Search Results

Search found 242 results on 10 pages for 'mdadm'.

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

  • Why does my RAID configuration with mdadm fail on reboots?

    - by Andy B
    I have been running Ubuntu server on my machine for 2 years and it has worked ok. I would like to speed it up by raiding a few drives. The machine is used to host my Mysql databases internally. using MDADM raid.. I have tried 2 schemes so far with the 3 drives. 2 partitions on each drive 1 for the swap 1 for the O/S both of them turned into drives raid level 5 3 partitions on each drive 1 for the boot 1 for the swap and 1 for the root. The boot I set to raid level1 and the swap and root raid drives were set to level5 Both setup worked fine for about a week, then on a reboot things fall apart. by fall apart I mean I end up with a bunch of hard drive errors on the screen and then get a grub prompt. Why do they fail on reboots? I am eager to understand what I am doing wrong thanks!

    Read the article

  • How can I set up FakeRAID/SoftRAID using mdadm without losing data?

    - by Danatela
    There is RAID0 of 2 drives connected through Silicon Image 3132 SATA SoftRAID controller. Under Windows it was partitioned as one dynamic GPT-disk having 4 TB NTFS volume. There is a lot of music and movies on the drive. I'm trying to get him to be seen under Ubuntu as a single disk, not as 2 by 2 terabytes. I tried to read it through dmraid, had no success, it is not displayed in /dev/mapper. Also tried to configure the kernel, but did not find anything suspicious, the driver for my controller was on. There is also a driver from the manufacturer, but it is only available for RHEL and SLES. Here it's reported that SoftRAID is supported by the kernel, but apparently not completely. If I thrust drives in the AMD controller, built into the motherboard, the drive is seen as a single, but the data is lost. I know about mdadm that it is able to ditch all the information on the disks. So, is it possible to somehow create an array without actually recording information on used drives and to make the system correctly identify sections on it later? Information about the array: /dev/sdf - Disk 0 /dev/sdg - Disk 1 Array type: Stripe Block Size: 64KB Also, a device /dev/md1 is created using command mknod /dev/md1 b 9 1

    Read the article

  • What parameters to mdadm, to re-create md device with payload starting at 0x22000 position on backing storage?

    - by Adam Ryczkowski
    I try to recover from mdadm raid disaster, which happened when moving from ubuntu server 10.04 to 12.04. I know the correct order of devices from dmesg log, but given this information, I still cannot access the data. The superblocks look messy; the mdadm --examine for each disk is on this question on askubuntu By inspecting the raw contents of backing storage, I found the beginning of my data (the LUKS container in my case) at position 0x22000 relative to the beginning of the first partition in the raid. Question: What is the combination of options issued to "mdadm --create" to re-create mdadm that starts with the given offset? Bitmap size? PS. The relevant information from syslog when the system was healthy are pasted here.

    Read the article

  • Did I lost my RAID again?

    - by BarsMonster
    Hi! A little history: 2 years ago I was really excited to find out that mdadm is so powerful so it even can reshape arrays so you can start with a smaller array and the grow it as you need. I've bought 3x1Tb drives and made RAID-5. It was fine for a year. Then I bought 2x more, and tried to reshape to RAID-6 out of 5 drives, and due to some mess with superblock versions, lost all content. Had to rebuild it from scratch, but 2Tb of data were gone. Yesterday I bought 2 more drives, and this time I had everything: properly built array, UPS. I've disabled write intent map, added 2 new drives as a spare and run a command to grow array to 7-disk. It started working, but speed was ridiculously slow, ~100kb/sec. AFter processing first 37Mb at such an amasing speed, one of old HDDs fails. I properly shutdown PC and disconnected failed drive. After bootup it appeared it recreated intent map as it was still in mdadm config, so I removed it from config and rebooted again. Now all I see is that all mdadm processes deadlocks, and don't do anything. PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 1937 root 20 0 12992 608 444 D 0 0.1 0:00.00 mdadm 2283 root 20 0 12992 852 704 D 0 0.1 0:00.01 mdadm 2287 root 20 0 0 0 0 D 0 0.0 0:00.01 md0_reshape 2288 root 18 -2 12992 820 676 D 0 0.1 0:00.01 mdadm And all I see in mdstat is: $ cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid6 sdb1[1] sdg1[4] sdf1[7] sde1[6] sdd1[0] sdc1[5] 2929683456 blocks super 1.2 level 6, 1024k chunk, algorithm 2 [7/6] [UU_UUUU] [>....................] reshape = 0.0% (37888/976561152) finish=567604147.2min speed=0K/sec I've already tried mdadm 2.6.7, 3.1.4 and 3.2 - nothing helps. Did I lost my data again? Any suggestions how can I make it work? OS is Ubuntu Server 10.04.2... PS. Needless to say that data is unaccessible - I cannot mount /dev/md0 as save the most valuable data. You can see my disappointment - the very specific thing I was excited about failed twice taking 5Tb of my data with it.

    Read the article

  • How to delete removed devices from a mdadm RAID1?

    - by Kabuto
    I had to replace two hard drives in my RAID1. After adding the two new partitions the old ones are still showing up as removed while the new ones are only added as spare. I've had no luck removing the partitions marked as removed. Here's the RAID in question. Note the two devices (0 and 1) with state removed. $ mdadm --detail /dev/md1 mdadm: metadata format 00.90 unknown, ignored. mdadm: metadata format 00.90 unknown, ignored. /dev/md1: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Thu May 20 12:32:25 2010 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 1454645504 (1387.26 GiB 1489.56 GB) Used Dev Size : 1454645504 (1387.26 GiB 1489.56 GB) Raid Devices : 3 Total Devices : 3 Preferred Minor : 1 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 12 21:30:39 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 3 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 2 UUID : 10d7d9be:a8a50b8e:788182fa:2238f1e4 Events : 0.8717546 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 0 0 1 removed 2 8 34 2 active sync /dev/sdc2 3 8 18 - spare /dev/sdb2 4 8 2 - spare /dev/sda2 How do I get rid of these devices and add the new partitions as active RAID devices? Update I seem to have gotten rid of them. My RAID is resyncing, but the two drives are still marked as spares and are number 3 and 4, which looks wrong. I'll have to wait for the resync to finish. All I did was to fix the metadata error by editing my mdadm.conf and rebooting. I tried rebooting before, but this time it worked for whatever reason. Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 3 8 2 0 spare rebuilding /dev/sda2 4 8 18 1 spare rebuilding /dev/sdb2 2 8 34 2 active sync /dev/sdc2

    Read the article

  • Does mdadm allow to mix sata drives and USB -> sata drives ?

    - by marc
    Welcome, I have question, i have working array md5 of 5 drives. We are running out of space. Server don't have big usage but it have to be online. We can't add another controller. I got idea to buy a USB drive case ? Does mdadm allow to mix array created on sata drives by controller and virtual usb ? (we don't boot from mdadm) But im not sure is this will work ? Is usb drives are configurated before mdadm demon start ? Regards

    Read the article

  • Linux Raid: Can mdadm --grow a raid1 while mounted?

    - by Chris
    I have 2 500gb drives in a RAID1 setup that I needed to upgrade for more space. I mdadm --fail'ed each drive in turn and I used dd to copy each drive to it's respective larger drive (2tb each), removed the smaller drives and replaced them with the larger drives, and reassembled the array and forced a resync. So now I've got a 500gb RAID1 sitting on 2TB drives, and wish to grow them. The plan is to use mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --grow to grow them, then boot a rescue cd, assemble the array under that environment, and do the resize2fs on them. Can I use mdadm --grow on a mounted and live filesystem? Also, do I need more options to make sure the grow operation stays raid1?

    Read the article

  • mdadm lvm and ext4 slowness - How can I speed it up?

    - by beatbreaker
    I can't figure out why I'm getting such terrible times out of my mdadm and in particular the lvm partitions in it. I made the raid: mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --level=5 --chunk=1024 --raid-devices=4 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1 # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] md0 : active raid5 sda1[0] sdd1[3] sdc1[2] sdb1[1] 2930279424 blocks level 5, 1024k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/4] [UUUU] I then created the physical volume, volume group, and logical volumes, I then formatted the logical volumes to ext4 using the following commands I got from here: http://busybox.net/~aldot/mkfs_stride.html mkfs.ext3 -b 4096 -E stride=256,stripe-width=768 /dev/datavg/blah Now I'm confused, I had these lvs running real quick before in mdadm but now that I've 'optimized' everything it's slower, eg, before: /dev/datavg/lv_audio: Timing buffered disk reads: 598 MB in 3.01 seconds = 198.85 MB/sec but now after: /dev/datavg/audio: Timing buffered disk reads: 198 MB in 3.00 seconds = 65.96 MB/sec That's pitiful! What's happened here? Did I not follow the instructions correctly? Can i reshape the ext4 partitons to default back to what they were? (I used defaults before and they were fine!)

    Read the article

  • What's the reason to break HDD to few partitions for MDADM+LVM2?

    - by archer
    I'm using 2 HDDs each 1TB in size. I'm going to create MDADM+LVM2 over them. Initially I though about this partition layout: /dev/sda1 - 1Gb (boot) /dev/sda2 - 500Gb (md0) /dev/sda3 - 499Gb (md1) /dev/sdb1 - 1Gb (boot) /dev/sdb2 - 500Gb (md0) /dev/sdb3 - 499Gb (md1) md0 is going to be raid0 and md1 is going to be raid1 however, I found some info that this would be better to break each drive to more partitions (lets say 10 partitions 100Gb in size each). What's the reason of doing that?

    Read the article

  • disks not ready in array causes mdadm to force initramfs shell

    - by RaidPinata
    Okay, this is starting to get pretty frustrating. I've read most of the other answers on this site that have anything to do with this issue but I'm still not getting anywhere. I have a RAID 6 array with 10 devices and 1 spare. The OS is on a completely separate device. At boot only three of the 10 devices in the raid are available, the others become available later in the boot process. Currently, unless I go through initramfs I can't get the system to boot - it just hangs with a blank screen. When I do boot through recovery (initramfs), I get a message asking if I want to assemble the degraded array. If I say no and then exit initramfs the system boots fine and my array is mounted exactly where I intend it to. Here are the pertinent files as near as I can tell. Ask me if you want to see anything else. # mdadm.conf # # Please refer to mdadm.conf(5) for information about this file. # # by default (built-in), scan all partitions (/proc/partitions) and all # containers for MD superblocks. alternatively, specify devices to scan, using # wildcards if desired. #DEVICE partitions containers # auto-create devices with Debian standard permissions # CREATE owner=root group=disk mode=0660 auto=yes # automatically tag new arrays as belonging to the local system HOMEHOST <system> # instruct the monitoring daemon where to send mail alerts MAILADDR root # definitions of existing MD arrays # This file was auto-generated on Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:50:41 -0700 # by mkconf $Id$ ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid6 num-devices=10 metadata=1.2 spares=1 name=Craggenmore:data UUID=37eea980:24df7b7a:f11a1226:afaf53ae Here is fstab # /etc/fstab: static file system information. # # Use 'blkid' to print the universally unique identifier for a # device; this may be used with UUID= as a more robust way to name devices # that works even if disks are added and removed. See fstab(5). # # <file system> <mount point> <type> <options> <dump> <pass> # / was on /dev/sdc2 during installation UUID=3fa1e73f-3d83-4afe-9415-6285d432c133 / ext4 errors=remount-ro 0 1 # swap was on /dev/sdc3 during installation UUID=c4988662-67f3-4069-a16e-db740e054727 none swap sw 0 0 # mount large raid device on /data /dev/md0 /data ext4 defaults,nofail,noatime,nobootwait 0 0 output of cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid6 sda[0] sdd[10](S) sdl[9] sdk[8] sdj[7] sdi[6] sdh[5] sdg[4] sdf[3] sde[2] sdb[1] 23441080320 blocks super 1.2 level 6, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [10/10] [UUUUUUUUUU] unused devices: <none> Here is the output of mdadm --detail --scan --verbose ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid6 num-devices=10 metadata=1.2 spares=1 name=Craggenmore:data UUID=37eea980:24df7b7a:f11a1226:afaf53ae devices=/dev/sda,/dev/sdb,/dev/sde,/dev/sdf,/dev/sdg,/dev/sdh,/dev/sdi,/dev/sdj,/dev/sdk,/dev/sdl,/dev/sdd Please let me know if there is anything else you think might be useful in troubleshooting this... I just can't seem to figure out how to change the boot process so that mdadm waits until the drives are ready to build the array. Everything works just fine if the drives are given enough time to come online. edit: changed title to properly reflect situation

    Read the article

  • Is Software Raid1 Using mdadm with a Local Hard Disk and GNDB Possible?

    - by Travis
    I have multiple webservers which use many small files to created dynamic web pages. Caching the web pages isn't an option. The webserver also performs writes so I need a synchronous filesystem. I'm looking to maximise performance as it's my understanding that small files is the weakness (to varying degreess) of a cluster filesystem over ethernet. Currently I'm using Centos 5.5, 64 bit. Since it's only about 300MB of data, I'm looking at mdadm using RAID-1 with the GNBD and a local hard disk using the "--write-mostly" option so the reads are done using the local hard disk. Is this possible? If so, is there any advantage to making it a tmpfs disk instead of a local hard disk? Or will the files on the local hard disk just get cached in RAM anyway so I won't see a performance gain by using tmpfs, assuming there's enough RAM available?

    Read the article

  • raid 5 creation (using mdadm) lots of read/writes on creation: is this normal?

    - by Gbrits
    I created a software raid 5 disk using: mdadm -C /dev/md2 -l5 -n4 /dev/sd[i-l] at the same time I'm using dstat to see io-activity: dstat -c -d -D total,sda1,md2,sdi,sdj,sdk,sdl -l -m -n and notice that disks sd[i-k] are all read from and sdl is written to. Now, I do understand that raid5 has to be configured, but it takes a really long time and all disks are clean & formatted (using xfs) so I figure there might be some kind of shortcut to skip (unnecessary? ) checking.. Is it? The creation is part of a time-critical nightly batch-process (run on amazon ec2) so it's not a one-time thing. Thanks, Geert-Jan

    Read the article

  • Linux mdadm software RAID 6 - does it support bit corruption recovery?

    - by user101203
    Wikipedia says "RAID 2 is the only standard RAID level, other than some implementations of RAID 6, which can automatically recover accurate data from single-bit corruption in data." Does anyone know if the RAID 6 mdadm implementation in Linux is one such implementation that can automatically detect and recover from single-bit data corruption. This pertains to CentOS / Red Hat 6 if those are different from other versions. I tried searching online but didn't have much luck. With SATA error rates being 1 in 1E14 bits, and a 2TB SATA disk containing 1.6E13 bits, this is especially relevant to preventing data corruption. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Move an existing RAID 5 array from Ubuntu to Gentoo

    - by Cocoabean
    I have a 64-bit Ubuntu machine with a 4-disk RAID 5 using software raid (md). I've been able to boot an Ubuntu LiveCD and recognize the array with a simple mdadm -A /dev/md0. It was easy to mount after that and nothing had to rebuild. I'm installing Gentoo on this box now (multi-boot, non-RAID root partition) and I have md auto-detect turned on in the kernel. When I boot Gentoo I get: "invalid superblock magic on sdd" for each of the drives in the array. I boot back to Ubuntu and they mount no problem. I tried copying the mdadm.conf that works in Ubuntu to Gentoo, and then ran mdadm -A /dev/md0 but it reports that there is no array named md0. I don't want to lose data (obviously) and I don't want to have to let the RAID rebuild every time I switch between OSes. Any help is appreciated. Both are using mdadm 3.1.4 Both are running 64-bit kernels. mdadm -D /dev/md0 from Ubuntu yields: http://pastebin.com/5gj2QNkV UPDATE: After rebooting I noticed that it still complains about invalid blocks, but cat /proc/mdstat shows an inactive /dev/md127 with the same disks as my raid. I want to mount it but I don't want to get stuck waiting for a rebuild or destroying it inadvertently. mdadm -D /dev/md127 Here is pastebin of mdadm -D /dev/md127 on gentoo: http://pastebin.com/gDCWn0Rn UPDATE II: dmesg output about 'invalid raid superblocks' http://paste.ubuntu.com/885471/ fdisk -l from Ubuntu, /dev/md0 does not have any partitions but I do have it mounted and accessible: http://paste.ubuntu.com/885475/

    Read the article

  • Removing a device in "removed" state from Linux software RAID array

    - by Sahasranaman MS
    My workstation has two disks(/dev/sd[ab]), both with similar partitioning. /dev/sdb failed, and cat /proc/mdstat stopped showing the second sdb partition. I ran mdadm --fail and mdadm --remove for all partitions from the failed disk on the arrays that use them, although all such commands failed with mdadm: set device faulty failed for /dev/sdb2: No such device mdadm: hot remove failed for /dev/sdb2: No such device or address Then I hot swapped the failed disk, partitioned the new disk and added the partitions to the respective arrays. All arrays got rebuilt properly except one, because in /dev/md2, the failed disk doesn't seem to have been removed from the array properly. Because of this, the new partition keeps getting added as a spare to the partition, and its status remains degraded. Here's what mdadm --detail /dev/md2 shows: [root@ldmohanr ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md2 /dev/md2: Version : 1.1 Creation Time : Tue Dec 27 22:55:14 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 52427708 (50.00 GiB 53.69 GB) Used Dev Size : 52427708 (50.00 GiB 53.69 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Intent Bitmap : Internal Update Time : Fri Nov 23 14:59:56 2012 State : active, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Name : ldmohanr.net:2 (local to host ldmohanr.net) UUID : 4483f95d:e485207a:b43c9af2:c37c6df1 Events : 5912611 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2 1 0 0 1 removed 2 8 18 - spare /dev/sdb2 To remove a disk, mdadm needs a device filename, which was /dev/sdb2 originally, but that no longer refers to device number 1. I need help with removing device number 1 with 'removed' status and making /dev/sdb2 active.

    Read the article

  • Linux Software RAID1: How to boot after (physically) removing /dev/sda? (LVM, mdadm, Grub2)

    - by flight
    A server set up with Debian 6.0/squeeze. During the squeeze installation, I configured the two 500GB SATA disks (/dev/sda and /dev/sdb) as a RAID1 (managed with mdadm). The RAID keeps a 500 GB LVM volume group (vg0). In the volume group, there's a single logical volume (lv0). vg0-lv0 is formatted with extfs3 and mounted as root partition (no dedicated /boot partition). The system boots using GRUB2. In normal use, the systems boots fine. Also, when I tried and removed the second SATA drive (/dev/sdb) after a shutdown, the system came up without problem, and after reconnecting the drive, I was able to --re-add /dev/sdb1 to the RAID array. But: After removing the first SATA drive (/dev/sda), the system won't boot any more! A GRUB welcome message shows up for a second, then the system reboots. I tried to install GRUB2 manually on /dev/sdb ("grub-install /dev/sdb"), but that doesn't help. Appearently squeeze fails to set up GRUB2 to launch from the second disk when the first disk is removed, which seems to be quite an essential feature when running this kind of Software RAID1, isn't it? At the moment, I'm lost whether this is a problem with GRUB2, with LVM or with the RAID setup. Any hints?

    Read the article

  • linux raid 1: right after replacing and syncing one drive, the other disk fails - understanding what is going on with mdstat/mdadm

    - by devicerandom
    We have an old RAID 1 Linux server (Ubuntu Lucid 10.04), with four partitions. A few days ago /dev/sdb failed, and today we noticed /dev/sda had pre-failure ominous SMART signs (~4000 reallocated sector count). We replaced /dev/sdb this morning and rebuilt the RAID on the new drive, following this guide: http://www.howtoforge.com/replacing_hard_disks_in_a_raid1_array Everything went smooth until the very end. When it looked like it was finishing to synchronize the last partition, the other old one failed. At this point I am very unsure of the state of the system. Everything seems working and the files seem to be all accessible, just as if it synchronized everything, but I'm new to RAID and I'm worried about what is going on. The /proc/mdstat output is: Personalities : [raid1] [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md3 : active raid1 sdb4[2](S) sda4[0] 478713792 blocks [2/1] [U_] md2 : active raid1 sdb3[1] sda3[2](F) 244140992 blocks [2/1] [_U] md1 : active raid1 sdb2[1] sda2[2](F) 244140992 blocks [2/1] [_U] md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[2](F) 9764800 blocks [2/1] [_U] unused devices: <none> The order of [_U] vs [U_]. Why aren't they consistent along all the array? Is the first U /dev/sda or /dev/sdb? (I tried looking on the web for this trivial information but I found no explicit indication) If I read correctly for md0, [_U] should be /dev/sda1 (down) and /dev/sdb1 (up). But if /dev/sda has failed, how can it be the opposite for md3 ? I understand /dev/sdb4 is now spare because probably it failed to synchronize it 100%, but why does it show /dev/sda4 as up? Shouldn't it be [__]? Or [_U] anyway? The /dev/sda drive now cannot even be accessed by SMART anymore apparently, so I wouldn't expect it to be up. What is wrong with my interpretation of the output? I attach also the outputs of mdadm --detail for the four partitions: /dev/md0: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:07 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 9764800 (9.31 GiB 10.00 GB) Used Dev Size : 9764800 (9.31 GiB 10.00 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:27:33 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : a3b4dbbd:859bf7f2:bde36644:fcef85e2 Events : 0.7704 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 8 17 1 active sync /dev/sdb1 2 8 1 - faulty spare /dev/sda1 /dev/md1: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:15 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Used Dev Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 1 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:39:06 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : 8bcd5765:90dc93d5:cc70849c:224ced45 Events : 0.1508280 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2 2 8 2 - faulty spare /dev/sda2 /dev/md2: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:19 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Used Dev Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 2 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:46:44 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : 2885668b:881cafed:b8275ae8:16bc7171 Events : 0.2289636 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 8 3 - faulty spare /dev/sda3 /dev/md3: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:22 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 478713792 (456.54 GiB 490.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 478713792 (456.54 GiB 490.20 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 3 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:19:20 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 4 0 active sync /dev/sda4 1 0 0 1 removed 2 8 20 - spare /dev/sdb4 The active sync on /dev/sda4 baffles me. I am worried because if tomorrow morning I have to replace /dev/sda, I want to be sure what should I sync with what and what is going on. I am also quite baffled by the fact /dev/sda decided to fail exactly when the raid finished resyncing. I'd like to understand what is really happening. Thanks a lot for your patience and help. Massimo

    Read the article

  • Why is my mdadm raid-1 recovery so slow?

    - by dimmer
    On a system I'm running Ubuntu 10.04. My raid-1 restore started out fast but quickly became ridiculously slow (at this rate the restore will take 150 days!): dimmer@paimon:~$ cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid1 sdc1[2] sdb1[1] 1953513408 blocks [2/1] [_U] [====>................] recovery = 24.4% (477497344/1953513408) finish=217368.0min speed=113K/sec unused devices: <none> Eventhough I have set the kernel variables to reasonably quick values: dimmer@paimon:~$ cat /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_min 1000000 dimmer@paimon:~$ cat /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max 100000000 I am using 2 2.0TB Western Digital Hard Disks, WDC WD20EARS-00M and WDC WD20EARS-00J. I believe they have been partitioned such that their sectors are aligned. dimmer@paimon:/sys$ sudo parted /dev/sdb GNU Parted 2.2 Using /dev/sdb Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands. (parted) p Model: ATA WDC WD20EARS-00M (scsi) Disk /dev/sdb: 2000GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: gpt Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 1049kB 2000GB 2000GB ext4 (parted) unit s (parted) p Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 2048s 3907028991s 3907026944s ext4 (parted) q dimmer@paimon:/sys$ sudo parted /dev/sdc GNU Parted 2.2 Using /dev/sdc Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands. (parted) p Model: ATA WDC WD20EARS-00J (scsi) Disk /dev/sdc: 2000GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/4096B Partition Table: gpt Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 1049kB 2000GB 2000GB ext4 I am beginning to think that I have a hardware problem, otherwise I can't imagine why the mdadm restore should be so slow. I have done a benchmark on /dev/sdc using Ubuntu's disk utility GUI app, and the results looked normal so I know that sdc has the capability to write faster than this. I also had the same problem on a similar WD drive that I RMAd because of bad sectors. I suppose it's possible they sent me a replacement with bad sectors too, although there are no SMART values showing them yet. Any ideas? Thanks. As requested, output of top sorted by cpu usage (notice there is ~0 cpu usage). iowait is also zero which seems strange: top - 11:35:13 up 2 days, 9:40, 3 users, load average: 2.87, 2.58, 2.30 Tasks: 142 total, 1 running, 141 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.2%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.8%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 3096304k total, 1482164k used, 1614140k free, 617672k buffers Swap: 1526132k total, 0k used, 1526132k free, 535416k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 45 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 2:17.02 scsi_eh_0 1 root 20 0 2808 1752 1204 S 0 0.1 0:00.46 init 2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd 3 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.02 migration/0 4 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.17 ksoftirqd/0 5 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 watchdog/0 6 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.02 migration/1 ... dmesg errors, definitely looking like hardware: [202884.000157] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [202884.007015] ata5.00: failed command: FLUSH CACHE EXT [202884.013728] ata5.00: cmd ea/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 tag 0 [202884.013730] res 40/00:00:ff:59:2e/00:00:35:00:00/e0 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [202884.033667] ata5.00: status: { DRDY } [202884.040329] ata5: hard resetting link [202889.400050] ata5: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0) [202894.048087] ata5: COMRESET failed (errno=-16) [202894.054663] ata5: hard resetting link [202899.412049] ata5: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0) [202904.060107] ata5: COMRESET failed (errno=-16) [202904.066646] ata5: hard resetting link [202905.840056] ata5: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [202905.849178] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/133 [202905.849188] ata5: EH complete [203899.000292] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [203899.007096] ata5.00: failed command: IDENTIFY DEVICE [203899.013841] ata5.00: cmd ec/00:01:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 pio 512 in [203899.013843] res 40/00:00:ff:f9:f6/00:00:38:00:00/e0 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [203899.041232] ata5.00: status: { DRDY } [203899.048133] ata5: hard resetting link [203899.816134] ata5: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [203899.826062] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/133 [203899.826079] ata5: EH complete [204375.000200] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [204375.007421] ata5.00: failed command: IDENTIFY DEVICE [204375.014799] ata5.00: cmd ec/00:01:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 pio 512 in [204375.014800] res 40/00:00:ff:0c:0f/00:00:39:00:00/e0 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [204375.044374] ata5.00: status: { DRDY } [204375.051842] ata5: hard resetting link [204380.408049] ata5: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0) [204384.440076] ata5: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [204384.449938] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/133 [204384.449955] ata5: EH complete [204395.988135] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [204395.988140] ata5.00: failed command: IDENTIFY DEVICE [204395.988147] ata5.00: cmd ec/00:01:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 pio 512 in [204395.988149] res 40/00:00:ff:0c:0f/00:00:39:00:00/e0 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [204395.988151] ata5.00: status: { DRDY } [204395.988156] ata5: hard resetting link [204399.320075] ata5: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [204399.330487] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/133 [204399.330503] ata5: EH complete

    Read the article

  • Reconstructing the disk order in RAID 6 with 7 disks

    - by rkotulla
    a little background to this question first: I am running a RAID-6 within a QNAP TS869L external RAID/NAS system. I started with 5 disks of 3 TB each back in the day, and later added another 2 disks of 3TB to the RAID. The QNAP internals handled the growing and re-syncing etc, and everything seemd to be perfectly fine. About 2 weeks ago, I had one of the disks (disk #5, disk #2 has gone bad in the mean time) fail, and somehow (I have no idea why), also disks 1 and 2 got kicked out of the array. I replaced disk #5, but the RAID didn't start working again. After some calls to QNAP technical support, they re-created the array (using mdadm --create --force --assume-clean ...), but the resulting array couldn't find a filesystem, and I was kindly referred to contact a data recovery company that I can't afford. After some digging through old log files, resetting the disk to factory default, etc, I found a few errors that were made during this re-create - I wish I still had some of the original metadata, but unfortunately i don't (I definitely learned that lesson). I'm currently at the point where I know the correct chunk-size (64K), metadata-version (1.0; factory default was 0.9, but from what I read 0.9 doesn't handle disks over 2 TB, mine are 3 TB), and I now find the ext4 filesystem that should be on the disks. Only variable left to determine is the right disk order! I started using the description found in answer #4 of "Recover RAID 5 data after created new array instead of re-using" but am a little confused on what the order should be for a proper RAID-6. RAID-5 is pretty well documented in a number of places, but RAID-6 much less so. Also, does the layout, i.e. distribution of parity and data chunks across the disks, change after the growing of the array from 5 to 7 disks, or does the re-sync re-organize them in such a way a native 7-disk RAID-6 would have been? Thanks some more mdadm output that might be helpful: mdadm version: [~] # mdadm --version mdadm - v2.6.3 - 20th August 2007 mdadm details from one of the disks in the array: [~] # mdadm --examine /dev/sda3 /dev/sda3: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 1.0 Feature Map : 0x0 Array UUID : 1c1614a5:e3be2fbb:4af01271:947fe3aa Name : 0 Creation Time : Tue Jun 10 10:27:58 2014 Raid Level : raid6 Raid Devices : 7 Used Dev Size : 5857395112 (2793.02 GiB 2998.99 GB) Array Size : 29286975360 (13965.12 GiB 14994.93 GB) Used Size : 5857395072 (2793.02 GiB 2998.99 GB) Super Offset : 5857395368 sectors State : clean Device UUID : 7c572d8f:20c12727:7e88c888:c2c357af Update Time : Tue Jun 10 13:01:06 2014 Checksum : d275c82d - correct Events : 7036 Chunk Size : 64K Array Slot : 0 (0, 1, failed, 3, failed, 5, 6) Array State : Uu_u_uu 2 failed mdadm details for the array in the current disk-order (based on my best guess reconstructed from old log-files) [~] # mdadm --detail /dev/md0 /dev/md0: Version : 01.00.03 Creation Time : Tue Jun 10 10:27:58 2014 Raid Level : raid6 Array Size : 14643487680 (13965.12 GiB 14994.93 GB) Used Dev Size : 2928697536 (2793.02 GiB 2998.99 GB) Raid Devices : 7 Total Devices : 5 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Jun 10 13:01:06 2014 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 5 Working Devices : 5 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 Chunk Size : 64K Name : 0 UUID : 1c1614a5:e3be2fbb:4af01271:947fe3aa Events : 7036 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 3 0 active sync /dev/sda3 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 0 0 2 removed 3 8 51 3 active sync /dev/sdd3 4 0 0 4 removed 5 8 99 5 active sync /dev/sdg3 6 8 83 6 active sync /dev/sdf3 output from /proc/mdstat (md8, md9, and md13 are internally used RAIDs holding swap, etc; the one I'm after is md0) [~] # more /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [multipath] md0 : active raid6 sdf3[6] sdg3[5] sdd3[3] sdb3[1] sda3[0] 14643487680 blocks super 1.0 level 6, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [7/5] [UU_U_UU] md8 : active raid1 sdg2[2](S) sdf2[3](S) sdd2[4](S) sdc2[5](S) sdb2[6](S) sda2[1] sde2[0] 530048 blocks [2/2] [UU] md13 : active raid1 sdg4[3] sdf4[4] sde4[5] sdd4[6] sdc4[2] sdb4[1] sda4[0] 458880 blocks [8/7] [UUUUUUU_] bitmap: 21/57 pages [84KB], 4KB chunk md9 : active raid1 sdg1[6] sdf1[5] sde1[4] sdd1[3] sdc1[2] sda1[0] sdb1[1] 530048 blocks [8/7] [UUUUUUU_] bitmap: 37/65 pages [148KB], 4KB chunk unused devices: <none>

    Read the article

  • Impossible to stop raid device

    - by Traroth
    I'm trying to stop a RAID disk in order to replace it by a new one, as this one is not working properly. I'm typing mdadm --stop /dev/md1, and I'm getting an error message: mdadm: fail to stop array /dev/md1: Device or resource busy I'm getting this message even if I reboot the server, and I can't see a process that could cause this. The server is working under a Debian with a 2.6.18-4-amd64 kernel. Could you help? Edit: Mote details about what my colleague tried out. After unmounting sda1, the command mdadm --remove /dev/md0 /dev/sda1 worked. But now, we still have an error message after mdadm --remove /dev/md1 /dev/sda5: mdadm: hot remove failed for /dev/sda5: Device or resource busy I still don't understand completly how the different partitions are mounted, so I suppose there is something I don't understand in the currenct situation...

    Read the article

  • Raid1+0: create stripe over two /dev/mdx on partition or not?

    - by Chris
    Given that I haven't found a way to define how a Raid10 is created with mdadm, i went the Raid1+0 solution. How to display/define Mirror/Stripping pairs with mdadm mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdf1 mdadm --create /dev/md1 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdg1 /dev/sdh1 mdadm --create /dev/md10 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/md0 /dev/md1 My question is about the stripe. For the mirror I create a primary partition over the full HD and set partition type to FD. So, should I do the same for the Stripe? Create partition on /dev/md0 and /dev/md1 (primary over full 'HDD', set partition type correctly) and then do the stripe on the partition? Is there a correct way here or are there any advantages/disadvantages to a solution? Thank you

    Read the article

  • How does one enable --write-mostly with Linux RAID?

    - by user76871
    Unfortunately the mdadm and mdadm.conf man pages are not quite up to par. I would like to enable the --write-mostly flag for my RAID, but neither the man pages nor the internet will tell me how. I am not aware of any place to put default arguments for mdadm, nor aware of when it would be launched and by what. It seems the logical place to add this information is mdadm.conf, but the flag is unmentioned in man mdadm.conf. Where and how can I enable --write-mostly? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How to create partition when growing raid5 with mdadm.

    - by hometoast
    I have 4 drives, 2x640GB, and 2x1TB drives. My array is made up of the four 640GB partitions and the beginning of each drive. I want to replace both 640GB with 1TB drives. I understand I need to 1) fail a disk 2) replace with new 3) partition 4) add disk to array My question is, when I create the new partition on the new 1TB drive, do I create a 1TB "Raid Auto Detect" partition? Or do I create another 640GB partition and grow it later? Or perhaps the same question could be worded: after I replace the drives how to I grow the 640GB raid partitions to fill the rest of the 1TB drive? fdisk info: Disk /dev/sdb: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0xe3d0900f Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 77825 625129281 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb2 77826 121601 351630720 83 Linux Disk /dev/sdc: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0xc0b23adf Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 1 77825 625129281 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdc2 77826 121601 351630720 83 Linux Disk /dev/sdd: 640.1 GB, 640135028736 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 77825 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x582c8b94 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 77825 625129281 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/sde: 640.1 GB, 640135028736 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 77825 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0xbc33313a Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sde1 1 77825 625129281 fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/md0: 1920.4 GB, 1920396951552 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 468846912 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000

    Read the article

  • How to get an inactive RAID device working again?

    - by Jonik
    After booting, my RAID1 device (/dev/md_d0 *) sometimes goes in some funny state and I cannot mount it. * Originally I created /dev/md0 but it has somehow changed itself into /dev/md_d0. # mount /opt mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/md_d0, missing codepage or helper program, or other error (could this be the IDE device where you in fact use ide-scsi so that sr0 or sda or so is needed?) In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try dmesg | tail or so The RAID device appears to be inactive somehow: # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md_d0 : inactive sda4[0](S) 241095104 blocks # mdadm --detail /dev/md_d0 mdadm: md device /dev/md_d0 does not appear to be active. Question is, how to make the device active again (using mdmadm, I presume)? (Other times it's alright (active) after boot, and I can mount it manually without problems. But it still won't mount automatically even though I have it in /etc/fstab: /dev/md_d0 /opt ext4 defaults 0 0 So a bonus question: what should I do to make the RAID device automatically mount at /opt at boot time?) This is an Ubuntu 9.10 workstation. Background info about my RAID setup in this question. Edit: My /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf looks like this. I've never touched this file, at least by hand. # by default, scan all partitions (/proc/partitions) for MD superblocks. # alternatively, specify devices to scan, using wildcards if desired. DEVICE partitions # auto-create devices with Debian standard permissions CREATE owner=root group=disk mode=0660 auto=yes # automatically tag new arrays as belonging to the local system HOMEHOST <system> # instruct the monitoring daemon where to send mail alerts MAILADDR <my mail address> # definitions of existing MD arrays # This file was auto-generated on Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:14:36 +0200 In /proc/partitions the last entry is md_d0 at least now, after reboot, when the device happens to be active again. (I'm not sure if it would be the same when it's inactive.) Resolution: as Jimmy Hedman suggested, I took the output of mdadm --examine --scan: ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=2 UUID=de8fbd92[...] and added it in /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf, which seems to have fixed the main problem. After changing /etc/fstab to use /dev/md0 again (instead of /dev/md_d0), the RAID device also gets automatically mounted!

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

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