Search Results

Search found 16940 results on 678 pages for 'disk drive'.

Page 224/678 | < Previous Page | 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231  | Next Page >

  • Ubuntu 12.4 not listed while in boot menu

    - by radkrish
    I am using Dell Inspiron 17R with Windows7 as the primary OS to boot my system up. I am new to Linux and to begin with, I thought of installing Ubuntu 12.4 AMD 64 bit version on my laptop. Today I performed a successful installation on my laptop but when I reboot, it doesn't show me the Ubuntu OS in the list (I can only see Windows7). Is there any way to bring up the Ubuntu entry into this list? While installing I selected the option to have both Windows7 and Ubuntu OS on my laptop. The root drive for both OS is C: drive. Hence I split the drive into two (250 GB for Windows7 and 250 GB for Ubuntu). Now I can only see 250GB in my C:\ drive for Windows7. Is the remaining 250GB assigned to Ubuntu or did I lose that 250GB space?? Your answers will be highly appreciated..

    Read the article

  • No Windows Option on Boot

    - by Okoning
    I've installed Ubuntu alongside Windows but at first didn't have a boot option menu. So, I installed bootrepair and ran it. This succeeded in granting me a GRUB boot option menu, but Windows isn't on it. Here is the bootrepair report: http://paste.ubuntu.com/8098527 Can anyone tell me what might be wrong? EDIT: I ran sudo fdisk -l and this is the output: Disk /dev/sda: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders, total 976773168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00023fe0 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 2048 960096255 480047104 83 Linux /dev/sda2 960098302 976771071 8336385 5 Extended /dev/sda5 960098304 976771071 8336384 82 Linux swap / Solaris Disk /dev/sdb: 32.0 GB, 32015679488 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 3892 cylinders, total 62530624 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 32 62530623 31265296 c W95 FAT32 (LBA)

    Read the article

  • Few questions about backing up the OS

    - by user23950
    I'm running windows 7 with 2gb memory and 2.50 Ghz dual core cpu. here are my question regarding backing up an entire drive. I plan to use Macrium Reflect because its free. And I can't afford to buy one. If I backup a hard drive would I only be able to backup the partition where the operating system is? If I have installed applications which requires activation keys, and I have already installed an activation key. Does backing the hard drive also backup those application, so that I won't have to re-apply the keys later? If I have a multi-boot system, would the backup also include those other OS that are installed in my hard drive? Can I still boot into them after restoring the image? Do you have any links there that could enlighten me on what drive backup really is. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Grub not loading after Windows 8 Install

    - by RazorXsr
    My system was configured to dual boot Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS and Windows 7. Today I got my hands on the MSDN release of Windows 8 and I installed it over my Windows 7. Now the computer just boots to Windows 8 directly without loading the GRUB screen. So I followed the steps as suggested in: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RecoveringUbuntuAfterInstallingWindows. Running this command: ls -l /dev/disk/by-label/ gives the following output: total 0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Sep 11 07:51 Entertainment -> ../../sda2 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Sep 11 02:45 PENDRIVE -> ../../sdb1 Also fdisk -l command gives this as the output: Disk /dev/sda: 320.1 GB, 320072933376 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 38913 cylinders, total 625142448 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x1246aa23 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 2048 319582199 159790076 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda2 319582208 602906623 141662208 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda3 602908672 625135615 11113472 83 Linux Disk /dev/sdb: 1939 MB, 1939865600 bytes 64 heads, 63 sectors/track, 939 cylinders, total 3788800 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0xc3072e18 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 2248 3788799 1893276 c W95 FAT32 (LBA) So I assume that I have to run this: sudo grub-install /dev/sda3 to get GRUB up and running. But I am getting this error: /usr/sbin/grub-probe: error: cannot find a device for /boot/grub (is /dev mounted?). Can anyone please guide me in the right direction? The current Ubuntu installation is far too customized to my needs to lose it to a boot manager issue! Any help is much appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Stop Windows boot

    - by Parley Applegate
    Installed Ubuntu over a Windows8 trial. After installation, Windows8 still tries to boot. Wiped disk clean with Acronis and reinstall Ubuntu. Windows8 still tries to start, but goes to blank screen. Ubuntu never tries to boot. Naturally live mode works fine. What do you think of wiping disk again, install Windows7 and try using GRUB approach or do you know how to remove Windows from the cleaned disk?

    Read the article

  • ???????/?????!?????????????????

    - by user788995
    ????? ??:2012/01/23 ??:??????/?? ??????????????????????????????????Disk I/O???????????????????Disk I/O???????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????? / ?????????????????Appendix ????????? ????????????????? http://otndnld.oracle.co.jp/ondemand/otn-seminar/movie/120106_D-12_Disk_1.wmv http://otndnld.oracle.co.jp/ondemand/otn-seminar/movie/mp4/120106_D-12_Disk_1.mp4 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/jp/ondemand/db-technique/d-12-disk-1484778-ja.pdf

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting failover cluster problem in W2K8 / SQL05

    - by paulland
    I have an active/passive W2K8 (64) cluster pair, running SQL05 Standard. Shared storage is on a HP EVA SAN (FC). I recently expanded the filesystem on the active node for a database, adding a drive designation. The shared storage drives are designated as F:, I:, J:, L: and X:, with SQL filesystems on the first 4 and X: used for a backup destination. Last night, as part of a validation process (the passive node had been offline for maintenance), I moved the SQL instance to the other cluster node. The database in question immediately moved to Suspect status. Review of the system logs showed that the database would not load because the file "K:\SQLDATA\whatever.ndf" could not be found. (Note that we do not have a K: drive designation.) A review of the J: storage drive showed zero contents -- nothing -- this is where "whatever.ndf" should have been. Hmm, I thought. Problem with the server. I'll just move SQL back to the other server and figure out what's wrong.. Still no database. Suspect. Uh-oh. "Whatever.ndf" had gone into the bit bucket. I finally decided to just restore from the backup (which had been taken immediately before the validation test), so nothing was lost but a few hours of sleep. The question: (1) Why did the passive node think the whatever.ndf files were supposed to go to drive "K:", when this drive didn't exist as a resource on the active node? (2) How can I get the cluster nodes "re-syncd" so that failover can be accomplished? I don't know that there wasn't a "K:" drive as a cluster resource at some time in the past, but I do know that this drive did not exist on the original cluster at the time of resource move.

    Read the article

  • PostgreSQL, Foreign Keys, Insert speed & Django

    - by Miles
    A few days ago, I ran into an unexpected performance problem with a pretty standard Django setup. For an upcoming feature, we have to regenerate a table hourly, containing about 100k rows of data, 9M on the disk, 10M indexes according to pgAdmin. The problem is that inserting them by whatever method literally takes ages, up to 3 minutes of 100% disk busy time. That's not something you want on a production site. It doesn't matter if the inserts were in a transaction, issued via plain insert, multi-row insert, COPY FROM or even INSERT INTO t1 SELECT * FROM t2. After noticing this isn't Django's fault, I followed a trial and error route, and hey, the problem disappeared after dropping all foreign keys! Instead of 3 minutes, the INSERT INTO SELECT FROM took less than a second to execute, which isn't too surprising for a table <= 20M on the disk. What is weird is that PostgreSQL manages to slow down inserts by 180x just by using 3 foreign keys. Oh, disk activity was pure writing, as everything is cached in RAM; only writes go to the disks. It looks like PostgreSQL is working very hard to touch every row in the referred tables, as 3MB/sec * 180s is way more data than the 20MB this new table takes on disk. No WAL for the 180s case, I was testing in psql directly, in Django, add ~50% overhead for WAL logging. Tried @commit_on_success, same slowness, I had even implemented multi row insert and COPY FROM with psycopg2. That's another weird thing, how can 10M worth of inserts generate 10x 16M log segments? Table layout: id serial primary, a bunch of int32, 3 foreign keys to small table, 198 rows, 16k on disk large table, 1.2M rows, 59 data + 89 index MB on disk large table, 2.2M rows, 198 + 210MB So, am I doomed to either drop the foreign keys manually or use the table in a very un-Django way by defining saving bla_id x3 and skip using models.ForeignKey? I'd love to hear about some magical antidote / pg setting to fix this.

    Read the article

  • Very weird C file-handling anomaly

    - by KáGé
    Hello, I got a very weird issue that I cant figure out in my school project, which is the simulation of a simple filesystem in a human-readable textfile. Unfortunately I don't yet have enough time to translate the comments in my code or make it less gibberish, so if you are bothered by that, you don't have to help, I understand. See the code HERE. Now in drive.h, at line 574 is this part: i = getline(); #ifdef DEBUG printf("Free space in all found at %d.\n\n", i); if(drive.disk != NULL){ printf("Disk OK\n\n"); } #endif //write in data state = seekline(i); Before this it finds place for the allocation database entry in the ALL sector (see the "image files" in the mounts folder, this issue was tested on mount_30.efs-dbf), then gets the line with i = getline() fine (getline is in lglobal.h, line 39), but after that any file manipulation (in this case seekline's fseek, but if I comment that out, then the first fprintf after that) crashes the program straight away. I think the file gets somehow corrupted (though the Disk OK message appears) but can't figure out how. I've tried putting i = getline(); into comment, but it didn't make any difference. I've also tried asking at local programming forums but they didn't really help either. The last few lines of the output before it crashes: Dir written. (drive.h line 562) Seekline entered: 268 (called at drive.h line 564) Getline entered. (called at drive.h line 574) Line got: 268. Free space in all found at 268. (drive.h line 576) Seekline entered: 268 (called at drive.h line 582, note that this exact call was run successfully less than 20 lines back. This one should set the pointer to the beginning of the line it is currently in) After this it crashes. Does anyone has any idea of what causes this and how could I fix it? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • It is said that Mercurial's "hg clone" is very cheap... but it is 400MB on my hard drive? (on Mac OS

    - by Jian Lin
    I have a project I cloned over the network to the Mac hard drive (OS X Snow Leopard). The project is about 1GB in the hard drive du -s 2073848 . so when I hg clone proj proj2 then when I MacBook-Pro ~/development $ du -s proj 2073848 proj MacBook-Pro ~/development $ du -s proj2 894840 proj2 MacBook-Pro ~/development $ du -s 2397928 . so the clone seems not so cheap... probably around 400MB... is that so? also, the whole folder grew by about 200MB, which is not the total of proj and proj2 by the way... are there some links and some are not links, that's why the overlapping is not counted twice?

    Read the article

  • Rebuilding array on 3ware 9690SA-8I

    - by Tim Jones
    I have a RAID10 (8x1TB) array on a 3ware 9690 card running on an Ubuntu 1110 server. There was a kernel update so I scheduled a reboot after which the array was inaccessible. I checked the status a drive has died in the array, but the controller has thrown the entire array into an 'inoperable' state instead of simply degraded (what's the point of the RAID now ;-). After taking out the 'dead' drive I run a quick test to find it completely functional without a bad sector to be found. I try to put the drive back in but the array still marks the disk as degraded (remembering serial number or something??) and the entire array as inoperable... So I swap it out for a known working drive (not the same capacity but higher - should still work) and initiate a rebuild with the the new drive as a replacement. This fails instantly with the error "(0x0B:0x0033): Unit busy : Failed to start Rebuild on Unit 0". The unit shouldn't be busy as it is not mounted (the card itself is listed with lshw but the array it provides is not). I'm pretty much at an impasse now, I don't understand how I can have a single drive failure on a RAID10 that makes the entire array inaccessible, degraded I could understand but inaccessible?? I don't think the controller as prior to the reboot it was completely functional.

    Read the article

  • Desktop SATA drives in SATA <-> FC array

    - by chris
    Let's assume you've got a box like one of these with space for 24 SATA disks. What are the best bits of advice for deploying this? For instance, should you be greedy and go for the 1.5 or 2tb disks or are they just not reliable enough to be used in an array like this and you should stick with 640gb or 750gb disks instead? Also, I know that FC (or generically, "enterprise class") disks have a different error recovery strategy than desktop disks. An enterprise disk will fail a read quickly and report to the controller that it wasn't able to read that block, and the RAID controller will quickly regenerate the info from the parity disk and mark the block as bad. A desktop disk, on the other hand, will try and try and try again to get the data, and in pathological cases this may cause a raid controller to fail the whole disk because the read operation times out. So there are a couple aspects to this question: What's the best sort of disk to get today? (ie specific disks on the market in Feb 2010) Generically, what should someone look for when trying to buy something like this that kinda walks the line between enterprise and consumer? Lastly -- is there anything that can be done with current "consumer" disks to make them more suitable for array use? IE can you use a SMART configuration to change the error recovery strategy used by the disk? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Problem booting virtual machine after converting VMDK to VHD

    - by vg1890
    I used the VMWare VCenter Converter Standalone Client to convert a physical drive on my old PC to a virtual drive. The conversion worked fine and I ended up with a valid VMDK file. Next, I wanted to convert the VMDK to a VHD for use with Microsoft Virtual PC, since that's what I use on my new box. I used WinImage for the conversion and that worked fine, too. I can access the files from the virtual drive through WinImage. However, when I create a new virtual machine using Virtual PC and add the existing VHD file, the machine doesn't boot. The initial boot screen flashes with the amount of RAM and then the screen goes black. If I turn off the VM and reboot in safe mode I can see the drivers being loaded until eventually it gets to crcdisk.sys and hangs indefinitely. Any ideas how to fix this? I'm not opposed to starting over from scratch if there's another method to turn my physical machine into a Virtual PC VM. Thanks! EDIT - I should add that the virtual drive is a system boot drive and not a secondary drive. EDIT - I tried booting from the install CD and doing a repair. The result was that the system could not be repaired due to a "driver error."

    Read the article

  • restoring a failed SBS 2000 box...

    - by Brad Pears
    Hi there, I read a post where you had mentioned you have had a PERC card blow up on you in an SBS box... I've got a similar situation where one of my RAID drives failed and then the power supply failed before I could replace the drive... I then replaced the power supply and the failed drive and reconfigured the RAID array. I had a recent full backup of the my Win2k SBS's C: drive stored on my SYmantec backup exec server so I installed win2K server on the c: partition and then once I had that up and running, installed the backup exec agent so as to do a restore of the entire c drive including system state. THis all worked just fine, until I had to reboot. I received an "incorrect drive configuration" error and then it hangs. I figure that likely makes sense becasue I think my RAID array is configured slightly different now in that the partitions may be sizeded ever so slightly differently now than they were before I think... Is there a way I can just restore from my backup BUT maybe exclude some of the registry and hidden boot files it wants to restore so that it is booting with the current configuration now active on that machine - not the pre blow up configuration files? I also read a post that indicated you might have to install the exact same service pack etc... etc.. before attemting a restore but that does not make sense to me being as the entire c drive contents are going to be overwritten by the restore anyway? THe basic OS install is just to be able to get the backup exec agent installed . I can;t understand why one would need to install the exact same SP level. CAn you shed some light on what I might be able to do to get this thing up and running? Thanks,Brad

    Read the article

  • How can I get my SATA DVDs working again?

    - by user269051
    My hard drive crashed (WinXPpro), so I took a C drive from a broken PC. The new C drive is Win7pro. Motherboard is MSI K8N Neo4 Platinum, with 4 hard drives installed on SATA 1-4 (nForce4 Ultra); the two DVD drives are loaded on SATA 7-8 (Silicon Image SATARAID5). I've tweaked BIOS settings every which way. The closest thing to success was when each DVD had both a CD and a DVD icon, and blinked green. No CD or DVD could be read in either drive. I assume that the problem resulted from the fact that my new C drive does not have the RAID drivers? I've tried loading from the floppy (doesn't work). I can't boot off the DVD/CD, and switching the DVD's SATA cable to the SATA 3 slot (and pulling one of the hard discs) didn't work. I'd like to be able to use the other two available SATA slots for a mirrored RAID drive, and get my DVDs working again. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • sg_map & lsscsi showing old storage version

    - by PratapSingh
    I am using SUN storage and recently upgraded/refreshed my ISCSI LUN storage. We have replicated old storage to new storage and attached to our servers. I can see at SUN storage side that storage is attached to server and also from server when I run the below command it prints the following output : iscsiadm -m session tcp: [1] 10.1.1.10:3260,2 iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd The above storage is SUN STORAGE 7420 But when I run sg_map or lsscsi command it prints different version: lsscsi disk SUN Sun Storage 7410 1.0 /dev/sda disk SUN Sun Storage 7410 1.0 /dev/sdb disk SUN Sun Storage 7410 1.0 /dev/sdc disk SUN Sun Storage 7410 1.0 /dev/sdd Output of ls on "/dev/disk/by-path/" ls -1 /dev/disk/by-path/ ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-0 ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-0-part1 ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-18 ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-18-part1 ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-2 ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-2-part1 ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-4 ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-4-part1 ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-6 ip-10.1.1.10:3260-iscsi-iqn.86-03.com.sun:02:afsfsf58-c56a-6ba8-a944-addd258687cd-lun-6-part1 I have rebooted server twice but still I am getting the same output as given above.

    Read the article

  • Why are SMART error rates going down?

    - by Jeff Shattock
    I have a hard drive that's part of a Linux software raid5 array. SMART has reported that its multi_zone_error_rate was 0, then 1, then 3. So I figured I better start backing up more frequently and prepare to replace the drive. Now, today, the multi_zone_error_rate of that very same drive is back down to 1. It seems that 2 errors unhappened while I wasn't looking. I've also seen simliar behaviour by inspecting the syslog on the server. Jun 7 21:01:17 FS1 smartd[25593]: Device: /dev/sdc, SMART Usage Attribute: 7 Seek_Error_Rate changed from 200 to 100 Jun 7 21:01:17 FS1 smartd[25593]: Device: /dev/sde, SMART Usage Attribute: 7 Seek_Error_Rate changed from 200 to 100 Jun 7 21:01:18 FS1 smartd[25593]: Device: /dev/sdg, SMART Usage Attribute: 7 Seek_Error_Rate changed from 200 to 100 Jun 8 02:31:18 FS1 smartd[25593]: Device: /dev/sdg, SMART Usage Attribute: 7 Seek_Error_Rate changed from 100 to 200 Jun 8 03:01:17 FS1 smartd[25593]: Device: /dev/sdc, SMART Usage Attribute: 7 Seek_Error_Rate changed from 100 to 200 Jun 8 03:01:17 FS1 smartd[25593]: Device: /dev/sde, SMART Usage Attribute: 7 Seek_Error_Rate changed from 100 to 200 These are raw values, not the human-useful values that smartctl -a produces, but the behaviour is similar: error rates changing, then undoing the change. None of these are the drive that had the multi_zone weirdness. I haven't seen any problems from the RAID; its most recent scrub ( < 24 hours ago) came back totally clean. The only thing I can think of is that the SMART reporting circuitry on the drive isn't working properly all the time. The cables are in tight on the drive and board. What's going on here?

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu 13.04 to 13.10: Filesystem check or mount failed [migrated]

    - by SamHuckaby
    I attempted to upgrade from Ubuntu 13.04 to 13.10 today, and mid upgrade the system started flaking out, and eventually locked up entirely. I was forced to restart the computer, and am now unable to get the computer to boot up at all. When I boot currently, it takes me to the GRUB menu, and I can choose to boot normally, or boot in an older version. I have tried several things, which I list below, but no matter what, when I try to finish booting into Ubuntu, I receive the following error: Filesystem check or mount failed. A maintenance shell will now be started. CONTROL-D will terminate this shell and continue booting after re-trying filesystems. Any further errors will be ignored root@ubuntu-computername:~# I have fun fsck -f and everything appears correct, no errors are reported. and it passes all 5 checks. If I run fdisk -l then I get the following information: Disk /dev/sda: 320.1 GB, 320072933376 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 38913 cylinders, total 625142448 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00010824 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 2048 608456703 304227328 83 Linux /dev/sda2 608458750 625141759 8341505 5 Extended Partition 2 does not start on physical sector boundary. /dev/sda5 608458752 625141759 8341504 82 Linux swap / Solaris Disk /dev/sdb: 320.1 GB, 320072933376 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 38913 cylinders, total 625142448 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: 0x0fb4b7e8 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 8192 625139711 312565760 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT I am considering just installing a new OS on the other disk, that currently has nothing on it, and then just attempting to scrape my data off the old disk (thankfully I didn't encrypt the files). Really my question is this: Can I salvage this Ubuntu install, or should I give up and just reinstall?

    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

  • Best way to attach 96 tb to workstation

    - by user994179
    I'm running a workstation with dual xeon 5690's (12 physical/24 logical cores), 192 gb of ram (ie, maxed-out), Windows 7 64bit, 5 slots for adapter cards, and 1 tb of internal storage, with 5 more internal bays available. I have an app that creates data files totaling about 88 tbs. These are written once every 14 months, and the rest of the time the app only needs to read them; and 95% of the reads are sequential reads of huge chunks of data. I have some control over how big the individual files are, but ideally they would be between 5 and 8 tbs. The app will be reading from only one drive at a time, and the nature of the data is such that if (when) a drive dies I can restore the data to a new disk from tape. While it would be nice to be able to use the fastest drive/controllers available, at this point size matters more than speed. After doing lots of reading, I am leaning toward buying a bunch of cheap 2tb drives and putting them into a bunch of cheap enclosures. All this stuff is going into my home office, so I need to avoid the raised floor/refrigerated approach. My questions: Is the cheap drive/enclosure solution the best one for this situation? Given the nature of the app and the way the data is used, does RAID make sense? If so, which one? For huge sequential reads, would Usb 3.0 and eSata be a wash performance-wise? For each slot available on the workstation, can I hook up an enclosure that can hold multiple drives? Or is it one controller per drive? If I can have multiple drives on one controller, am I essentially splitting the bandwidth (throughput)? For example, if I have a 12 bay enclosure, is the throughput of the controller reduced by a factor of 12? Are there any Windows 7 volume/drive/capacity limits I should be aware of? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How do I fix a super slow MacBook?

    - by MakingScienceFictionFact
    I'm running a black MacBook 4.1. Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB hard disk drive, bus speed is 800 MHz. It's about three years old in excellent shape externally. I treat this thing like a baby. It used to run awesome, but now it's super slow at everything. I get the spinning pizza of death constantly. It takes a long time to boot up or load any program, even Safari and iTunes. iPhoto is terribly slow. The Internet doesn't work properly and it reminds me of a buggy PC. I've formatted it and re-installed Mac OS X 10.6 (with all updates), and I've done the disk repairs process. As an iOS developer this is driving me crazy, but luckily I have an iMac to work on in the day which is fast. I'm ready to format it again, but that didn't work last time. After the last format, I copied back files from an external drive so maybe the offending files were hidden in there somewhere. Here are the hard disk drive and RAM specifications. It is upgrade-able to 4 GB of RAM. Hard disk drive: The Fujitsu Mobile MHY2250BH is a 250 GB, standard hard disk drive. Its burst transfer rate is 150 Mbyte/s. This is a 5400 RPM drive and comes with an 8 MB buffer. RAM: two sticks of 1 GB DDR2 SDRAM, speed: 667 MHz.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way in Windows 7 to disable "journaling"?

    - by Psycogeek
    C:\$extend\$Usn.Jrnl:$J:$data Here is a picture finally. The large strip in the center of the top band is the largest chunk, in the other, grey areas are the various clusters with it. On the right, the big long grey line is $logfile (not paging), and it is 63&nbsb;MB. Paging, 500&nbsb;MB is the dark cyan chunk, next to the yellow MFTres in the inner rings.. The disk was defragged so they could be seen easier. Not all clusters of this type of file are tagged, but the idea is there. The disk is 4k clusters, now about 12 GB size. Each cute little block in the picture is .81 MB and represents 207 clusters. The dkGreen section, is mostly the whole Winsxs pile, also interesting when they keep telling us it doesn't take much disk space. Wikipedia suggests that in previous NT systems "USN journaling" would be turned on when enabled (assumes it could also be turned off?). What aspects, services, or program is working on putting that stuff all over the disk which is known by $jrnl$ type clusters, even if it is not actual USN journaling? Is it possible in a Windows 7 system to completly disable the journaling, and what would be the ramifications of that? On a Windows XP NTFS system, I do not recall seeing the quantity of disk clusters used with these $jrnl$ names, so I do not recall this being necessary in this quantity for an NTFS file system itself? I understand that it would not be there, if it did not have a useful function :-) Information about how wonderful is fine, if that information will help track down what parts of the system create and use it. Change Journals states: Change journals are also needed to recover file system indexing Hmm, that might explain some of them, or why it was left on the disk. A crash while background indexing?

    Read the article

  • Application (was Firefox) crash on first load on Ubuntu Linux on older Dell Laptop

    - by Ira Baxter
    I've had a Dell Latitude laptop since about 2000 without managing to destroy it. A month ago the Windows 2000 system on it did something stupid to its file system and Windows was completely lost. No point in reinstalling Windows 2000, so I installed an Ubuntu Linux on the laptop. Everything seems normal (installed, rebooted, I can log in, run GnuChess, poke about). ... but ... when I attempt to launch Firefox from the top bar menu icon, I get a bunch of disk activity, the whirling cursor icon goes round a bit and then (WAS: everything stops: icon, mouse. Literally nothing happens for 5 minutes. Ubuntu is dead, as far as I can tell. EDIT : on further investigation, spinning icon, mouse operated by touchpad freeze. There's apparantly a little disk activity occuring about every 5 seconds. I wait 5-10 minutes, behavior doesn't change) A reboot, and I can repeat this reliably. So on the face of it, everything works but Firefox. That seems really strange. The only odd thing about this system when Firefox is booting is that while it has an Ethernet port (that worked fine under Windows), it isn't actually plugged into an Ethernet. As this is the first Firefox boot since the Ubuntu install, maybe Firefox mishandles Internet access? Why would that crash Ubuntu? (I need to go try the obvious experiment of plugging it in). EDIT: I tried to run the Disk manager tool, not that I cared what it was, just a menu-available application. It started up like Firefox, I get a little tag in the lower left saying Disk P*** something had started, and then the same behavior as Firefox. At this point, I don't think its the Ethernet. Is it possible that the Ubuntu disk driver can't handle the disk controller in this older laptop? The install seemed to go fine.

    Read the article

  • How ZFS handles online replacement in a RAID-Z (theoretical)

    - by Kevin
    This is a somewhat theoretical question about ZFS and RAID-Z. I'll use a three disk single-parity array as an example for clarity, but the problem can be extended to any number of disks and any parity. Suppose we have disks A, B, and C in the pool, and that it is clean. Suppose now that we physically add disk D with the intention of replacing disk C, and that disk C is still functioning correctly and is only being replaced out of preventive maintenance. Some admins might just yank C and install D, which is a little more organized as devices need not change IDs - however this does leave the array degraded temporarily and so for this example suppose we install D without offlining or removing C. Solaris docs indicate that we can replace a disk without first offlining it, using a command such as: zpool replace pool C D This should cause a resilvering onto D. Let us say that resilvering proceeds "downwards" along a "cursor." (I don't know the actual terminology used in the internal implementation.) Suppose now that midways through the resilvering, disk A fails. In theory, this should be recoverable, as above the cursor B and D contain sufficient parity and below the cursor B and C contain sufficient parity. However, whether or not this is actually recoverable depnds upon internal design decisions in ZFS which I am not aware of (and which the manual doesn't say in certain terms). If ZFS continues to send writes to C below the cursor, then we are fine. If, however, ZFS internally treats C as though it were gone, resilvering D only from parity between A and B and only writing A and B below the cursor, then we're toast. Some experimenting could answer this question but I was hoping maybe someone on here already knows which way ZFS handles this situation. Thank you in advance for any insight!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231  | Next Page >