Search Results

Search found 5000 results on 200 pages for 'partition alignment'.

Page 31/200 | < Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >

• CentOS 5.5 ext4 conversion problem - ext4 partition is recognized as ext3

  - by FractalizeR

  Hello. I had 5.4 machine. Upgraded to 5.5 today via yum upgrade. All went fine. Rebooted. Wanted to convert root partition to ext4 (I have three partitions: /boot, / and swap). All of them on software RAID 1 (root is /dev/md2). I did the following for converting yum install e4fsprogs tune2fs -O extents,uninit_bg,dir_index /dev/md2 nano /etc/fstab # I indicated here that my /dev/md2 is of ext4 uname -a mkinitrd -f /boot/initrd-2.6.18-194.3.1.el5.img 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 Rebooted. I expected fsck to start automatically as said on some site. But it did not. Threw some error (don't remember exactly which). Ok, I booted linux rescue and executed fsck: fsck -t ext4 -fy /dev/md2 Partition went fine. But still when I boot main system, it says in log: "ext3-fs:" then something about not being able to mount ext3 partition due to unknown extended attributed (200). I booted linux rescue again. It loads fine and correctly determines all my machine partitions both ext3 (boot) and ext4 (/) under /mnt/sysimage just fine. I retried mkinitrd thing again watching it's output and ensured ext4 module is included into the system. I also edited menu.lst grub file to include rootfstype=ext4 kernel parameter. Bad luck. I still have message from ext3-fs about not being able to mount filesystem because of attributes and kernel panic immediately after. I checked /etc/fstab - it's fine and saying that root is of ext4. What did I do wrong? This machine is empty so I can just reformat it with 5.5 and recreate partitions to be originally ext4. But... I just want to know what did I do wrong.

  Read the article

• Degraded RAID-5 array with lvm2 lost superblock and partition table

  - by Fred Phillips

  I have a RAID-5 array of 4x1TB hard disks with one lvm2 partition on Ubuntu Linux 10.04 LTS. One of the disks has failed. I have re-assembled the array without this failed disk but now mdadm --examine claims the array has no superblock and fdisk says it has no partition table. What can I do to recover the data? # mdadm -D /dev/md0 /dev/md0: Version : 1.2 Creation Time : Sat Mar 5 14:43:49 2011 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 2930276352 (2794.53 GiB 3000.60 GB) Used Dev Size : 976758784 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Sat Mar 5 15:06:49 2011 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 3 Working Devices : 3 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 512K Name : boba:1 (local to host boba) UUID : 52eb4bc9:c3d8aab5:e0699505:e0e1aa05 Events : 18 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 1 0 active sync /dev/sda1 1 8 65 1 active sync /dev/sde1 2 8 49 2 active sync /dev/sdd1 3 0 0 3 removed 4 8 17 - faulty spare /dev/sdb1 # mdadm --examine /dev/md0 mdadm: No md superblock detected on /dev/md0. # fdisk -l /dev/md0 Disk /dev/md0: 3000.6 GB, 3000602984448 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 732569088 cylinders Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 524288 bytes / 1572864 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] md0 : active raid5 sdb1[4](F) sda1[0] sdd1[2] sde1[1] 2930276352 blocks super 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_] unused devices: <none>

  Read the article

• Why does this loopback device creation malfunction?

  - by user50118

  The stackoverflow people thought this was more appropriate here, I put it there as it is part of a program but I can see their POV, so here it is: At the bottom of the code you can see it failing. In fact, I'll put it here at the start too because it is the problem I need to solve: [350591.924819] EXT4-fs (loop0): bad geometry: block count 9750806 exceeds size of device (9750168 blocks) I don't understand why the device is supposedly too small. I made this partition two days ago with normal fdisk, it was created and formatted with ext4 supplying no options other than the partition (/dev/sdb2) to format. The only explaination I can think of is that ext4 has the size of the partition wrong somehow but that seems very unlikely. What is wrong with my math? The offset is correct, you can see that with the file command, and the size should be correct too because End - Start comes to the same number of sectors minus 1, just like it should (A disk starting on sector 1 and ending on sector 2 would be 2 - 1 = 1 and have two sectors). # sfdisk -luS /dev/sdb Disk /dev/sdb: 9729 cylinders, 255 heads, 63 sectors/track Units = sectors of 512 bytes, counting from 0 Device Boot Start End #sectors Id System /dev/sdb2 78295040 156296384 78001345 83 Linux # losetup -r -f --show -o $((78295040 * 512)) --sizelimit $((78001345 * 512)) /dev/sdb /dev/loop0 # file -s /dev/loop0 /dev/loop0: Linux rev 1.0 ext4 filesystem data (needs journal recovery) (extents) (large files) (huge files) # mount -o ro -t ext4 /dev/loop0 /mnt mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/loop0, missing codepage or helper program, or other error In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try dmesg | tail or so # dmesg | tail -n 1 [350591.924819] EXT4-fs (loop0): bad geometry: block count 9750806 exceeds size of device (9750168 blocks)

  Read the article

• GRUB- error: no such partition grub rescue and Error: No default or UI configuration directive found boot > on pendrive

  - by Ash

  I have dell inspiron, previously I installed Ubuntu 11.10 on my Windows 7 and made it dual boot. But since I want to upgrade my Ubuntu version and change the partition spacing, I deleted 11.10 partition directly and extended my hardrive space (Windows + Ubuntu) at that moment everything was fine. Then I prepared a 12.04 32bit USB and installed it . It was installed but isn't showing dual boot option like 11.10 and my machine directly boot into Windows 7. So instantly i again deleted my 12.04 partition . Now I login into Windows 7 but whenever I put USB ( with 12.04 ) to boot from it, I am facing error of "no such partition grub rescue" even though I try to put lower version(11.04) it showing another error "Error: No default or UI configuration directive found boot " I have reinstall Windows 7 and reformat all partition, still I am facing same error :(

  Read the article

• Recovering a mdadm+lvm+ext4 partition with read error

  - by bitwelder

  One of disks in my NAS has failed. The NAS is running Linux, and it uses mdadm + LVM technology for its filesystems. I do have backup for most of the contents, but not for the very last changes, and if possible, I'd like to recover that from this failing disk. The disk (a 'green drive' WD10EARS 1TB in size) throws this kind of errors: Oct 3 12:00:41 kernel: [ 3625.620000] ata5.00: read unc at 9453282 Oct 3 12:00:41 kernel: [ 3625.620000] lba 9453282 start 9453280 end 1953511007 Oct 3 12:00:41 kernel: [ 3625.620000] sde5 auto_remap 0 Oct 3 12:00:41 kernel: [ 3625.630000] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x1 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 Oct 3 12:00:41 kernel: [ 3625.630000] ata5.00: edma_err_cause=00000084 pp_flags=00000003, dev error, EDMA self-disable Oct 3 12:00:41 kernel: [ 3625.640000] ata5.00: failed command: READ FPDMA QUEUED Oct 3 12:00:41 kernel: [ 3625.650000] ata5.00: cmd 60/40:00:e0:3e:90/00:00:00:00:00/40 tag 0 ncq 32768 in Oct 3 12:00:41 kernel: [ 3625.650000] res 41/40:00:e2:3e:90/12:00:00:00:00/40 Emask 0x409 (media error) <F> Oct 3 12:00:41 kernel: [ 3625.660000] ata5.00: status: { DRDY ERR } However, while testing with 'dd', I noticed that if I skip the first 4kB, the read seems to be ok, i.e. a command like. dd if=/dev/sde5 of=dev/null bs=4k count=1000 skip=1 doesn't return any read error. Supposing that there is no other read failure in the rest of the disk, would I be able to recover this 900 GB partition (as I mentioned before, it's a 'linux raid autodetect' partition, that contains a a LVM2 volume that contains a ext4 filesystem) if I copy-clone the partition somewhere else, but the first 4kB?

  Read the article

• Windows recovery partition with GRUB2

  - by Actorclavilis

  So I recently got a new Toshiba laptop and installed Ubuntu 12.04 on it. Since it is a "Windows 7 Enabled" machine or some other proprietary nonsense like that, a few hardware features are designed only to work with W7. Eventually I found a way to enable these hardware functions by booting into the W7 recovery disc; however, they sporadically stop working. I'm moderately surprised that I was able to get anything to work at all, so I don't especially want to spend more time fixing the problems in a different fashion. Now I don't actually own the recovery disc; it's my father's. Since it's a pain to have to go asking for the disc every time the features stop working, I made an image of the disc and was hoping to make a 'recovery' partition like some computers have. However, unetbootin and GRUB2 both want a kernel and initrd to point to on startup, and something like set root=(hd0,1) loopback lo /w7r.iso set root=(lo) chainloader +1 in the spirit of the makeactive/ chainloader +1 commands that I used to use to dual-boot Linux and Windows simply gives me a file-not-found error. My question, therefore, is: Is it possible to, having written a Windows iso to a partition (such as with dd if=w7r.iso of=/dev/sda4) to a partition, convince GRUB2 to boot from it? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• ext3: maximum recommended partition size / handling large partitions

  - by Hansi

  Hi! I would like to do an encrypted install of Ubuntu on a 2 Terabyte drive (i.e., using LUKS/DMcrypt). In order to not have to type in passwords too often, the partitioning scheme will be 50 GB for / and about 1 TB for /home (and the rest for Windows 7), just for clarity. Even though by now LVM is regarded as being stable, I don't want to bother having more room for errors by introducing unnecessary layers of complexity. For both Ubuntu partitions I want encrypted ext3 with the default blocksize of ext3 (4k?). Thoughts: When I look at most partition schemes here on this site or elsewhere, I usually see at most about 400 or 500 GB partitions (maybe I didn't see enough). There may be different reasons for this, but is reliability an issue here? Are larger ext3 partitions, like about 1 TB, harder to handle for the OS or filesystem driver or at some other level? If I make the partition too large, will it be harder to repair in case of corruptions? Are there some default settings for ext3 that I should change for 1 TB partitions? Question: What maximum partition size for ext3 do you recommend and why? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Restoring MBR, partition table, and boot sector of memory card without data loss ("USBC")

  - by Synetech

  Abstract I have a FAT32 memory card that when inserted into a computer causes Windows to prompt to format it. The card is definitely not supposed to be blank and has a bunch of files on it. Symptoms Using a hex-editor/disk-viewer, I examined the card and found that several sectors/clusters have been overwritten with something that has a signature of USBC at the start of the sector. Specifically, the master boot record (and partition table) is gone (hence Windows thinking the card is blank and needing to be formatted), as are the boot sectors (they have the USBC signature and a volume label of NO NAME and partition type of FAT32). Fortunately, it looks like both copies of the FAT are almost entirely intact (a few FAT entries at the start of a cluster here and there seem to be overwritten by USBC). The root directory is also nearly intact—I can see the volume label entry and subdirectory listings, but one sector is overwritten. (There are no more instances of USBC after the last one in the FAT2.) Hypothesis These observations seem to indicate some sort of virus that erases a few key filesystem structures, and then overwrites a few extra sectors here and there. Googling it seems to corroborate the idea of a virus, except that others report a file called USBC which does not apply here, and in fact, could not be possible since there is no filesystem to even see files. I cannot find any information about a virus with these symptoms, nor a removal tool. (I can't help but wonder if it is actually due to an autorun virus prevention tool.) Question I can likely fix the FAT corruption since they are mostly contiguous chains and maybe even the lost sector of the root directory, but does anyone know of a convenient way to restore or (re)create the MBR/partition table and boot sectors (without formatting or overwriting the data)?

  Read the article

• W7-pro indexing mydoc on disk partition does not work

  - by Yvan Thery

  I am working on a HP-7100 mini tower running W7 Pro 64bits. My Local HD includes C:/ + 2 disk partitions : all my documents are located on disk partition L:/ and all my media files are on disk partition M:/ The indexing process works well on C:/ and M:/ but does not index the L:/ any more also all of them are allowed to be indexed, also the system is present on all drive security tabs. I have tested to rebuilt the indexing file with a new setting including few directories present on drive C/M/L but still with L: does not work ! One more thing I can tell you is that even after rebuilding the indexing file, I can find some residual directories or files which are out of the test selection. It is like unerased components remaining in the indexing database. As I do not know precisely how the indexing process works it is hard to know what to do ... Recently I had a bad time after using a past restoration procedure ... maybe it did corrupt the indexing file ???? If I start indexing the all L:/ disk partition the system stop at 39 found index also many more are existing .... Does any one from you guys could advise the process to create a new indexing database ... ? Any idea to get out of this mess ? Many thanks for assistance Yvan

  Read the article

• What should I encrypt in Debian during install?

  - by ianfuture

  I have seen various guides and recommendations on web about how best to do this but nothing that clearly explains the best way and why. So I understand there is a need for part of Debian during install to be un-encrypted on its own partition to allow it to boot. Most info I have seen is call this /boot and set the boot flag. Next I believe the best approach is to create another partition out of all the rest of the disk space, encrypt this, then on top of that create a LVM and then within the LVM create my various partitions , name them , select size, and file system type. Can I include /swap in the encrypted LVM part ? Is this approach sound? If so what are the partitions I should use (this is going to be a minimal server install with a view to install as and when what I need for a dev server)? Finally how does the installer know what to put in each partition I define ? I appreciate there are more than one question but any help and suggestions would be appreciated. If further clarification is needed please mention in the comments . EDIT : 16/3/2010 After Richard Holloways reply I thought it relevant to add this info: The reasons why I want to do this are to explore maximising security on any server install and set up, due to interest in the area of Computer Security and Forensics. Also I am trying to peform the task as if it being performed in an enterprise situation. On a technical matter, once set up and configured with minimal packages and ssh this server will not physically be easy to access so I will only be entering via ssh. (Yes I know why encrypt something no one will ever be able to get their hands on? Because I can and I want to is the simple answer, but see above too).

  Read the article

• How to split currently used partition on Ubuntu server?

  - by KrizzzyS

  I would like to split a currently used partition that is mounted to /usr directory. I did this because / only had 1 gb of data allocated to it. Now, I did not account for the /home directory when I made this partition (or I would have made two partitions). So I have 14 gb mounted to usr/ with 12 gb free. Is there a way I can reclaim the free space on this partition to make another partition to mount to /home? Here is the result of a df -h: I have tried to split the /dev/mmcblk1p4 into 2 different partitions but I was not able to save the partition table correctly.

  Read the article

• Is it safe to format this partition?

  - by xanesis4

  On a ubuntu server I own, I am running out of space. When I ran sudo parted /dev/sda -l to find all available drives, I got this: Model: ATA ST31000528AS (scsi) Disk /dev/sda: 1000GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: msdos Number Start End Size Type File system Flags 1 1049kB 256MB 255MB primary ext2 boot 2 257MB 1000GB 1000GB extended 5 257MB 1000GB 1000GB logical lvm Model: Linux device-mapper (linear) (dm) Disk /dev/mapper/server--vg-swap_1: 2135MB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: loop Number Start End Size File system Flags 1 0.00B 2135MB 2135MB linux-swap(v1) Model: Linux device-mapper (linear) (dm) Disk /dev/mapper/server--vg-root: 998GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: loop Number Start End Size File system Flags 1 0.00B 998GB 998GB ext4 I understand /dev/mapper/server--vg-root is the filesystem, and /dev/sda1 has some stuff related to GRUB. But, what about /dev/sda2 and /dev/sda5? When I tried to mount /dev/sda2, it said that I needed to specify the file system, which according to the table, is nonexistent. So, is it safe to format this with, say ext4 and mount it? Also, when I tried to mount /dev/sd5, it gave me this error: mount: unknown filesystem type 'LVM2_member' I assume it is NOT save to reformat this. If I'm wrong, then that would be great, because I could save some space. Please let me know either way. Thanks in advance! UPDATE: Here is the result of mount: /dev/mapper/server--vg-root on / type ext4 (rw,errors=remount-ro) proc on /proc type proc (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) none on /sys/fs/fuse/connections type fusectl (rw) none on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw) none on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs (rw) udev on /dev type devtmpfs (rw,mode=0755) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,noexec,nosuid,gid=5,mode=0620) tmpfs on /run type tmpfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,size=10%,mode=0755) none on /run/lock type tmpfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev,size=5242880) none on /run/shm type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev) /dev/sda1 on /boot type ext2 (rw,acl) /dev/sda1 on /media/hd2 type ext2 (rw)

  Read the article

• Aligning Numbered Bullet Points in Word 2007

  - by FrustratedwithWord

  I am putting together a very large business manual which incorporates numbered headings, steps to follow, diagrams, etc. When using the bullet points, they align perfectly as I work through the processes. However when I include a diagram, or something different from the "norm" of text, the alignment changes. I would like all the bullet points to be aligned in the whole document regardless of where they appear in the document. Is there a way to save the settings so that the bullets always appear in the same position? Currently I am having to reset the indents by dragging the tabs on the ruler. This will be a large document, so I don't want to manually adjust the numbered bullets every time. Help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks very much.

  Read the article

• Oracle "Partition By" Keyword

  - by Nalandial

  Can someone please explain what the "partition by" keyword does and give a simple example of it in action, as well as why one would want to use it? I have a SQL query written by someone else and I'm trying to figure out what it does. An example of partition by: SELECT empno, deptno, COUNT(*) OVER (PARTITION BY deptno) DEPT_COUNT FROM emp The examples I've seen online seem a bit too in-depth. Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Unable to delete oldest table partition - Oracle 11g

  - by poijoi

  Hi, I'm using the 11g interval partitioning feature in one of my tables. I set it up to create 1 day partitions on a timestamp field and created a job to delete data 3 months old. When I try to delete the oldest partition I get the following error: ORA-14758: Last partition in the range section cannot be dropped I would have thought that "Last" refers to the newest partition and not the oldest. How should I interpret this error? Is there something wrong with my partitions or should I in fact keep the oldest partition there at all time? Thanks in advance, PJ

  Read the article

• security concerns in dual-boot Linux, Windows system? [closed]

  - by Brian

  I plan to install Windows Vista on my second hard drive partition, with Ubuntu Hardy remaining on the first partition. How likely is it that any security holes that may exist in Vista could allow malicious code to find its way to the Ubuntu partition or otherwise damage the system?

  Read the article

• how to create partition on windows CE device

  - by mack369

  Is there any tool to create a new partition on windows CE device? Device has a NAND flash memory and initially there were two partitions. Using Storage manager in Control Panel I was able to delete one partition but when I want to create it again, I get an error message: "Unable to create partition".

  Read the article

• Attachment_fu: can't disable :partition option

  - by Nathan Long

  I'm trying to use the Attachment_Fu plugin in a Rails project, and want to customize the paths where uploaded files are saved. The documentation shows this option: :partition # Whether to partiton files in directories like /0000/0001/image.jpg. Default is true. (The 0001 part is an ID from a table.) I don't want that, so I set the partition option to false, like so: class Photo < ActiveRecord::Base has_attachment :content_type => :image, :storage => :file_system, :max_size => 500.kilobytes, :resize_to => '320x200', :thumbnails => {:thumb => '100x100>' }, :partition => false validates_as_attachment end ...but the :partition => false option has no effect. Has anybody else encountered this problem? How did you fix it?

  Read the article

• Developing a sector based partition copying program?

  - by baltusaj

  Hi, I want to develop a program that copies a partition's 'data' only, to another partition. And I want to do it such that the program starts from the first sector of source partition and checks if a sector is used. If it is used copy it to the destination parition. Else don't copy. In other words it's like copying only the contents of a partition to another, sector-by-sector. Question: Is there a way to check if a particular sector on harddisk is used or not? The programming language I am using is C++ and the underlying filesystem in NTFS. Thanks a lot.

  Read the article

• Installing 13.04 on an EFI partition - Share with Windows 8?

  - by mengelkoch

  Information I've found here suggests that for my system, I need to install 13.04 into an EFI-type partition, since it needs to boot as UEFI. I also understand it is advisable to have only ONE EFI partition on the disk; I've read here that it is OK for Ubuntu and Windows to share the same partition (please confirm). When I try to install into the existing EFI drive, I get the message "No root file system is defined. Please correct from partitioning menu." Do I change the EFI boot partition to another type? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? If I change it to Ext4 Journaling File System, I am given the opportunity to define the '/' Mount point. I haven't proceeded beyond this point for fear I am going to destroy Windows 8 by altering this partition. BTW, I created three partitions in Windows before installing, per the helpful response to my previous question. But if I try to install into the partition I created for Ubuntu, I get the "No root file system..." error again.

  Read the article

• How do I boot to a windows recovery partition from GRUB in a Toshiba computer?

  - by Andy Groff

  This should be simple but I cannot figure out how to do it. I've been dual booting ubuntu and vista for a while. About 8 months ago, I realized my windows partition got corrupt and does not boot. This wasn't a problem since I didn't need it anyways, but now I do need windows. Using the disk manager I can see a partition called Toshiba System Volume which is 1.6 GB and one called HDD Recovery which is 7.8 GB. I assume the second one is what I need and i'm not sure what the first one is for. Anyways, how do I boot to this one? Is it a matter of configuring GRUB to boot to it? Once I do boot to it will it let me only reformat my windows partition, or is it going to restore the entire hard drive to factory condition? I assume I'll get the general windows installer which lets me choose the partition but, as you can probably tell, I've never used a recover partition. Should I burn the contents of the partition to a disk and boot to that? Sorry if this is obvious but I'm confused and cannot figure this out.

  Read the article

• How do I boot to a windows recovery partition from GRUB on a Toshiba computer?

  - by Andy Groff

  This should be simple but I cannot figure out how to do it. I've been dual booting ubuntu and vista for a while. About 8 months ago, I realized my windows partition got corrupt and does not boot. This wasn't a problem since I didn't need it anyways, but now I do need windows. Using the disk manager I can see a partition called Toshiba System Volume which is 1.6 GB and one called HDD Recovery which is 7.8 GB. I assume the second one is what I need and i'm not sure what the first one is for. Anyways, how do I boot to this one? Is it a matter of configuring GRUB to boot to it? Once I do boot to it will it let me only reformat my windows partition, or is it going to restore the entire hard drive to factory condition? I assume I'll get the general windows installer which lets me choose the partition but, as you can probably tell, I've never used a recover partition. Should I burn the contents of the partition to a disk and boot to that? Sorry if this is obvious but I'm confused and cannot figure this out.

  Read the article

• How do I get 12.04 to recognize swap partition so that I can hibernate?

  - by Kayla

  I justed installed 12.04 and used gparted to erase and enlarge my swap partition. When I rebooted, gparted said that the file partition for the swap was unknown. Gparted doesn't let me change the file partition to "linux-swap". It does let me change it to NTFS, but when I reboot, it goes back to "unknown". Thanks in advance for your help. Output from sudo swapon -s: Filename Type Size Used Priority /dev/mapper/cryptswap1 partition 9025532 0 -1 Output from sudo fdisk -l: Disk /dev/sda: 250.1 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders, total 488397168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x9d63ac84 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 2048 2459647 1228800 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda2 2459648 197836472 97688412+ 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda3 466890752 488395119 10752184 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda4 197836798 466890751 134526977 5 Extended /dev/sda5 197836800 448837631 125500416 83 Linux /dev/sda6 448839680 466890751 9025536 82 Linux swap / Solaris Partition table entries are not in disk order Disk /dev/mapper/cryptswap1: 9242 MB, 9242148864 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 1123 cylinders, total 18051072 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x951b7f53 Disk /dev/mapper/cryptswap1 doesn't contain a valid partition table

  Read the article

• FreeNas on Dell Powervault 745N: 2TB Limit?

  - by willoller

  I want to purchase 2 x 2TB drives, and install FreeNas on my Dell Powervault 745N. People on the internets seem to be having trouble with the MD3000 firmware, and I want to make sure I can solve any issues before buying the drives. Before I invest, I have 3 questions : Is there a partition size limit determined by the RAID controller? That is, could I have a striped 4TB partition? The spec sheets make me wonder if the RAID controller needs all 4 drives in order to work. Is there any reason this will have to run in RAID5? If I buy 4 matching drives, would the controller support a RAID6 configuration? I'm basically new to all this RAID stuff - sorry for any noob questions.

  Read the article

• Disable linux read and write file cache on partition

  - by complistic

  How do i disable the linux file cache on a xfs partition (both read an write). We have a xfs partition over a hardware RAID that stores our RAW HD Video. Most of the shoots are 50-300gb each so the linux cache has a hit-rate of 0.001%. I have tryed the sync option but it still fills up the cache when copinging the files. ( about 30x over per shoot :P ) /etc/fstab: /dev/sdb1 /video xfs sync,noatime,nodiratime,logbufs=8 0 1 Im running debian lenny if it helps.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >