Search Results

Search found 1864 results on 75 pages for 'raid 0'.

Page 20/75 | < Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >

• Replacement Alternative for Dell FY606 in a Poweredge T105

  - by Mike C

  I have recently upgraded my Poweredge T105 server to use a SAS 6/ir RAID controller. Unfortunately, I did not realize at the time that adding the card would cause the BIOS to complain about a missing hard drive fan. This warning requires that a user press F1 to continue, which is disastrous in a server environment. I have searched all over found that the specific part I need is a Dell FY606 fan. However, I have yet to find a suitable retailer that covers this part. I have contacted Dell and they do not have this part in stock. Are there any alternative models of a fan that I could use in place of an FY606? Seems like a pretty straightforward part, just a fan that connects to a 4-pin power connector on the motherboard.

  Read the article

• Raid 11 : how to stop @ how to release devices

  - by santhosha

  #cat /proc/mdstat md7 : active raid10 sdh1[2] 286743936 blocks 64K chunks 2 near-copies [4/1] [__U_] [0:0:3:0] #mdadm -f /dev/md7 /dev/sdh1 mdadm: set /dev/sdh1 faulty in /dev/md7 #mdadm -r /dev/md7 /dev/sdh1 mdadm: hot remove failed for /dev/sdh1: Device or resource busy # umount /dev/md7 umount: /dev/md7: not mounted #mdadm --stop /dev/md7 mdadm: fail to stop array /dev/md7: Device or resource busy #cat /proc/mdstat md7 : active raid10 sdh1[2] 286743936 blocks 64K chunks 2 near-copies [4/1] [__U_] [0:0:3:0]

  Read the article

• Raid HDD Boot up

  - by user234695

  My server is Power Edge 1950 running server 2008 32Bit, using 3 Physical SAS HDD as a Virtual 2 Disk configured for RAID5, with partition of C drive as OS and D drive as Data. Planning to format and install Server 2008 R2 64Bit so I insert a New Physical disk and configured as RAID5 and clone the C drive and D drive to the new hard disk. Now I need to test that the new hard disk is able to boot windows and work as expected. How do I test, I am not able to boot the windows by choosing the new harddisk, the bios show only the existing HDD, not the new one. Also, if I remove the old three hard disk, and leave the new harddisk and then am I able to boot the device, if I do this does my existing RAID5 configuration and data on the hard disk still remain.

  Read the article

• IBM x260m won't boot from PCI raid card

  - by syrenity

  Hi. We ghosted our old Windows 2003 drive to a new 1TB one, and connected through new PCI SATA card. The server fails to boot with error 1962: Boot sector not found. When we connect the drive directly to motherboard, it boots fine, so the problem is probably in getting BIOS boot from the SATA card. Does anyone know how to do it? Thanks.

  Read the article

• HW RAID 1 different disk sizes?

  - by jacka

  I was told by an HP support guy that I should not replace a failed drive in a mirror with a bigger size drive, since it could crash my array. I am puzzled why is this so and how to hell am I suppose to support this array once the specific hdd model is not available any more?

  Read the article

• Can one build a single disk RAID 1 array?

  - by Core Xii

  I have an Nvidia hardware RAID 1 array and need to reformat. But I don't have any spare storage media, so I need to get along with the 2 disks in the array. I figured I'd do as follows: Delete the array, so I have 2 separate but identical disks, A and B, with my files Put disk B aside Reformat disk A, build RAID 1 array with it, install Windows XP Put disk B back in Boot to Windows on disk A, copy my files from disk B to disk A Add disk B to the RAID 1 array, rebuild array And now I'd have a new RAID 1 array, fresh install and all my files intact (the ones I copied). Here are the parts I'm unsure about: Can I build a RAID 1 array using just one disk, then add the other one later? Can Windows on disk A see disk B and allow me to copy my files over?

  Read the article

• mdadm software RAID doesn't load at boot

  - by martinald

  Hi there, I'm using mdadm to create a raid1 mirror across two disks. I can create my /dev/md5 array perfectly using the tools, but it does not automatically reload my /dev/md5 when I restart, I need to manually recreate the array. Am I missing something obvious here?

  Read the article

• Allignment of ext3 partition on LVM RAID volume group

  - by John P

  I'm trying to add a partition on a LVM that resides on a RAID6 volume group and fdisk is complaining about the partition not residing on a physical sector boundry. My question is, how do you calculate the correct starting sector for a partition on a LVM? This partition will be formated ext3. Would it be better to just format the LVM directly instead of creating a new partition? Disk /dev/dedvol/backup: 2199.0 GB, 2199023255552 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 267349 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 1048576 bytes / 8388608 bytes Disk identifier: 0x4e428f49 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/dedvol/backup1 63 267349 2146982827+ 83 Linux Partition 1 does not start on physical sector boundary. lvdisplay /dev/dedvol/backup --- Logical volume --- LV Name /dev/dedvol/backup VG Name dedvol LV UUID OV2n5j-7LHb-exJL-t8dI-dU8A-2vxf-uIicCt LV Write Access read/write LV Status available # open 0 LV Size 2.00 TiB Current LE 524288 Segments 1 Allocation inherit Read ahead sectors auto - currently set to 32768 Block device 253:1 vgdisplay dedvol --- Volume group --- VG Name dedvol System ID Format lvm2 Metadata Areas 1 Metadata Sequence No 3 VG Access read/write VG Status resizable MAX LV 0 Cur LV 2 Open LV 1 Max PV 0 Cur PV 1 Act PV 1 VG Size 14.55 TiB PE Size 4.00 MiB Total PE 3815448 Alloc PE / Size 3670016 / 14.00 TiB Free PE / Size 145432 / 568.09 GiB VG UUID 8fBcOk-aXGx-P3Qy-VVpJ-0zK1-fQgy-Cb691J

  Read the article

• Sort-of Software Raid-1 on windows?

  - by ricardowong

  I have 2 windows vista computers on a lan, can i set them up with a program so that they replicate the data written in one partition to another and the other way around. basically replicating data across 2 partitions whenever each is modified. Making that data is available on the network when either of the computers are turned on, when both are, data is synchronized. Is this posible?

  Read the article

• MDADM RAID5 array showing as CLEAN FAULTY

  - by Dean Reilly

  A drive dropped out of my raid 5 array yesterday. It looks like the reason was due to a bad controller so I switched it out and attempted to re-add the drive but mdadm claimed it couldn't do it. So I zerod the superblock and just added the drive normally and left it to resync. When I came to check on the array this morning I was unable to mount it at all and it's now showing as CLEAN FAULTY with two drives missing. The two missing drives are listed as spare and faulty spare. Is there anything I can do in this situation or is the array gone?

  Read the article

• Software RAID for several HDs which retains files on each HD

  - by Fuxi

  Is there some kind of software/driver that would enable me to create one big volume out of several hard disks but retain the file structure on each HD? This would be in case where one hard disk crashes and only data on that HD will be lost. Windows 7 enables me to do that but in case one HD breaks all data will be lost.

  Read the article

• What RAID level for a backup server?

  - by ispirto

  I'm building a server with 12 x 3TB disks to use daily backups. I'm thinking to use RAID50 to get a good 27TB usable space. The disks will be used brutally to backup 9 servers with 1.5TB of data once a day. I'll keep the backups for 2 days. So for each server I'll have 3TB of separate partitions. Do you think this kind of huge backups would stress the disks too much and make them fail? Should I better go with RAID10? Oktay

  Read the article

• INtel SSD RAID Trim

  - by Mike Pateras

  I just found this article, that says that Intel now supports Trim for SSD RAIDs. It links to this download page. I'm pretty excited about that, but I'm a little confused. There seem to be two sets of drivers, an executable and something that's bootable. I ran the executable. Is that just to apply the drivers to my system now, and are the bootable drivers so that if I re-format, I won't have to re-run everything? Do I need to do both? And is there a way to check if it worked? I'm running an i7 in Windows 7 (ASUS P6T Deluxe Motherboard), if that's significant.

  Read the article

• Will my RAID0 stay intact when I move it to a new computer?

  - by Jeremy H

  My primary drive is a 250GB WD SATA drive. So, I added 2x 500GB 7,200 RPM WD SATA drives into my Windows Vista box and created a 1TB RAID0. I then formatted the the primary drive and installed Windows 7. To my pleasant surprise when I booted into Windows 7 my RAID0 was still intact and I kept trotting along the same as I did before. Now I am replacing my motherboard, processor, and RAM and plan on formatting the primary 250GB drive again and using it to boot for a new clean install of Windows 7. My question is: if I move these two SATA drives which are setup for RAID0 into the new system, install Windows 7 again, will the RAID0 remain? Edit: Software RAID. I created it within Windows. The RAID0 does NOT contain the system boot partition.

  Read the article

• Is there a difference between RAID 10 (1+0) and RAID 01 (0+1)?

  - by notnot

  I've seen both of these listed, both being striped and mirrored across multiple drives, but is the a difference between them that I'm not picking up on?

  Read the article

• Software raid 0 with six disks performance

  - by user134880

  I have some problems with disk performance. I have 6 x WD 500Gb RE4 disks. Each disk gives 135Mb/sec throughput. All measurements are made with hdparm with options "-tT" (I know that it is just synthetic test, but I need some start point to make measurements). I have controller with Sil3124 x 4 ports PCI Express 1x So... RAID0 on controller with 2 disks gives 200Mb/s - ok, pcie limit. RAID0 on motherboard with 2 disks gives 270Mb/s - niceeee :) RAID0 on contorller with 4 disks gives 200Mb/s - ok, pcie limit. RAID0 on controller with 4 disks + 1 disks on motherboard = 340Mb/s ... :( RAID0 on controller with 4 disks + 2 disks on motherboard = 300Mb/s .... why? Any ideas? Maybe need more cpu power? Now there is Pentium D Dual core 2.8Ghz, 4Gb RAM. It is dedicated box for storage.. no other activity.

  Read the article

• Installing grub2 on ubutntu with software raid mirroring

  - by Marko

  Hi guys, Can someone help me out on this? I accidentally installed grub on usb flash drive during ubuntu server installation. Now I cant boot system without drive attached to server. I want to install grub on hard drive with grub-install but i don't know what to set as location for boot loader? my fstab looks like this: file system mount point type options dump pass proc /proc proc nodev,noexec,nosuid 0 0 /dev/mapper/pdc_jdbeghhjg1 / ext4 errors=remount-ro 0 1 /dev/mapper/pdc_jdbeghhjg5 none swap sw 0 0 and partition tables for hard drives as this: Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 2048 1215662079 607830016 83 Linux /dev/sda2 1215664126 1249998847 17167361 5 Extended /dev/sda5 1215664128 1249998847 17167360 82 Linux swap / Solaris Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 75672 607830016 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 75672 77809 17167361 5 Extended /dev/sdb5 75672 77809 17167360 82 Linux swap / Solaris ?

  Read the article

• Converting ASUS Zenbook from Win8 to Win7.. do i need raid drivers?

  - by BrownChiLD

  I've got an ASUS ZEnBook Prime, ASUS Zenbook UX301LA-XH72T 13.3" Touch Ultrabook and it runs 500GB SDD on RAID 0 configuration. This notebook is running Windows 8, and i desperately need to convert to Windows 7, but maintain RAID 0 configuration. My question is, will i have problems maintaining RAID 0 once converted? I would assume that the RAID 0 configuration is BIOS based and WINDOWS wont even know it, and will only see 1 drive regardless... right? Or will i need to do some weird Windows stuff to maintain RAID 0 config? = which doesn't make sense to me why it would.

  Read the article

• I have a 21TB array but only 16TB is visible from Windows

  - by Relentim

  CONTROLLER Raid Controller: 3Ware 9650SE-24M8 Disks: 21 x 1TB RAID5 Stripe 64KB WINDOWS OS: Windows Server 2003 SP2 32x Disk: Dynamic 19557.44GB Volume: Capacity 15832.19GB I guess my array must have a 4KB block size which is limiting it to 16TB. I think I would have to switch to a 64KB block size to be able to see a maximum of 256TB. Or create another unit on my controller to go above 16TB of storage. Unfortunately I have already added over 16TB, ideally I would like to shrink the array and reclaim the 5 disks that aren't doing anything. I don't think this is possible. More likely, can I change the block size so 20TB becomes visible in windows?

  Read the article

• Installing grub2 on ubuntu with software raid mirroring

  - by Marko

  Can someone help me out on this? I accidentally installed grub on usb flash drive during ubuntu server installation. Now I cant boot system without drive attached to server. I want to install grub on hard drive with grub-install but i don't know what to set as location for boot loader? my fstab looks like this: file system mount point type options dump pass proc /proc proc nodev,noexec,nosuid 0 0 /dev/mapper/pdc_jdbeghhjg1 / ext4 errors=remount-ro 0 1 /dev/mapper/pdc_jdbeghhjg5 none swap sw 0 0 and partition tables for hard drives as this: Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 2048 1215662079 607830016 83 Linux /dev/sda2 1215664126 1249998847 17167361 5 Extended /dev/sda5 1215664128 1249998847 17167360 82 Linux swap / Solaris Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 75672 607830016 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 75672 77809 17167361 5 Extended /dev/sdb5 75672 77809 17167360 82 Linux swap / Solaris ?

  Read the article

• Putting two physical hard drives in a single 2.5" bay?

  - by dgw

  My crazy brain came up with this ridiculous idea. "Why can't I have a single 2.5" drive device that actually contains two independent hard drives? I want RAID 1 data mirroring and the security of having redundant drives. This is a thing that must exist!" To be clear, I am not asking if I can somehow shoehorn two 2.5" drives into a single bay, replace an optical drive with an additional HDD, or anything like that. What I have in mind is a single 2.5"-form-factor device that houses two independent hard drives, with separate housings (likely) and distinct controllers. Probably all they'd need to share is the power & SATA connections. Probably no such thing exists, but because I know there exist hard drives the physical size of a stack of postage stamps (roughly), I have to ask.

  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

• How to remove RAID flag on unstriped drive without losing data?

  - by Alex Folland

  I have a Gigabyte Z68X-UD4-B3 motherboard. It advertises this new thing called "XHD", which is like RAID but makes a SSD and traditional-style drive work together to enable high speed with high capacity. I don't want to use this feature, and I already have Windows 7 64 installed without using this feature. When I first installed my 2 hard drives (1 SSD and 1 traditional-style drive) in my machine and booted it up for the first time, it ran a program from the mobo that asked me if I wanted to set up XHD. Thinking it would go to some config screen, I said yes. It immediately started doing something with my drives and finished. I considered that strange, but figured it wouldn't matter when I simply install Windows onto my SSD only. I now have my BIOS and Windows running in AHCI mode with no RAID arrays and separate drives. My SSD is one of those new Corsair Force GT drives which loses power every so often, causing Windows to BSOD. I've figured everything out about this problem, including installing the latest firmware from Corsair, and the only way to fix it at this point is by installing Intel Rapid Storage Technology to control AHCI instead of Windows, since the Windows AHCI driver disables the drive's power every once in a while and can't be configured not to do so. I've tried installing Intel Rapid Storage Technology. When I reboot my machine after doing so, it BSODs just after the Windows logo. I've figured out this is because my SSD and my traditional drive are flagged as RAID, as seen in the "Intel Matrix Storage Manager" program found by switching the BIOS hard drive handling to "RAID" mode. This is due to the XHD auto-config program I mentioned earlier. Normally, the BIOS is set to AHCI, and when the drives boot in AHCI mode, they work perfectly. So, I've concluded the data is stored in AHCI mode but the drives' flags are set to RAID. I've figured out that I can accomplish my objective by using the "Intel Matrix Storage Manager" program on the mobo (with "Reset disks to non-RAID"), but doing so would cause it to completely wipe the drives I select. I want to simply toggle these flags from RAID to AHCI so Intel Rapid Storage Technology doesn't fail and cause a BSOD upon booting, but without wiping the drives.

  Read the article

• Raid superblock missing on single parition. Recovery needed!

  - by user171639

  Ok so I have a 2 TB raid 1 setup that has three partitions: sdc1: linux sdc2: swap sdc3: LVM for data However the LVM will no longer mount. So I thought that I would take the first drive, mount it in linux (ive done this b4), and reset the spare drive to copy the data. Normally I can mount a single drive for data recovery using: sudo su apt-get install mdadm lvm2 mdadm --assemble --scan modprobe dm-mod vgscan vgchange -ay c mount -o ro /dev/c/c /mnt Unfortunately, vgscan doesnot recognize the data partition. It appears as though the superblock on the first drive's data partition was erased while syncing with the second. So now I cannot mount that partition and the second drive is stuck in spare mode. Any ideas? Or a way to force mount the data partition just to copy the data? knoppix@Microknoppix:~$ sudo su root@Microknoppix:/home/knoppix# apt-get install mdadm lvm2 Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done lvm2 is already the newest version. mdadm is already the newest version. 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 551 not upgraded. root@Microknoppix:/home/knoppix# mdadm --assemble --scan mdadm: /dev/md/1 has been started with 1 drive (out of 2). mdadm: /dev/md/0 has been started with 1 drive (out of 2). root@Microknoppix:/home/knoppix# modprobe dm-mod root@Microknoppix:/home/knoppix# vgscan Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while... No volume groups found root@Microknoppix:/home/knoppix# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] md0 : active raid1 sdc1[2] 4193268 blocks super 1.2 [2/1] [U_] md1 : active raid1 sdc2[2] 524276 blocks super 1.2 [2/1] [U_] unused devices: <none> root@Microknoppix:/home/knoppix# mdadm -v --assemble --auto=yes /dev/md2 /dev/sdc3 mdadm: looking for devices for /dev/md2 mdadm: no recogniseable superblock on /dev/sdc3 mdadm: /dev/sdc3 has no superblock - assembly aborted root@Microknoppix:/home/knoppix# dumpe2fs /dev/md0 | grep -i superblock dumpe2fs 1.42.4 (12-Jun-2012) Primary superblock at 0, Group descriptors at 1-1 Backup superblock at 32768, Group descriptors at 32769-32769 Backup superblock at 98304, Group descriptors at 98305-98305 Backup superblock at 163840, Group descriptors at 163841-163841 Backup superblock at 229376, Group descriptors at 229377-229377 Backup superblock at 294912, Group descriptors at 294913-294913 Backup superblock at 819200, Group descriptors at 819201-819201 Backup superblock at 884736, Group descriptors at 884737-884737 root@Microknoppix:/home/knoppix# Notes: I can read the super block from the spare drive. I was gonna try and restore the superblock from one of the backups, but i dont know how or if this would work. I also heard creating a new array (mdadm --create) using the same parameters will not delete the data on the drive but i didnt want to risk it. Recommendations?

  Read the article

• SAS Expanders vs Direct Attached (SAS)?

  - by jemmille

  I have a storage unit with 2 backplanes. One backplane holds 24 disks, one backplane holds 12 disks. Each backplane is independently connected to a SFF-8087 port (4 channel/12Gbit) to the raid card. Here is where my question really comes in. Can or how easily can a backplane be overloaded? All the disks in the machine are WD RE4 WD1003FBYX (black) drives that have average writes at 115MB/sec and average read of 125 MB/sec I know things would vary based on the raid or filesystem we put on top of that but it seems to be that a 24 disk backplane with only one SFF-8087 connector should be able to overload the bus to a point that might actually slow it down? Based on my math, if I had a RAID0 across all 24 disks and asked for a large file, I should, in theory should get 24*115 MB/sec wich translates to 22.08 GBit/sec of total throughput. Either I'm confused or this backplane is horribly designed, at least in a perfomance environment. I'm looking at switching to a model where each drive has it's own channel from the backplane (and new HBA's or raid card). EDIT: more details We have used both pure linux (centos), open solaris, software raid, hardware raid, EXT3/4, ZFS. Here are some examples using bonnie++ 4 Disk RAID-0, ZFS WRITE CPU RE-WRITE CPU READ CPU RND-SEEKS 194MB/s 19% 92MB/s 11% 200MB/s 8% 310/sec 194MB/s 19% 93MB/s 11% 201MB/s 8% 312/sec --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- 389MB/s 19% 186MB/s 11% 402MB/s 8% 311/sec 8 Disk RAID-0, ZFS WRITE CPU RE-WRITE CPU READ CPU RND-SEEKS 324MB/s 32% 164MB/s 19% 346MB/s 13% 466/sec 324MB/s 32% 164MB/s 19% 348MB/s 14% 465/sec --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- 648MB/s 32% 328MB/s 19% 694MB/s 13% 465/sec 12 Disk RAID-0, ZFS WRITE CPU RE-WRITE CPU READ CPU RND-SEEKS 377MB/s 38% 191MB/s 22% 429MB/s 17% 537/sec 376MB/s 38% 191MB/s 22% 427MB/s 17% 546/sec --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- 753MB/s 38% 382MB/s 22% 857MB/s 17% 541/sec Now 16 Disk RAID-0, it's gets interesting WRITE CPU RE-WRITE CPU READ CPU RND-SEEKS 359MB/s 34% 186MB/s 22% 407MB/s 18% 1397/sec 358MB/s 33% 186MB/s 22% 407MB/s 18% 1340/sec --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- 717MB/s 33% 373MB/s 22% 814MB/s 18% 1368/sec 20 Disk RAID-0, ZFS WRITE CPU RE-WRITE CPU READ CPU RND-SEEKS 371MB/s 37% 188MB/s 22% 450MB/s 19% 775/sec 370MB/s 37% 188MB/s 22% 447MB/s 19% 797/sec --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- 741MB/s 37% 376MB/s 22% 898MB/s 19% 786/sec 24 Disk RAID-1, ZFS WRITE CPU RE-WRITE CPU READ CPU RND-SEEKS 347MB/s 34% 193MB/s 22% 447MB/s 19% 907/sec 347MB/s 34% 192MB/s 23% 446MB/s 19% 933/sec --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- ---- --------- 694MB/s 34% 386MB/s 22% 894MB/s 19% 920/sec 28 Disk RAID-0, ZFS 32 Disk RAID-0, ZFS 36 Disk RAID-0, ZFS More details: Here is the exact unit: http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/4U/847/SC847E1-R1400U.cfm

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >