Search Results

Search found 6033 results on 242 pages for 'partition magic'.

Page 26/242 | < Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >

• What's wrong with my ext4 partition?

  - by bumbling fool

  What is wrong with this picture? Top is output from "df -h", bottom is gparted. I suspect I'm missing a lot of free space. No problems other than that (yet). Can somebody suggest the best (non-destructive) way to correct this? sudo dumpe2fs -h /dev/sda3: (source http://pastebin.com/nAvrdT4E) Filesystem volume name: <none> Last mounted on: / Filesystem UUID: 9f6eff64-60d7-4eec-81d5-1e8acd818b38 Filesystem magic number: 0xEF53 Filesystem revision #: 1 (dynamic) Filesystem features: has_journal ext_attr resize_inode dir_index filetype needs_recovery extent flex_bg sparse_super large_file huge_file uninit_bg dir_nlink extra_isize Filesystem flags: signed_directory_hash Default mount options: (none) Filesystem state: clean Errors behavior: Continue Filesystem OS type: Linux Inode count: 1602496 Block count: 6406144 Reserved block count: 320306 Free blocks: 4842284 Free inodes: 1361222 First block: 0 Block size: 4096 Fragment size: 4096 Reserved GDT blocks: 1022 Blocks per group: 32768 Fragments per group: 32768 Inodes per group: 8176 Inode blocks per group: 511 RAID stride: 32692 Flex block group size: 16 Filesystem created: Sun Nov 8 18:18:13 2009 Last mount time: Tue Mar 1 01:04:27 2011 Last write time: Mon Feb 28 04:27:34 2011 Mount count: 16 Maximum mount count: 28 Last checked: Thu Feb 24 06:23:39 2011 Check interval: 15552000 (6 months) Next check after: Tue Aug 23 07:23:39 2011 Lifetime writes: 227 GB Reserved blocks uid: 0 (user root) Reserved blocks gid: 0 (group root) First inode: 11 Inode size: 256 Required extra isize: 28 Desired extra isize: 28 Journal inode: 8 First orphan inode: 268015 Default directory hash: half_md4 Directory Hash Seed: cc101517-e617-482b-a883-a72919419c84 Journal backup: inode blocks Journal features: journal_incompat_revoke Journal size: 128M Journal length: 32768 Journal sequence: 0x001d3000 Journal start: 7787 fdisk and parted output per requests: http://pastebin.com/EGVH7Ken

  Read the article

• Can a partition table be edited from a LiveUSB of another architecture?

  - by Eliran Malka

  My purpose is to re-partition a dual-boot machine (running Ubuntu 13.04 / Windows 7), i.e. the current table is as follows: ----------------------------------------------------------- | | extended partition | | | windows |--------------------------------| recovery | | (NTFS) | swap | filesystem | (NTFS) | | | (swap) | (ext4) | | ----------------------------------------------------------- and I want to create an additional ext4 partition under the extended partition, and mount those (the one I created and the 'filesystem' partition) to root and home (/ and /home), such as the new layout will be: ----------------------------------------------------------- | | extended partition | | | windows |--------------------------------| recovery | | (NTFS) | swap | root | home | (NTFS) | | | (swap) | (ext4) | (ext4) | | ----------------------------------------------------------- As the installations on the system and on my Live USB differ in architecture, I want to know: Is it safe to use a 64bit GParted from a Live USB for partitioning a 32bit installation?

  Read the article

• How do I align my partition table properly?

  - by Jorge Castro

  I am in the process of building my first RAID5 array. I've used mdadm to create the following set up: root@bondigas:~# mdadm --detail /dev/md1 /dev/md1: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Wed Oct 20 20:00:41 2010 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 5860543488 (5589.05 GiB 6001.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 1953514496 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 1 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Wed Oct 20 20:13:48 2010 State : clean, degraded, recovering Active Devices : 3 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Rebuild Status : 1% complete UUID : f6dc829e:aa29b476:edd1ef19:85032322 (local to host bondigas) Events : 0.12 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 16 0 active sync /dev/sdb 1 8 32 1 active sync /dev/sdc 2 8 48 2 active sync /dev/sdd 4 8 64 3 spare rebuilding /dev/sde While that's going I decided to format the beast with the following command: root@bondigas:~# mkfs.ext4 /dev/md1p1 mke2fs 1.41.11 (14-Mar-2010) /dev/md1p1 alignment is offset by 63488 bytes. This may result in very poor performance, (re)-partitioning suggested. Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=4096 (log=2) Fragment size=4096 (log=2) Stride=16 blocks, Stripe width=48 blocks 97853440 inodes, 391394047 blocks 19569702 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=0 Maximum filesystem blocks=0 11945 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 Writing inode tables: ^C 27/11945 root@bondigas:~# ^C I am unsure what to do about "/dev/md1p1 alignment is offset by 63488 bytes." and how to properly partition the disks to match so I can format it properly.

  Read the article

• How do I align my partition table properly?

  - by Jorge Castro

  I am in the process of building my first RAID5 array. I've used mdadm to create the following set up: root@bondigas:~# mdadm --detail /dev/md1 /dev/md1: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Wed Oct 20 20:00:41 2010 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 5860543488 (5589.05 GiB 6001.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 1953514496 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 1 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Wed Oct 20 20:13:48 2010 State : clean, degraded, recovering Active Devices : 3 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 64K Rebuild Status : 1% complete UUID : f6dc829e:aa29b476:edd1ef19:85032322 (local to host bondigas) Events : 0.12 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 16 0 active sync /dev/sdb 1 8 32 1 active sync /dev/sdc 2 8 48 2 active sync /dev/sdd 4 8 64 3 spare rebuilding /dev/sde While that's going I decided to format the beast with the following command: root@bondigas:~# mkfs.ext4 /dev/md1p1 mke2fs 1.41.11 (14-Mar-2010) /dev/md1p1 alignment is offset by 63488 bytes. This may result in very poor performance, (re)-partitioning suggested. Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=4096 (log=2) Fragment size=4096 (log=2) Stride=16 blocks, Stripe width=48 blocks 97853440 inodes, 391394047 blocks 19569702 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=0 Maximum filesystem blocks=0 11945 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 Writing inode tables: ^C 27/11945 root@bondigas:~# ^C I am unsure what to do about "/dev/md1p1 alignment is offset by 63488 bytes." and how to properly partition the disks to match so I can format it properly.

  Read the article

• Installer doesn't display partition I want to install to

  - by Aditya

  While performing a Ubuntu 10.10 installation on my laptop, it doesn't show partitions pertaining to the PC. My PC configuration is as follows : HP Pavilion dv6 - 2020AX AMD Turion II Dual Core Mobile Processor M500 4 GB RAM OS Installed : Windows 7 500 GB Hard drive partitioned as follows : C : 227 GB (Free : 142 GB) D : 11.9 GB (Free : 1.98 GB) - Recovery F : 174 GB (Free : 18 GB) G : 50.5 GB (Free : 50.4 GB) So, I want to perform a Dual-boot installation on my PC, so that Ubuntu resides in the free disk space G:. Therefore, I started the Ubuntu 10.10 installation and select the manual partitioning feature in the installation. However, in the 'Allocate Drive Space' section of the installation, following partitions information is displayed: Partition Type Size Used /dev/sda /dev/sda1      1 MB    unknown /dev/sda2    ntfs    208 MB   unknown /dev/sda3   ntfs    244813 MB    168540 MB /dev/sda4    ntfs    255083 MB   3221 MB where /dev/sda - 500 GB So, what exactly is the problem? What is it should I do to install Ubuntu 10.10 in the G: disk space? Why are the partitions not being shown as the way they should be? Any Suggestions. Thank you for the help.

  Read the article

• Help in decide the partition to install ubuntu

  - by G.Ashwin kumar

  I have a PC running with windows 7 ultimate 64 bit version with 4 gig Ram. I have a 320 gig hard disk , in which I have allocated 120 gig for windows 7, 100 gig for NY files(named ashwin in windows) and rest 80-90 gig partitioned but empty NTFS partition.Now where do I install Ubuntu so that windows and data is safe. I got the option install with windows I selected it , it then shows select drive(SCSI1 (0,0,0) (sda) -320.1 GB ATA WDC WD3200AAJS-6) and allocate driver by dragging the divider below which shows 66.5gb and 59.3 GB respectively. Which one do I go with? I clicked advance partitioning it shows five devices: device , type, m.point ,size.(mb), used(mb)......... /dev/sda1, NTFS, 104 , 35 (windows 7 loader) /dev/sda2, NTFS, 104752, 23604 /dev/sda3, NTFS, 125829, 10161 /dev/sda5, NTFS, 89382, 3221 when I checked size in properties it showed name of drive according to windows, used.Gb, free, total. ashwin, 10.2, 115.7, 125.8 c drive, 23.6, 81.1, 104.8 new volume, 92.6mb, 89.3, 89.4 except mentioned everything in gigabytes.ignore the last dots. I want to install it in new volume or using that space how do I do it? Explain in detail I'm a beginner.

  Read the article

• error while trying to resize the partition

  - by speedox

  im running out of space and i tried to resize the partition using g-parted but i got an error: Checking for bad sectors ... Bad cluster: 0x2904636 - 0x2904636 (1) Bad cluster: 0x290526d - 0x290526e (2) Bad cluster: 0x29052fd - 0x2905300 (4) Bad cluster: 0x2905392 - 0x2905392 (1) Bad cluster: 0x2905425 - 0x2905428 (4) Bad cluster: 0x290555d - 0x2905560 (4) Bad cluster: 0x29055f1 - 0x29055f8 (8) Bad cluster: 0x2905681 - 0x2905688 (8) Bad cluster: 0x29057ac - 0x29057ac (1) Bad cluster: 0x29887dd - 0x29887dd (1) Bad cluster: 0x299a086 - 0x299a086 (1) Bad cluster: 0x348ec05 - 0x348ec05 (1) Bad cluster: 0x353dabb - 0x353dabb (1) Bad cluster: 0x353dba4 - 0x353dba4 (1) Bad cluster: 0x354a162 - 0x354a162 (1) Bad cluster: 0x354a1ce - 0x354a1ce (1) ERROR: This software has detected that the disk has at least 40 bad sectors. **************************************************************************** * WARNING: The disk has bad sector. This means physical damage on the disk * * surface caused by deterioration, manufacturing faults or other reason. * * The reliability of the disk may stay stable or degrade fast. We suggest * * making a full backup urgently by running 'ntfsclone --rescue ...' then * * run 'chkdsk /f /r' on Windows and rebooot it TWICE! Then you can resize * * NTFS safely by additionally using the --bad-sectors option of ntfsresize.* **************************************************************************** I opened the "disk utility" and clicked on "Smart DATA" button I got this image:

  Read the article

• How to create NTFS partition in Linux to install Windows 7 from USB?

  - by Michal Stefanow

  I messed up with my computer and need help. Generally: install Windows 7 from USB. Problem: "setup was unable to create a new system partition" When first attempt to install Windows 7 failed I tried Linux live USB, installed distro to HDD, and erased all the existing partitions. Current state (fdisk -l): [writing from other computer so no copy and paste] /dev/sda1 305GB Linux /dev/sda2 7GB Extended /dev/sda5 7GB Linux Swam / Solaris To create a new, NTFS partition: fdisk /dev/sda n (for new) p (for primary) 3 (for partintion number) "No free sectors available" All the HDD was formatted couple of minutes before so there is a lot of free space but how to resize a parition? I cannot find an option for resizing in man fdisk. Some people say I should use gparted but my distro doesn't not contain this package. And my distro doesn't support wireless drivers so I have serious problems with downloading stuff. I tried also using cfdisk but any command results in: "cfdisk bad primary partition 1 partition ends in the final partial cylinder" I tried also removing partition 1 and then creating a new one (so there is no "no free sectors"). I'm receiving a warning: "Re-reading the partition table failed with error 16: Device or resource busy. The kernel still uses the old table. The new table will be used at the next reboot." After restating: "grub rescue, no known filesystem" It may indicate that some changes have been made BUT when running Windows 7 installed some another error: "Windows cannot be installed to Disk 0 Partition 1" More detailed: "Windows cannot be installed to this hard disk space. Windows must be installed to a partition formatted as NTFS." So formatting drive using Windows 7 installer BUT this time yet another error: "Setup was unable to create a new system partition or locate an existing system partition. See the setup log files for more information" Apparently I cannot access logs (how?) and I am back to drawing board with my live USB (this time showing partition as HPFS/NTFS). Any suggestions how to install Windows 7? Should I reinstall Linux to HDD, erase existing partitions once again, and use Parted rather than gparted (parted is included in the distro). Or maybe should I create another bootable USB such as PartedMagic to painlessly create partitions? I just want to install Windows 7 from USB, my laptop is semi-operational and I am ready to receive some help regarding fdisk and creating NTFS partitions. UPDATE: I did as suggested (removed all the partitions) and tried to install in unallocated space. Tried to create a new partition and format it. Same error: "setup was unable to create a new system partition" Came to the conclusion it may have something to do with TrueCrypt I have recently installed. Right now trying to FIX MBR (as I haven't got possibility to create rescue disc without optical drive)

  Read the article

• is it a good idea to change a recovery partition from primary to logical? [HP laptop]

  - by DiegoDD

  I have a new HP laptop, model dv6-6c85la, with 1TB hard drive, and it has 4 primary partitions, like this: |<- system [199 MB] -|<- c: [899.8 GB] -|<- d:(recovery) [27.5 GB] -|<- e:(hp_tools) [4 GB] -| I wanted to make another partition, splitting "C" which is the main partition, into TWO partitions, and leave the rest as it is. but it doesn't let me because they are already 4 primary partitions (the ones in the diagram). I read somewhere, that i could in fact split C into 2 partitions, but only if the adjacent partition (in this case d:(recovery) is converted into a "logical" partition. That way, the new unallocated part taken from C, and the recovery partition, would each be logical, "inside" an extended partition (right???) As i understand, the resulting partitions would be: primary (system, no letter), primary (c:), extended [ logical (x:) | logical(d:recovery) ], primary (e: hp_tools) "x" being the new one. am i correct? My question is, if i do convert the recovery partition to logical (and thus, it is inside an extended partition adjacent to the new "x:" one), would i have any problems when in case of a disaster i would like to restore the system using the now logical instead of primary RECOVERY partition? Or it is completely safe to change it to logical? My main concern is because i think i may need to be primary so the recovery can proceed in boot time? Or i am completely wrong? how does the recovery process happens? I also understand that i can simply create recovery media, in DVDs, and then even i would be able to delete that recovery partition completely, but as of now, i don't want to do that. I may create the disks, but i don't want to delete the partition, simply because it would be a lot faster and easier to recover from a hard drive than disks. Wrapping up: if i change a recovery partition from primary to logical, will the system still be capable of using it to recover? or it NEEDS to be primary to work? The whole point is that i want to split C:, but as things are, i cant directly, i'd need to change the recovery partition to logical. Or is there another way? thanks.

  Read the article

• GParted wont resize extended partitions

  - by Magnum Frost

  I have dual booted windows 7 and Ubuntu 12.04 LTS and have decided that I need more space on my Ubuntu partition. I used gparted on a Live CD to shrink my Windows 7 partition (/dev/sda3) but when i try to resize the extended partition (/dev/sda4), which houses my linux partition (/dev/sda6), the right click options are greyed out and there is a key next to the extended partition. I have resized the partitions within the extended partition before to provide room, but now I can go no further with that, and need to grow the extended partition. The free space lies to the left of the extended partition and there is a small amount of free space directly to the right as well. Also, within the extended partition is /dev/sda5 (ntfs) , which I have no idea what is on it, but most of the space (3.42GB) is used, /dev/sda6 (ext4, mount point: /), my partition containing Linux, and /dev/sda7 (linux-swap). I hope you guys can help me with this because I really don't want to screw something up while trying to resize the extended partition.

  Read the article

• Any "Magic Tricks" For Getting Data Back After Windows 7 Install

  - by user163757

  My old man installed Windows 7 without making a proper backup, and now realizes he left behind some important data. He did a true "clean install", so there is no Windows.old folder in the root directory. However, I believe the format performed on the hard drive was only a quick format, so I am hoping there is some chance at data recovery. I took his hard drive out, and have spent a majority of the weekend researching data recovery options. I paid $70 for the GetDataBack software, but have had little success with it. I can see all of the files I want to restore, however they appear corrupt when I try to open them. With that all being said, does anyone know of a viable way to recover some of this data, or is it a lost cause all together?

  Read the article

• Aeseus Partition Master

  - by user326613

  Has anybody used Aeseus Partition Master..? bcoz i need to know that when i copy the partition to another partition will it copy the MBR 2 coz i need to boot from that copied partition too

  Read the article

• What needs updating when moving a bootable Windows 7 (or Vista) partition?

  - by SuperTempel

  When I move a bootable NTFS partition with Windows on it to a different block offset, what needs updating to make it bootable again? In particular, here's what I tried: I have a disk with several partitions, one of which is the NTFS partition with Windows on it, and the disk uses the plain old MBR block 0 for the partitions layout (no more than 4 partitions). Now I format and partition a new, larger, disk. There I make room for the NTFS partition and copy the contents from the old disk's NTFS Windows partition into. And I make the partition "active". However, when I try to boot from this disk, I get a "read error" message immediately and the booting stops, the exact text is: A disk read error occurred Press Ctrl+Alt+Del to restart I verified that both disks have the same boot sector code in block 0. It seems to me that something else might need updating. I guess that somewhere there's a absolute block reference that I need to update, probably pointing to the next level loader or to the NT kernel. Update: I found this article going quite into the depth of what I want to know. However, it says to modify boot.ini, but I have Windows 7 installed here, where such things appear to have changed: No boot.ini but a folder called System Volume Information with GUID and other data in it that sounds related to my problem. Going to keep digging... Update 2: Thanks to the terrible looking but very informative website by starman, I was able to figure out the first step: The NTFS boot sector has a field for "hidden" sectors. This feld has to contain the sector number of the boot sector. This solves the "read error" message. Now, however, I get a "BOOTMGR is missing" error instead. Looks like there's another place where a block number has to be adjusted, but I can't find anything in the code listing about this. I do find a lot of help sites suggesting Windows tools for fixing this "BOOTMGR is missing" problem, but none seem to know what goes on behind the scenes. Kind of like suggesting to re-install Windows when there's a little problem with it. At least, those fixes seem to work, mostly involving the Bcdedit and Bootrec tools. Now, who knows what they do, especially the latter, in regards to a moved partition? Update 3: After lots of trial-and-error attempts, I believe now that the solution lies in the BCD-Template registry file, residing usually inside \Windows\System32\config. If I get this updated using the "bcdboot" command, Windows starts up from it. I am now in the middle of figuring out what information this registry contains relevant to the above question. Any pointers to the contents of this registry are welcome. Update 4: Turns out that while the BCD-Template file gets rewritten and has different binary contents than its predecessor, the values inside do not change. So it must be something else that bcdboot.exe writes. I had previously already checked if it changes the first 32 boot blocks of the partition, but they appear to remain unchanged. Parititon map doesn't get changed, either. So what is it that bcdboot modifies besides the BCD registry? Any tips on how I can trace that? Are there low level tools that show me what files a program writes to? Update 5: The answer seems to be: c:\Boot\BCD is also changed, and that appears to be the key file for the boot manager's process. I'll investigate this later... Update 6: It seems to be an important detail that I had originally two partitions created when I installed Windows 7: A small partition of 204800 sectors which appears to be a bootstrap partition, followed by the actual, large, partition containing the Windows system (drive C:). When I tried to transfer this installation to a new, larger, disk, I had kept the same two partitions intact on the new drive, although they ended up at a different offset. This alone led to the "BOOTMGR is missing" message. Since then, I've used bcdboot.exe only on the Windows partition, which added the \Boot\BCD file on that partition. That file (and folder) did originally only exist on the smaller partition. Hence, this problem may be more complicated in my case as one partition (the boot strapper) referred to another partition (the one containing the OS), whereas other people may only have to deal with one partition containing both, and maybe there the solution is simpler. Update 7: Found one more detail: The \Boot\BCD file records the MBR's serial number. If that number doesn't match, the system won't boot. Next I'll test if there's also an absolute block reference stored in there.

  Read the article

• How to remove iso 9660 from USB?

  - by a_m0d

  I have somehow managed to write an iso 9660 image onto my USB drive, which makes all my computer think that the device is actually a CD. I have tried various methods of removing this partition, but nothing seems to work. I have tried fdisk, which says $ fdisk -l /dev/sdb Cannot open /dev/sdb parted crashes when I try to use it on this device. I have even tried $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb but it just hangs with no output (either on screen or on disk). However, when I plug the USB in, it does mount, and I can view (but not edit) the files on it. edit: now the result is $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb dd: opening `/dev/sdb': Read-only file system I have also tried re-formatting it on Windows, but it gets to the end of the format process and then says "Couldn't format the drive". How can I remove this partition and get my whole USB drive back to normal again? EDIT 1: Trying a simple mkfs doesn't work: $ sudo mkfs -t vfat /dev/sdb mkfs.vfat 3.0.0 (28 Sep 2008) mkfs.vfat: Will not try to make filesystem on full-disk device '/dev/sdb' (use -I if wanted) I can't do mkfs on /dev/sdb1 because there is no such partition, as shown:$ ls /dev | grep sdb sdb EDIT 2: This is the information posted by dmesg when I plug the device in:$ dmesg . . (snip) . usb 2-1: New USB device found, idVendor=058f, idProduct=6387 usb 2-1: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=3 usb 2-1: Product: Mass Storage usb 2-1: Manufacturer: Generic usb 2-1: SerialNumber: G0905000000000010885 usb-storage: device found at 4 usb-storage: waiting for device to settle before scanning usb-storage: device scan complete scsi 6:0:0:0: Direct-Access FLASH Drive AU_USB20 8.07 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2 sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] 4069376 512-byte hardware sectors (2084 MB) sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 03 00 00 00 sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Assuming drive cache: write through sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] 4069376 512-byte hardware sectors (2084 MB) sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 03 00 00 00 sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Assuming drive cache: write through sdb: unknown partition table sd 6:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI removable disk sd 6:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 0 ISO 9660 Extensions: Microsoft Joliet Level 3 ISO 9660 Extensions: RRIP_1991A SELinux: initialized (dev sdb, type iso9660), uses genfs_contexts CE: hpet increasing min_delta_ns to 15000 nsec This shows that the device is formatted as ISO 9660 and that it is /dev/sdb. EDIT 3: This is the message that I find at the bottom of dmesg after running cfdisk and writing a new partition table to the disk:SELinux: initialized (dev sdb, type iso9660), uses genfs_contexts sd 17:0:0:0: [sdb] Device not ready: Sense Key : Not Ready [current] sd 17:0:0:0: [sdb] Device not ready: < ASC=0xff ASCQ=0xffASC=0xff < ASCQ=0xff end_request: I/O error, dev sdb, sector 0 Buffer I/O error on device sdb, logical block 0 lost page write due to I/O error on sdb

  Read the article

• Resizing Partitions on Live RHEL/cPanel Server

  - by Timothy R. Butler

  I've resized many partitions over the years on Linux, Windows and Mac OS X -- but always using a GUI. However, the time has come where the preset partition sizes my data center placed on my server aren't the right sizes and I need to resize a production server's disks. I could fiddle with it and probably do OK, but given that it is a production server, I wanted to get some advice about the right way to do this. I do have KVM over IP access, so if it is best to take the server offline and boot off a rescue partition, I can do that. root [/var/lib/mysql]# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 9.9G 2.1G 7.3G 23% / tmpfs 7.8G 0 7.8G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 99M 77M 18M 82% /boot /dev/sda8 884G 463G 376G 56% /home /dev/sda3 9.9G 8.0G 1.5G 85% /usr /dev/sda5 9.9G 9.1G 308M 97% /var /usr/tmpDSK 2.0G 38M 1.8G 3% /tmp As you can see /var and /usr are quite close to being full and I've actually had to symlink some logs on /usr to directories in /home to balance things out. What I would like to do is to add 6-10 GB each to /usr and /var, presumably taking the space from /home. As I think about how the disk is arranged, the best thought I've come up with is to reduce /home by 16 GB, say, and move /var to the spot freed up, then allocating /var's space to /usr. However, that would put /var at the far end of the disk, which seems less than idea, given that MySQL has all of its data on that partition. I'd love to take the space out of the closer end of /usr, but I assume that would take a very arduous (and perhaps risky) process of moving all of the data in /usr around. I seem to recall having such a process fail for me on a computer in the past. The other option might be to merge / and /usr since / is underutilized, though I'm not sure if that's a good idea. Do you have any suggestions both on the best reallocation plan and the commands to use to accomplish it? UPDATE: I should add -- here's the partition table. There's one unused partition, which, if memory serves, was the original tmp location before I created a tmp image: Name Flags Part Type FS Type [Label] Size (MB) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Unusable 1.05* sda1 Boot Primary Linux ext2 106.96* sda2 Primary Linux ext3 10737.42* sda3 Primary Linux ext3 10737.42* sda5 NC Logical Linux ext3 10738.47* sda6 NC Logical Linux swap / Solaris 2148.54* sda7 NC Logical Linux ext3 1074.80* sda8 NC Logical Linux ext3 964098.53*

  Read the article

• Raid1 with active and spare partition

  - by Daniel Baron

  I am having the following problem with a RAID1 software raid partition on my Ubuntu system (10.04 LTS, 2.6.32-24-server in case it matters). One of my disks (sdb5) reported I/O errors and was therefore marked faulty in the array. The array was then degraded with one active device. Hence, I replaced the harddisk, cloned the partition table and added all new partitions to my raid arrays. After syncing all partitions ended up fine, having 2 active devices - except one of them. The partition which reported the faulty disk before, however, did not include the new partition as an active device but as a spare disk: md3 : active raid1 sdb5[2] sda5[1] 4881344 blocks [2/1] [_U] A detailed look reveals: root@server:~# mdadm --detail /dev/md3 [...] Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 2 8 21 0 spare rebuilding /dev/sdb5 1 8 5 1 active sync /dev/sda5 So here is the question: How do I tell my raid to turn the spare disk into an active one? And why has it been added as a spare device? Recreating or reassembling the array is not an option, because it is my root partition. And I can not find any hints to that subject in the Software Raid HOWTO. Any help would be appreciated. Current Solution I found a solution to my problem, but I am not sure that this is the actual way to do it. Having a closer look at my raid I found that sdb5 was always listed as a spare device: mdadm --examine /dev/sdb5 [...] Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 2 8 21 2 spare /dev/sdb5 0 0 0 0 0 removed 1 1 8 5 1 active sync /dev/sda5 2 2 8 21 2 spare /dev/sdb5 so readding the device sdb5 to the array md3 always ended up in adding the device as a spare. Finally I just recreated the array mdadm --create /dev/md3 --level=1 -n2 -x0 /dev/sda5 /dev/sdb5 which worked. But the question remains open for me: Is there a better way to manipulate the summaries in the superblock and to tell the array to turn sdb5 from a spare disk to an active disk? I am still curious for an answer.

  Read the article

• SQL SERVER – Partition Parallelism Support in expressor 3.6

  - by pinaldave

  I am very excited to learn that there is a new version of expressor’s data integration platform coming out in March of this year.  It will be version 3.6, and I look forward to using it and telling everyone about it.  Let me describe a little bit more about what will be so great in expressor 3.6: Greatly enhanced user interface Parallel Processing Bulk Artifact Upgrading The User Interface First let me cover the most obvious enhancements. The expressor Studio user interface (UI) has had some significant work done. Kudos to the expressor Engineering team; the entire UI is a visual masterpiece that is very responsive and intuitive. The improvements are more than just eye candy; they provide significant productivity gains when developing expressor Dataflows. Operator shape icons now include a description that identifies the function of each operator, instead of having to guess at the function by the icon. Operator shapes and highlighting depict the current function and status: Disabled, enabled, complete, incomplete, and error. Each status displays an appropriate message in the message panel with correction suggestions. Floating or docking property panels provide descriptive tool tips for each property as well as auto resize when adjusting the canvas, without having to search Help or the need to scroll around to get access to the property. Progress and status indicators let you know when an operation is working. “No limit” canvas with snap-to-grid allows automatic sizing and accurate positioning when you have numerous operators in the Dataflow. The inline tool bar offers quick access to pan, zoom, fit and overview functions. Selecting multiple artifacts with a right click context allows you to easily manage your workspace more efficiently. Partitioning and Parallel Processing Partitioning allows each operator to process multiple subsets of records in parallel as opposed to processing all records that flow through that operator in a single sequential set. This capability allows the user to configure the expressor Dataflow to run in a way that most efficiently utilizes the resources of the hardware where the Dataflow is running. Partitions can exist in most individual operators. Using partitions increases the speed of an expressor data integration application, therefore improving performance and load times. With the expressor 3.6 Enterprise Edition, expressor simplifies enabling parallel processing by adding intuitive partition settings that are easy to configure. Bulk Artifact Upgrading Bulk Artifact Upgrading sounds a bit intimidating, but it actually is not and it is a welcome addition to expressor Studio. In past releases, users were prompted to confirm that they wanted to upgrade their individual artifacts only when opened. This was a cumbersome and repetitive process. Now with bulk artifact upgrading, a user can easily select what artifact or group of artifacts to upgrade all at once. As you can see, there are many new features and upgrade options that will prove to make expressor Studio quicker and more efficient.  I hope I’m not the only one who is excited about all these new upgrades, and that I you try expressor and share your experience with me. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQLServer, T SQL, Technology

  Read the article

• mdadm superblock hiding/shadowing partition

  - by Kjell Andreassen

  Short version: Is it safe to do mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sdd on a disk with a partition (dev/sdd1), filesystem and data? Will the partition be mountable and the data still there? Longer version: I used to have a raid6 array but decided to dismantle it. The disks from the array are now used as non-raid disks. The superblocks were cleared: sudo mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sdd The disks were repartitioned with fdisk and filesystems created with mfks.ext4. All disks where mounted and everything worked fine. Today, a couple of weeks later, one of the disks is failing to be recognized when trying to mount it, or rather the single partition on it. sudo mount /dev/sdd1 /mnt/tmp mount: special device /dev/sdd1 does not exist fdisk claims there to be a partition on it: sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdd Disk /dev/sdd: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 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: 0xb06f6341 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 243201 1953512001 83 Linux Of course mount is right, the device /dev/sdd1 is not there, I'm guessing udev did not create it because of the mdadm data still on it: sudo mdadm --examine /dev/sdd /dev/sdd: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 1.2 Feature Map : 0x0 Array UUID : b164e513:c0584be1:3cc53326:48691084 Name : pringle:0 (local to host pringle) Creation Time : Sat Jun 16 21:37:14 2012 Raid Level : raid6 Raid Devices : 6 Avail Dev Size : 3907027120 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB) Array Size : 15628107776 (7452.06 GiB 8001.59 GB) Used Dev Size : 3907026944 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB) Data Offset : 2048 sectors Super Offset : 8 sectors State : clean Device UUID : 3ccaeb5b:843531e4:87bf1224:382c16e2 Update Time : Sun Aug 12 22:20:39 2012 Checksum : 4c329db0 - correct Events : 1238535 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 512K Device Role : Active device 3 Array State : AA.AAA ('A' == active, '.' == missing) My mdadm --zero-superblock apparently didn't work. Can I safely try it again without losing data? If not, are there any suggestion on what do to? Not starting mdadm at all on boot might be a (somewhat unsatisfactory) solution.

  Read the article

• EFI vs MBR - Installing Windows Server 2008 R2 or 2012 on 8TB

  - by Riaan de Lange

  I'm having some difficulty installing Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows Server 2012 on an Intel Server platform. The server specs is as follows: Intel Grizzly Pass Server System - R2308GZ4GC 2x Intel Xeon 2620 - 2.0 GHZ - BX80621E52620 132 GB of Memory REG-DIMM - TS1GKR72V6H 4x Seagate Constellation ES 2TB 3.5" 7200rpm 6GB/S - ST32000645NS Intel Big Laurel 4CH 6G SAS RAID 512MB - RS2BL040 On the Intel RAID Controller Setup, I have setup the HDD to be in RAID-0 - for testing purposes. (Ultimately configured in RAID-5) So, the total size of HDD space I can use is 7.6 TB something... When I install the Server OS's, they don't seem to go beyond 2 TB (1.76 TB) I have read up on EFI and UEFI boot, and this seems to work in 2012, but I could not install any drivers for the motherboard... So, I also tried EFI for 2008R2, and this worked while installing the OS, it did not however work with the Windows Boot Manager option in the BIOS. It kept on freezing once it tries to load the partition. My idea was to allocate the complete 8 TB for the OS, and load a few VM's on there. I have now started with a new approach where I'll have a 256 GB OS Partition, and a secondary 7.5 TB Data partition. Oh, and I also did a diskpart - convert disk to gpt whilst installing 2008R2. The whole disk was accessible, 7.6TB Can anyone please clarify that EFI/UEFI is meant for larger boot volumes? Bigger than 2TB. If I were to have an ideal situation where my OS is run on a SSD, 256GB, and I can attach the 8 TB drives as normal disk to the OS? I'm I correct in saying that if I wanted to boot from a 8TB partition, I would need to force the BIOS to boot from EFI? The limit for MBR is 2 TB as far as I know now... *FYI: The motherboard is EFI-ready

  Read the article

• NTFS partition size not recognized after disaster recovery clone

  - by djechelon

  I'm in the middle of a disaster recovery of a 250GB hard disk that was "clicking". Obviously I didn't have a backup copy. I managed to salvage all the files thanks to GParted Live that was able to read the disk without a single "click" sound. So I cloned the partition to a new drive sized 500GB. Unfortunately, GParted process went to some kind of infinite loop, disks stopped I/O and after a couple of hours I interrupted the clone process I started. Now the problem is: when cloning the partition I also chose to expand 250GB to the whole 500GB of the target disk. Windows sees the partition sized 500GB in computer management, but Windows Explorer only sees 250. chkdsk e: /f says the filesystem is OK. How can I repair the file system and let Windows see the full 500GB of the new partition? An alternate idea is to deep-copy the files from the backup disk to a newly formatted disk. This should definitely fix. Any other ideas?

  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

• Removing extended partition without deleting logical in it

  - by HisDudeness

  I'm running a Linux-based laptop, and in order to multi-boot several distros in it, I created an extended partition which contains a bunch of logical ones with GParted. Now, after quite a long time with this setup, I've changed my mind because of the consequent lack of storing space for my data partition. Now I want to keep one distro alone like it's normal, and eventually have some other operating systems stored in external supports to plug in and use if I want. Obviously, also this partition I want to keep (and to enlarge a little too) is just a logical inside the extended I want to keep. For what concerns the number I'm ok, meaning I currently have this big distro dedicated extended, the swap and the data partitions, so there's space for another primary before I delete the extended, but I don't know how to delete it without touching the logical in it, I don't want to reinstall the system losing all changes and settings, and I don't want to keep an extended partition for a logical alone. How can I do? Do I have to create a new primary, copy the logical content in it and then delete everything? Will the system boot and maintain exactly all the features it has now? Or is there a way to convert an extended into a primary once it contains just one logical? Or can I directly move a logical out of an extended turning it into a primary? Or, again, am I screwed?

  Read the article

• Unable to resize ec2 ebs root volume

  - by nathanjosiah

  I have followed many of the tutorials that pretty much all say the same thing which is basically: Stop the instance Detach the volume Create a snapshot of the volume Create a bigger volume from the snapshot Attach the new volume to the instance Start the instance back up Run resize2fs /dev/xxx However, step 7 is where the problems start happening. In any case running resize2fs always tells me that it is already xxxxx blocks big and does nothing, even with -f passed. So I start to continue with tutorials which all basically say the same thing and that is: Delete all partitons Recreate them back to what they were except with the bigger sizes Reboot the instance and run resize2fs (I have tried these steps both from the live instance and by attaching the volume to another instance and running the commands there) The main problem is that the instance won't start back up again and the system error log provided in the AWS console doesn't provide any errors. (it does however stop at the grub bootloader which to me indicates that it doesn't like the partitions(yes, the boot flag was toggled on the partition with no affect)) The other thing that happens regardless of what changes I make to the partitions is that the instance that the volume is attached to says that the partition has an invalid magic number and the super-block is corrupt. However, if I make no changes and reattach the volume, the instance runs without a problem. Can anybody shed some light on what I could be doing wrong? Edit On my new volume of 20GB with the 6GB image,df -h says: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/xvde1 5.8G 877M 4.7G 16% / tmpfs 836M 0 836M 0% /dev/shm And fdisk -l /dev/xvde says: Disk /dev/xvde: 21.5 GB, 21474836480 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 2610 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: 0x7d833f39 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/xvde1 1 766 6144000 83 Linux Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/xvde2 766 784 146432 82 Linux swap / Solaris Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary. Also, sudo resize2fs /dev/xvde1 says: resize2fs 1.41.12 (17-May-2010) The filesystem is already 1536000 blocks long. Nothing to do!

  Read the article

• Moving from 1 Linux Partition to Many over USB Mount

  - by Mistiry

  We have devices which use Compact Flash for storage. They work OK, but we recently got industrial-grade CF cards to start using. One of the major problems we get is corruption on the flash card. As it is now, these flash cards run Debian with everything in a single partition. We want to have multiple partitions on the new industrial CF cards to help avoid some of the corruption problems. I booted up the device, and attached a USB CF reader. I then used fdisk to partition the CF card in the USB reader. How can I move the data to these partitions so that it works? I have a partition for each of these directories: /lib /var /root /boot /tmp /home /etc / swap space I imagine I can't just use rsync - do I need to attach a second CF reader with a copy of the CF card, so that it's not active and in-use - and then copy from the first reader to the second? How will the system know where to find its files? I know I'd have to change fstab, but that resides in /etc, which will be on a separate partition...how will it find the fstab file if it can't find /etc? And what about grub? I'm at a loss, perhaps its just because I'm under the weather, or I'm just missing a piece of logic here... Any help is greatly appreciated, this is somewhat urgent as our existing stock is nearing its end and we don't want to purchase anything but these industrial cards, but need to get it working with partitions.

  Read the article

• Windows Broken after Deletion of HP_TOOLS partition

  - by beanland

  When I decided to install Ubuntu on my laptop as a dual-boot, I recognized that Windows 7 was using four separate partitions. I (yes, this was stupid) thought the HP_TOOLS partition was probably one I could get rid of, so I deleted it and installed Ubuntu side-by-side Windows using the installation wizard, but now Windows won't progress past the loading screen without the computer automatically restarting. I've had to use Ubuntu exclusively since then. I'm not sure how I can recover it. All of my files seem to still be there--I can mount the other partition and see them, use them, etc--but Windows 7 won't boot. I really have no idea what to do or what to try, or even if I'm at a salvageable point. here's a screenshot of GParted: This makes me suspicious that it wasn't necessarily the removal of my HP_TOOLS partition but the "unknown" status of that 992.50 KiB partition there, sda1. I'm assuming that's the recovery one? How can I get Windows bootable again? I'm sorry, but I'm so unfamiliar with this sort of thing I'm not quite sure where to start.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >