Search Results

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

Page 22/356 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

  • FreeNAS/ZFS/Raid-Z slightly different disks

    - by muskratt
    I'm considering using FreeNAS and "recycling" some of my older 1TB disks. Two are the exact same model Western Digital while another is Seagate and the fourth is Samsung. Typically, since all disks are not equal, I'll create my arrays on a Windows-based server 1GB undersized to prevent a replacement disk not being large enough. Dell is notorious for sending replacement SATA disks of different brand---knock on wood, no problems yet. Since not all drives are created equally and they can vary a few MBs, is there a way to make the the FreeNas/ZFS/Raid-Z function in the same way I do for my Windows-based servers above? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Software Raid 10 corrupted superblock after dual disk failure, how do I recover it?

    - by Shoshomiga
    I have a software raid 10 with 6 x 2tb hard drives (raid 1 for /boot), ubuntu 10.04 is the os. I had a raid controller failure that put 2 drives out of sync, crashed the system and initially the os didnt boot up and went into initramfs instead, saying that drives were busy but I eventually managed to bring the raid up by stopping and assembling the drives. The os booted up and said that there were filesystem errors, I chose to ignore because it would remount the fs in read-only mode if there was a problem. Everything seemed to be working fine and the 2 drives started to rebuild, I was sure that it was a sata controller failure because I had dma errors in my log files. The os crashed soon after that with ext errors. Now its not bringing up the raid, it says that there is no superblock on /dev/sda2, even if I assemble manually with all the device names. I also did a memtest and changed the motherboard in addition to everything else. EDIT: This is my partition layout Disk /dev/sdb: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders, total 3907029168 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: 0x0009c34a Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 2048 511999 254976 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 512000 3904980991 1952234496 83 Linux /dev/sdb3 3904980992 3907028991 1024000 82 Linux swap / Solaris All 6 disks have the same layout, partition #1 is for raid 1 /boot, partition #2 is for raid 10 far plan, partition #3 is swap, but sda did not have swap enabled EDIT2: This is the output of mdadm --detail /dev/md1 Layout : near=1, far=2 Chunk Size : 64k UUID : a0feff55:2018f8ff:e368bf24:bd0fce41 Events : 0.3112126 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 34 0 spare rebuilding /dev/sdc2 1 0 0 1 removed 2 8 18 2 active sync /dev/sdb2 3 8 50 3 active sync /dev/sdd2 4 0 0 4 removed 5 8 82 5 active sync /dev/sdf2 6 8 66 - spare /dev/sde2 EDIT3: I ran ddrescue and it has copied everything from sda except a single 4096 byte sector that I suspect is the raid superblock EDIT4: Here is some more info too long to fit here lshw: http://pastebin.com/2eKrh7nF mdadm --detail /dev/sd[abcdef]1 (raid1): http://pastebin.com/cgMQWerS mdadm --detail /dev/sd[abcdef]2 (raid10): http://pastebin.com/V5dtcGPF dumpe2fs of /dev/sda2 (from the ddrescue cloned drive): http://pastebin.com/sp0GYcJG I tried to recreate md1 based on this info with the command mdadm --create /dev/md1 -v --assume-clean --level=10 --raid-devices=6 --chunk=64K --layout=f2 /dev/sda2 missing /dev/sdc2 /dev/sdd2 missing /dev/sdf2 But I can't mount it, I also tried to recreate it based on my initial mdadm --detail /dev/md1 but it still doesn't mount It also warns me that /dev/sda2 is an ext2fs file system but I guess its because of ddrescue

    Read the article

  • Is it normal for a SAS drive to have a few bad blocks, or should I replace my drive ASAP?

    - by Nate
    I have a drive—part of a RAID 1 mirror—that has two bad blocks. Adaptec Storage Manger e-mailed me when it detected the blocks. It shows 4 medium errors for that drive, but state is still “optimal”. This is my first time using Adaptec RAID controllers. I don’t know if an occasional bad block is normal, or if I should immediately replace that drive. Update: The drive failed later the same day! The disk subsystem is: Adaptec 6405 with ZMM (2) Seagate near-line SAS drives (ST31000424SS) The other drive hasn’t reported any bad blocks yet. I am running a consistency check.

    Read the article

  • RAID 1 Mirror Error with Two Western Digital 500GB Drives

    - by bm678
    I have Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit installed on a Western Digital 500GB drive (WD5000BEVT-22ZAT0) that was partitioned automatically by Windows as 100MB System Reserved and 465.66GB drive C. There is also an unallocated second Western Digital 500GB drive (WD5000BPVT-22HXZT1) that I want to use for RAID 1 to mirror the first drive but I get an error message stating “ALL DISKS HOLDING EXTENTS FOR A GIVEN VOLUME MUST HAVE THE SAME SECTOR SIZE, AND THE SECTOR SIZE MUST BE VALID.” I uninstalled Windows patch KB-982018 but I still get the same error message. Could you please let me know how to resolve this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Raid system fails to boot after moving from 2.6 kernel to 3.5

    - by user846226
    I'm running Gentoo Linux with a custom compiled kernel and I've just migrated from a 2.6 kernel to a 3.5. As my HD's are on RAID 0 mode I use a custom initrd file in order to be able to boot. While kernel 2.6 is able to boot without problems the new 3.5 compiled kernel fails to boot complaining about no block devices found. After taking a look at initrd.cpio contained scripts I can see the failure message is given by mdadm tool. Does anyone has a clue about that? Edit: this morning i noticed there was some kind of issue on my old initrd which works fine for 2.6 kernels, so created a new initrd which works fine and let me to boot into GNU/Gentoo Linux with same 3.5 bzImage. It could be an issue of mdadm, gonna check it. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=416081

    Read the article

  • Access RAID configuration in x3550M2

    - by Mike B
    I'm trying to configure RAID in a IBM x3550 M2 server. I can't find any messages on boot about any hotkey to access the configuration utility. I wasn't able either in BIOS. The card is a on board LSI 1068e. I can't find the original CD's shipped with the server, but I downloaded Server Guide 9.21 from IBM web. Booted with that, and only getting stuck at "Windows loading"p. Tried with a 8.? version from a x3550 (M1), but it was less useful. Although I do not consider myself an expert, I'm starting to feel like a newbie luser. Any help?

    Read the article

  • Installing raid controller forces reinstall of Windows Server 2008

    - by Tyler
    So, I've tried two different RAID controllers that have external SATA connections on my Server 2008 machine. I can install the hardware, boot into Windows, install the drivers and reboot again. No problems. However, as soon as I try to use eSATA-connected drives and reboot something happens to the Windows install and I can no longer boot into Windows. I tried repairing from the command line, and the end result is that repair console tells me I have 0 Windows installations (?). I end up having no choice but to reinstall Windows to get back on track. I must be doing something fundamentally wrong here, but I don't know what :(

    Read the article

  • Windows XP 32-bit + RocketRaid 622 + 4 x 3TB = not quite a RAID setup

    - by gmoney
    I'm looking to make a 6TB RAID 10 array from my new pile of drives under Windows XP 32-bit, however they are only for auxiliary storage. After adding all the drives to an array, and initializing them XP sees only a fraction of the storage, 2TB. I'm assuming this has to do with MBR vs GPT. Is making a series of 2TB volumes and then spanning my only solution? Most questions online have to do with booting from this setup, but I'm just using them as extra storage. Hardware: 4 x 3TB Hitachi Deskstars + RocketRaid 622 + Sans Digital TR8M TowerRAID. The array is connected via eSATA.

    Read the article

  • What are the recognized ways to increase the size of the RAID array online/offline?

    - by user149509
    Is it possible, in theory, increase the size of the RAID-array of any level just by adding new drive(s)? Variant like "backup whole data - delete old array - add/replace disks - create new array - restore data" is obvious so what are the other options? Does it depend on the RAID-level only or on the implementation of RAID-controller only, or on both? Adding new disks to a striped array necessarily leads to a rebuilding of the array with the redistribution of the strips to the new drives? What steps should be done to increase size of RAID-array in online/offline scenarios? Especially interesting RAID-5 and RAID-10. I would like to see the big picture.

    Read the article

  • NVidia raid 5 array spooling sounds and delay

    - by Chase B. Gale
    I've had a raid 5 array setup with 3 2TB WD Green drives for about 3 years now. Starting last week, when I would access the array for the first time, I hear a loud drive spooling sound and experience a ~5 second delay before being able to access\save files. This behavior happens when I don't use the array for some time (about an hour) and after occurring it doesn't happen again if I continue to access the array. I've run SMART scans on all drives and they come back as being a-ok. What's causing this? Is my array getting close to death?

    Read the article

  • Windows shows incorrect free space on Raid 10 volume

    - by Adenverd
    I have 4 1TB hard drives in RAID 1+0 configuration. Theoretically, I should have ~2TB of available space. Windows says the drive has a total size of 1.81 TB, which I'm fine with. As far as files on the volume go, I used WinDirStat to determine that I have 552.8GB of files on the volume. This means that I should have somewhere around 1.3TB minimum of free space. Yet Windows shows the drive as only having 492GB of free space. Are there hidden files somewhere that I can't see (I have show hidden files/folders turned on)? Does Windows not recognize that old files have been deleted? Is there any way to correct this problem?

    Read the article

  • What server setup for a small web development company? [closed]

    - by Giordano
    I co-own a company with a friend of mine and we have decided to buy a new server to support our business (our current server is an Asus EEE Box, working great but too limited :) ). I should mention that we are web developers but occasionally we do small-office sys admin. Thus, 99% of time we work on GNU/Linux (mainly Ubuntu) but from time to time we need to setup a Windows environment to assist some customers (e.g. setup a temporary SQL Server 2008). Our requirements: Low budget: we don't want the cheapest solution out there but we can't afford to spend too much. Budget could be ~1000-1500€ (before VAT) Robustness: we would like to setup a RAID array and maybe have an external disk where we can store backups Virtualization: we need to be able to setup few servers for development. The scenario is something like this (~8 appliances running in parallel): Redmine + GIT server Bacula server FTP server 3-4 virtual appliances that could be set up on demand to test our applications or support a customer. The appliances could be: LAMP, Tomcat+PostgreSQL, SQL Server Support: if something breaks down it shouldn't be too difficult to find a replacement. Now, given the main requirements, there are some doubts we need to clarify: Do you suggest to buy a prepackaged solution (for example a customized Dell PowerEdge T110 or T310) or to assemble the server by ourselves (buy the separate components)? What RAID configuration do you suggest? I was thinking of RAID1 (probably cheaper) or RAID5. should we buy a hardware RAID controller or is it ok to use a software RAID (mdadm)? In case, which controller do you suggest? What processor do you suggest (Intel Xeon, i3, i5, i7, AMD)? How much RAM? (I was thinking at least 8GB, ~1GB per appliance) What virtualization software do you recommend? VMWare seems to be the best choice, but what about XEN or KVM? We don't want to buy licenses at the moment so we would like to consider only free options. What OS do you recommend? We know Ubuntu, Debian, Gentoo very well (we would like to use Ubuntu Server), however it seems a lot of people goes for CentOS. Thanks in advance if you can help us with this! It's our first "serious" server so many doubts popped up :) Please feel free to add further recommendations if you have some to share ;) Have a nice day

    Read the article

  • LSI RAID monitor reports "Consistency Check inconsistency logging disabled"

    - by carlpett
    I have a server with a LSI MegaRAID 9261-8i controller. Recently I started getting alerts like this one: Controller ID: 1 Consistency Check inconsistency logging disabled, too many inconsistencies on VD: 0 Generated on:Sat May 12 04:06:40 2012 SYSTEM DETAILS--- IP Address: 192.168.1.29 OS Name: Windows 7 x64 OS Version: 6.01 Driver Name: megasas.sys Driver Version: 4.5.1.64 IMAGE DETAILS--- BIOS Version: 2.120.33-1197 Firmware Package Version: 12.12.0-0045 Firmware Version: 3.21.00_4.11.05.00_0x05000000 VD 0 is a RAID mirror containing the system disk. I have searched and read, but cannot find any trace of how to actually do anything about this. I tried running a scandisk but that did not find anything (as I expected, since scandisk reads the disks as exposed by the controller, right?). The MegaRAID Storage Manager does not as far as I can see have any options for checking or fixing physical disks. The program claims the VD is "healty", and both disks have Error count 0. Also a bit strange is the System details in the message... The IP address is associated with the RAS (dial in) interface, and the OS should be Windows Server 2011 SBS. Has anyone else experienced this before? What can be done?

    Read the article

  • Resize a RAID 1 volume on OSX Snow Leopard - how? (Note: software raid)

    - by Emmel
    I've scoured the Internet in search of an answer to this question, and as usual with OSX-related topics, I often don't find any deep-dive technical explanations sufficient enough to feel confident doing dangerous things. Here is my question: I have a Mac Pro, running OSX 10.6.2. I have, as my main root/boot disk, a RAID 1 volume called "Mirror1". Mirror1 is comprised of two 1 TB disks. Mirror1, however, is fixed at 640 GB. That's because, I originally took a 640GB disk, bought a terabyte disk, mirrored it (using diskutil appleraid enable...), when it synced I removed the 640GB and replaced it with a second 1 TB disk, and synced again. Voila! A single 640 GB replaced by two 1 TB disks in a mirror.. Actually, no. There's still something missing from the equation: Mirror1 needs to be expanded from 640GB to 1 TB to match the partition sizes on each of those disks. How do I do this? Perhaps the diskutil output will help: -> diskutil list /dev/disk0 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: GUID_partition_scheme *1.0 TB disk0 1: EFI 209.7 MB disk0s1 2: Apple_RAID 999.9 GB disk0s2 3: Apple_Boot Boot OSX 134.2 MB disk0s3 /dev/disk1 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: GUID_partition_scheme *1.0 TB disk1 1: EFI 209.7 MB disk1s1 2: Apple_RAID 999.9 GB disk1s2 3: Apple_Boot Boot OSX 134.2 MB disk1s3 /dev/disk2 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: GUID_partition_scheme *640.1 GB disk2 1: EFI 209.7 MB disk2s1 2: Apple_HFS Mac Disk 2 536.7 GB disk2s2 3: Microsoft Basic Data BOOTCAMP 103.1 GB disk2s3 /dev/disk3 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: Apple_HFS Mirror1 *639.8 GB disk3 -> diskutil appleraid list AppleRAID sets (1 found) =============================================================================== Name: Macintosh HD Unique ID: 1953F864-B474-4EB6-8E69-41834EBD0247 Type: Mirror Status: Online Size: 639.8 GB (639791038464 Bytes) Rebuild: manual Device Node: disk3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Device Node UUID Status ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 disk1s2 25109BAE-5697-40EA-B612-0217851444F7 Online 1 disk0s2 11B83AB0-8148-4DB6-8761-DEF08C855F8D Online =============================================================================== Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Formula to calculate probability of unrecoverable read error during RAID rebuild

    - by OlafM
    I need to compare the reliability of different RAID systems with either consumer or enterprise drives. The formula to have the probability of success of a rebuild, ignoring mechanical problems, is simple: error_probability = 1 - (1-per_bit_error_rate)^bit_read and with 3 TB drives I get 38% probability to experience an URE (unrecoverable read error) for a 2+1 disks RAID5 (4.7% for enterprise drives) 21% for a RAID1 (2.4% for enterprise drives) 51% probability of error during recovery for the 3+1 RAID5 often used by users of SOHO products like Synologys. Most people don't know about this. Calculating the error for single disk tolerance is easy, my question concerns systems tolerant to multiple disks failures (RAID6/Z2, RAIDZ3 and RAID1 with multiple disks). If only the first disk is used for rebuild and the second one is read again from the beginning in case or an URE, then the error probability is the one calculated above squared (14.5% for consumer RAID5 2+1, 4.5% for consumer RAID1 1+2). However, I suppose (at least in ZFS that has full checksums!) that the second parity/available disk is read only where needed, meaning that only few sectors are needed: how many UREs can possibly happen in the first disk? not many, otherwise the error probability for single-disk tolerance systems would skyrocket even more than I calculated. If I'm correct, a second parity disk would practically lower the risk to extremely low values. Am I correct?

    Read the article

  • How to choose the most optimal RAID settings on PE2950

    - by javano
    I have some Dell PowerEdge 2950's with 4x 15k, 150GB Cheetah SAS drives in them. They are going to be VM hosts, CentOS running ESXi with Windows Server 2k8 guests. Some guests will be hosting IIS servers, and others MSSQL servers. I am trying to set the RAID virtual disks settings and can't decide which is more optimal given this situation; Read Policy: Out of Read-Ahead, No-Read-Ahead and Adaptive Read-Ahead, the default is Read-Ahead. I will be making large sequential writes initially, writing out blank images for virtual machine hard drives (lets say 30GBs from /dev/zero for example) so Read-Ahead seems good at first. But within the virtual machines reads could be random from anywhere within their file systems as they are IIS and MSSQL servers, so perhaps No-Read-Ahead is a better idea? Now I think Adaptive Read-Ahead would be better then as a compromise but I don't know much about this option, how does it compare in performance to the others? Write Policy: write-back caching, write-through caching, the default is write-back caching. The default of write-back caching is safer than write-through caching but at a performance expense. My thinking here is that in the event of power loss for example, it seems more likely in my head (this is why I need some clarification!) that damage will occur to a guest VM with write-back caching enabled, so I should favour write-through? I have searched around and there is obviously no definitive answer, so I would like to find out what is best for my situation.

    Read the article

  • Resize a RAID 1 volume on OS X Snow Leopard - how? (Note: software raid)

    - by Emmel
    I've scoured the Internet in search of an answer to this question, and as usual with OSX-related topics, I often don't find any deep-dive technical explanations sufficient enough to feel confident doing dangerous things. Here is my question: I have a Mac Pro, running OS X 10.6.2. I have, as my main root/boot disk, a RAID 1 volume called "Mirror1". Mirror1 is comprised of two 1 TB disks. Mirror1, however, is fixed at 640 GB. That's because, I originally took a 640GB disk, bought a terabyte disk, mirrored it (using diskutil appleraid enable), when it synced I removed the 640GB and replaced it with a second 1 TB disk, and synced again. Voila! A single 640 GB replaced by two 1 TB disks in a mirror.. Actually, no. There's still something missing from the equation: Mirror1 needs to be expanded from 640GB to 1 TB to match the partition sizes on each of those disks. How do I do this? Perhaps the diskutil output will help: -> diskutil list /dev/disk0 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: GUID_partition_scheme *1.0 TB disk0 1: EFI 209.7 MB disk0s1 2: Apple_RAID 999.9 GB disk0s2 3: Apple_Boot Boot OSX 134.2 MB disk0s3 /dev/disk1 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: GUID_partition_scheme *1.0 TB disk1 1: EFI 209.7 MB disk1s1 2: Apple_RAID 999.9 GB disk1s2 3: Apple_Boot Boot OSX 134.2 MB disk1s3 /dev/disk2 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: GUID_partition_scheme *640.1 GB disk2 1: EFI 209.7 MB disk2s1 2: Apple_HFS Mac Disk 2 536.7 GB disk2s2 3: Microsoft Basic Data BOOTCAMP 103.1 GB disk2s3 /dev/disk3 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: Apple_HFS Mirror1 *639.8 GB disk3 -> diskutil appleraid list AppleRAID sets (1 found) =============================================================================== Name: Macintosh HD Unique ID: 1953F864-B474-4EB6-8E69-41834EBD0247 Type: Mirror Status: Online Size: 639.8 GB (639791038464 Bytes) Rebuild: manual Device Node: disk3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Device Node UUID Status ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 disk1s2 25109BAE-5697-40EA-B612-0217851444F7 Online 1 disk0s2 11B83AB0-8148-4DB6-8761-DEF08C855F8D Online =============================================================================== Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Create a partition table on a hardware RAID1 drive with [c]fdisk

    - by Lev Levitsky
    My question is, is there a reason for this not to work? Details: I have two 500 Gb drives, and my motherboard RAID support, so I created a RAID1 array and booted from a Linux live medium. I then listed the disks and, apart from the obvious /dev/sda, /dev/sdb, etc. there was /dev/md126 which, I figured, was the mirrored "virtual" drive. Its size was 475 Gb; I had seen that the size of the array would be smaller than 500 Gb when I was creating it, so no surprise there. I did cfdisk /dev/md126, created the necessary partitions and chose write. It's been about half an hour now, I think. It doesn't seem like it's ever going to finish. The only thing about cfdisk in dmesg is that it's "blocked for more than 120 seconds". Doing fdisk -l /dev/md126 in another terminal I see all three partitions I created and a note that "Partition 1 does not start on a physical sector boundary". The table is lost after reboot, though. I tried to partition /dev/sda individually, and it worked, the table was written in about a second. The "not on a physical sector boundary" message is there, too. EDIT: I tried fdisk on /dev/sda, then there were no messages about sector boundaries. After a reboot, I am able to use mkfs on /dev/dm126p1, etc. fdisk shows that /dev/md126 has the same partitions as /dev/sda (but /dev/sdb doesn't have any). But at some point ("writing superblock and filesystem accounting information") mkfs is also blocked. Using it on sda1 results in a "partition is used by the system" error. What can be the problem? EDIT 2: I booted a freshly updated system from a pendrive and was able to create partition table and filesystems on /dev/md126 without any apparent problems. Was it an issue with the support of the hardware? My MB is Asus P9X79.

    Read the article

  • effective back-up using Raid / Win7 back-up

    - by Job
    I have a stand-alone pc system with two 2 tb harddiscs, one of which configured as Raid1, i.e. mirorring. The operational drive is partitioned. I use an external 1 tb harddisc for back-up using Windows 7 back-up facility which will be swapped weekly and stored on other premises. I back-up all partitions AND allow a system back-up. All application software is on the C: partition. Questions: How can I see whether Raid1 is working; i.e. is doing its job. All I see now is a status message in the start-up procedure that says its status is normal. How can I see used or available space on Raid 1? The Win-7 backup allows for 1 schedule only as far as I can see. I want daily back-ups of data. However due to the single schedule I am forced to do the time-consuming system back-up and c: back-up as well. Is there a way to activate two schedules allowing a frequent (daily) data back-up and a system back-up with c: drive back-up on a say weekly basis? Of course it can be forced by hand but I am likely to forget that. I am not the programming type of person so looking for simple and controllable solutions. Thank you - any help is apreciated.

    Read the article

  • mkfs Operation Takes Very Long on Linux Software Raid 5

    - by Elmar Weber
    I've set-up a Linux software raid level 5 consisting of 4 * 2 TB disks. The disk array was created with a 64k stripe size and no other configuration parameters. After the initial rebuild I tried to create a filesystem and this step takes very long (about half an hour or more). I tried to create an xfs and ext3 filesystem, both took a long time, with mkfs.ext3 I observed the following behaviour, which might be helpful: writing inode tables runs fast until it reaches 1053 (~ 1 second), then it writes about 50, waits for two seconds, then the next 50 are written (according to the console display) when I try to cancel the operation with Control+C it hangs for half a minute before it is really canceled The performance of the disks individually is very good, I've run bonnie++ on each one separately with write / read values of around 95 / 110MB/s. Even when I run bonnie++ on every drive in parallel the values are only reduced by about 10 MB. So I'm excluding hardware / I/O scheduling in general as a problem source. I tried different configuration parameters for stripe_cache_size and readahead size without success, but I don't think they are that relevant for the file system creation operation. The server details: Linux server 2.6.35-27-generic #48-Ubuntu SMP x86_64 GNU/Linux mdadm - v2.6.7.1 Does anyone has a suggestion on how to further debug this?

    Read the article

  • Resize a RAID 1 volume on OSX Snow Leopard - how? (Note: software raid)

    - by Emmel
    I've scoured the Internet in search of an answer to this question, and as usual with OSX-related topics, I often don't find any deep-dive technical explanations sufficient enough to feel confident doing dangerous things. Here is my question: I have a Mac Pro, running OSX 10.6.2. I have, as my main root/boot disk, a RAID 1 volume called "Mirror1". Mirror1 is comprised of two 1 TB disks. Mirror1, however, is fixed at 640 GB. That's because, I originally took a 640GB disk, bought a terabyte disk, mirrored it (using diskutil appleraid enable...), when it synced I removed the 640GB and replaced it with a second 1 TB disk, and synced again. Voila! A single 640 GB replaced by two 1 TB disks in a mirror.. Actually, no. There's still something missing from the equation: Mirror1 needs to be expanded from 640GB to 1 TB to match the partition sizes on each of those disks. How do I do this? Perhaps the diskutil output will help: -> diskutil list /dev/disk0 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: GUID_partition_scheme *1.0 TB disk0 1: EFI 209.7 MB disk0s1 2: Apple_RAID 999.9 GB disk0s2 3: Apple_Boot Boot OSX 134.2 MB disk0s3 /dev/disk1 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: GUID_partition_scheme *1.0 TB disk1 1: EFI 209.7 MB disk1s1 2: Apple_RAID 999.9 GB disk1s2 3: Apple_Boot Boot OSX 134.2 MB disk1s3 /dev/disk2 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: GUID_partition_scheme *640.1 GB disk2 1: EFI 209.7 MB disk2s1 2: Apple_HFS Mac Disk 2 536.7 GB disk2s2 3: Microsoft Basic Data BOOTCAMP 103.1 GB disk2s3 /dev/disk3 #: TYPE NAME SIZE IDENTIFIER 0: Apple_HFS Mirror1 *639.8 GB disk3 -> diskutil appleraid list AppleRAID sets (1 found) =============================================================================== Name: Macintosh HD Unique ID: 1953F864-B474-4EB6-8E69-41834EBD0247 Type: Mirror Status: Online Size: 639.8 GB (639791038464 Bytes) Rebuild: manual Device Node: disk3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Device Node UUID Status ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 disk1s2 25109BAE-5697-40EA-B612-0217851444F7 Online 1 disk0s2 11B83AB0-8148-4DB6-8761-DEF08C855F8D Online =============================================================================== Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Monitoring HP and Dell hardware in Gentoo.

    - by ewwhite
    I'm working in an environment that features a large number of Gentoo servers running on HP ProLiant and Dell PowerEdge equipment. While I've moved some of these systems to RedHat or CentOS for consistency, I'm still left with a good number of systems that will remain Gentoo. One of the issues I see with the Gentoo arrangement is lack of vendor-supported hardware monitoring. There doesn't seem to be an equivalent to the HP ProLiant Support Pack or Dell's agents for Gentoo. Is this simply something that you give up when using this distribution? How do you monitor hardware health and the like with Gentoo systems?

    Read the article

  • A website to compare software/hardware/electronics?

    - by liori
    Hello, When choosing software or hardware I often Wikipedia's comparision pages like the page on Comparison of project management software. However, criteria on including items on such lists are sometimes unclear (f.e. project has to be "notable", has to have a Wikipedia page), and the number of compared features are limited. Also, Wikipedia's software doesn't make it easy to edit such lists. I am looking for an external webapp/website that would do the task of comparing different solutions in the world of software, hardware, maybe even electronics, in this kind of social way. Is there any kind of such service? It should allow users to add new entries, add new features to compare and discuss items in a collaborative way. It should be also easy to browse already entered items, filter by features. (this might be a good idea for a startup ;-))

    Read the article

  • Enable Hardware Virtualization on HP CompaqDX2420?

    - by 7alwagy
    Hey Guys, After installing vmware7, I tried to run a virtual machine with Mac OSX installed. When I tried to run this virtual machine I got an error message saying: Mac OS X is not supported with software virtualization. To run Mac OS X you need a host on which VMware Workstation supports hardware virtualization. I'v googled and found out that my processor (Intel Core 2 Duo E7500 Processor (2.93 GHz, 3 MB L2 cache, 1066 Mhz FSB)supports Hardware virtualization. Does anyone know how to enable this in order to get this virtual machine running?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >