200i Controlller RAID Configuration fon Win2008 Ent, Sql Server, IIS Apps etc need opinion

    - by mn
    Hello, Actually I run RAID 5 (4 x SAS drives) with Win 2008 Ent(1x host) Win 2008 End(3x guest) Sql Server 2005 Std (on guest) 3 x asp.net applications (on guest) I bought 3 x drives to create additional array (on same controller E200i, I am waiting now for confirmation is it possible to have 3 raids in same controller) I am planning to have 2 x RAID5 (if it is possible) first RAID 5 with all vhd files, systems etc second RAID 5 all data files and transaction logs I am looking for opinion how to optimize data layer (seven drives, one controller).

    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

  • Older raid controllers in raid 5 vs. Jbod and SW raid

    - by TEB
    Hi. Im in the fortunate position to have 6 Supermicro older VOD servers with the following config: Supermicro 3U case, 3xPSU Dual Xeon 3ghz P4 class cpu (5 years old.. havnt checked the exact type) 4GB Ram 3ware 9500-8 SATA controller 8 SATA SLOTS and alot of free drives. 2GB FLASH Bootdrive What im curious about is the RAID5 performance on these old beasts in HW mode vs. SW on Linux with the controller set in JBOD mode. Im thinking on using Centos 5.5 or Ubuntu or ZFS RaidZ on Opensolaris. Any tips? or reccomendations ? best regards TEB

    Read the article

  • How to identify RAID (5 or 6) controllers that allow dynamic resize of the array

    - by David Pfeffer
    I'm building a server with a RAID5 array, based on a hardware controller. I want to be able to later add additional disks and have the array rebalance across all of the disks, enlarging the usable size. I also want to be able to later upgrade to bigger disks (one at a time, of course) and then expand the array to fill the entire drive. These features are available in Linux software raid (md). I've also heard they're available in some hardware controllers. Currently, I own the Adaptec RAID 3805 card and the 3ware 9650se card. I'd prefer to use the Adaptec if possible, but I can't find if either of these cards offer this feature. If they don't, are there other affordable (read as: sub-$600) RAID cards available that can accomplish this?

    Read the article

  • Raid 5 with 4 disks on Debian automatically creates a spare drive

    - by Razer
    I'm trying to to create a RAID 5 with 4x 2TB disks on Debian 6. I followed the instructions from: http://zackreed.me/articles/38-software-raid-5-in-debian-with-mdadm I created the raid with following command: sudo mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --auto=yes --level=5 --raid-devices=4 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1 /dev/sde1 After creating the RAID mdadm --detail /dev/md0 shows me: /dev/md0: Version : 1.2 Creation Time : Mon Jun 11 18:14:26 2012 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 5860535808 (5589.04 GiB 6001.19 GB) Used Dev Size : 1953511936 (1863.01 GiB 2000.40 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Mon Jun 11 18:14:26 2012 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 3 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 512K Name : rsserver:0 (local to host rsserver) UUID : a68c3c99:1ef865e9:5a8a7bdc:64710ed8 Events : 0 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 17 0 active sync /dev/sdb1 1 8 33 1 active sync /dev/sdc1 2 8 49 2 active sync /dev/sdd1 3 0 0 3 removed 4 8 65 - spare /dev/sde1 Why is there a spare drive? I didn't create one. I don't want to use a spare drive.

    Read the article

  • Restoring raid 5 array after bios flash

    - by cogergo
    I have just flashed my BIOS and now my machine does not detect my raid5 array! It has three 2TB drives in it so that is a LOT of data that will be lost! I have NOT deleted the array and it does not offer me to reboot I'm using Nvidia MediaShield! and Windows 7. Any ideas guys? Thanks! Update: here is the GUI raid configuration. As you see it shows one disk in the array but for some reason not the other two! Click for image of raid configuration error

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • mdadm: Replacing array with entirely new drives

    - by hellfur
    I have a server with three 500GB drives, with most of my data in a RAID5 configuration spanning the three of them. I just purchased and installed four 1TB drives, and the intention is to move off of the old drives and onto the new ones. I have enough SATA ports and power connectors to power all seven of my drives at once, so I've kept the old RAID running while I figure out what to do with the new drives. My question is: Should I create a whole new array on the 1TB drives, then move everything over and reconfigure linux to boot from the new md arrays? Or should I just expand the array, swapping out each of the three 500GBs with the 1TB, then adding the final drive? I've read up on the mdadm extending drive setup, and it makes sense, but I imagine I would use one of the drives as a full backup while I move things over, then add that drive back into the array once things are up and running on three of the 1TB drives, so there's some complication in going that route as well... I'm just not sure which is safer/recommended.

    Read the article

  • Rosewill RSV-S5 and it's transferespeeds

    - by DoomStone
    I have just bought a Rosewill RSV-S5, I have installed 5x1,5Tb Western Digital Green disks in it. After that have I created a Raid5 on them all with the software that followed with the hardware. Not the raid it self works fine, but it is SLOW, I can only obtain a maximum of 25 MB/s, and if SABnzbd+ is downloading with 5 MB/s is it having a hard time streaming a normal DIVX (700 mb) movie. Is this normal or is there something wrong? Edit: should be able to handle 3 Gbps = 384 megabytes / second Edit 2: As you can see am I only downloading with 3,76 MB/s and I'm trying to watch V s02e08 (720p), but it is completely unwatchable, as I can see 30 sec, and the it buffers for 20 sec. Edit: Other information there might be required I'm running Windows Server 2008 R2, optimized for program performance. Windows is installed on a 60GB SSD. I have a 50 Mb/s internet connection and a 1 Gb/s LAN, all connected with Cat6 Ethernet cables. The MCE is using a Gigabyte EP35C-DS3R motherboard with 2 GB DDR2 ram. Edit 3: I have used chunk sizes for 128 KB Edit 4: I found this on newegg Pros: Enclosure for 5x2TB hard drive is fine. This is basically a rebranded San Digital TR5M-B product. For support Rosewill tells you to contact San Digital. No direct support from Silicon Image for the computer raid card. Cons: Includes computer Silicon Image 3132 raid card, extremely slow raid 5 write (our tests ~10MB/s). Compare to regular internal local drive write 30-60MB/s. We basically dumped the Sil3132 card and replaced with High Point RocketRaid 622 card for extra $69.99. Note for RR622, turn off ECRC (end to end CRC check) for card to work on IBM xserver. What took 12hrs to copy now took 2-3hrs. San Digital realized the problem and has the newer model TR5M-BP TowerRaid Plus that comes with High Point RocketRaid 622 card. Rosewill should discontinue this product and go with TR5M-BP. Could not get Silicon Image raid management software to work with complicated 2008R2 server with 10 NICs, application doesn't know how to talk to localhost port with all those NICs. No updates from Silicon Image and support from San Digital ignored. Gave up on Sil3132 card. Save yourself from a lot of headaches, get the RR622 card too if you are going to buy this product. Other Thoughts: The newer model is TR5M-BP TowerRaid Plus, comes with High Point RocketRaid 622 raid card for the PC instead of Silicon Image Sil3132. According to San Digital, raid 5 performance for Sil3132 read 80MB/s write 19MB/s, and RR622 read 154MB/s write 149MB/s. Our RR622 tests gave (8TB raid 5) write ~80-110MB/s copying 40GB file took 8mins. So I have now ordered a HighPoint RocketRAID 622 2P ext SATA III and hopes that it will solve my problems.

    Read the article

  • RAID 5 RECONSTRUCT with RAID Reconstructor

    - by user22914
    I have Dell Poweredge server 2600 with Raid 5 in 3 hard drive Scsi 36gb each, it was fail to boot sinc the third drive is offline. I attached Sata card adapter to Sata hard drive and install OS SERVER 2003 to it, downloaded drivers for Raid and everything goes fine when I use recovery data software called "GetDataBack" from here http://www.runtime.org/data-recovery-software.htm but the problem that not all data recovered, I am still looking for importants data with about 5 GB size. I have another software called "RAID Reconstructor" from "http://www.runtime.org/raid.htm" I thought if I run it to reconstruct that will help to recover more data and put the third drive to be Online but I am afraid that might erase the current data in the other drives. Please I need your advise in how I could retrive the remaining data? Thanks

    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 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  | Next Page >