Search Results

Search found 1864 results on 75 pages for 'raid z'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 39/75 | < Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >

  • SAS Array with or without expander

    - by tegbains
    Is it better to use a SAS Expander backplane for 12 drives via one SAS connection or is it better to use a SAS backplane with 3 SAS connections? This is in terms of performance, rather than expansion. This array will be setup using ZFS on a OpenSolaris via a LSI SAS controller as an iSCSI target. The two products being considered are the SuperMicro SuperChassis 826A-R1200LPB or the SuperChassis 826E2-R800LPB

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting major performance issue: Is culprit Intel RST, Hard drive, or something else?

    - by Sean Killeen
    The Setup I have the following components that come into play in this situation: ASUS P8Z68 V/PRO motherboard a RAID1 configuration (1x 1TB drive, 1 x 2TB drive -- I explain below), accelerated with an SSD using Intel's RST software, and 1 TB drive standing by as a spare. Core i7 2600k 32 GB RAM Windows 8.1 This box was designed to be beast, and until just recently, was very good at being just that. What's Happening The system has slowed to a crawl whenever it touches the disk. Things appear to work at normal speed when dealing with memory. For example, typing this is fine, but saving it to disk from notepad gave me a 5-7 second pause when clicking save. The disks appear to be at 100% all the time (e.g. the light on the disk access on the PC is solidly on -- not even any flashing) In ProcExp it appears that the disk is barely being utilized at all: Intel RST reports that everything is fine: Other Details Prior to this happening, RST had reported that my drives were failing (one went bad, one was throwing SMART events). This made sense; they were at the tail end of their warranty and the PC is on almost all the time. I RMA'd the drives via Seagate. In the meantime, I'd purchased a 2TB drive because I didn't realize that the 1TB drives were under warranty. I figured I'd replace the other 1 TB drive with another 2 TB when it died but then discovered the warranty. AFAIK, I haven't done any major updates since 8.1 and it worked fine after those. Question(s) How can I troubleshoot this? What is the best way to try to figure out why disks are being maxed out despite the OS reporting barely any disk usage and that everything is OK? Given the failures, etc. that I describe above, is it possible that the problem could be the I/O on the motherboard itself? If so, how would I even be able to diagnose it? I'm betting the drives that Seagate gave me are refurbished (didn't think to look; that's dumb). Is it possible that the same model drive, refurbished, could somehow cause this? In terms of how RAID1 works, is it possible that one drive is "falling behind" somehow, and that the RAID1 is constantly trying to fix the mirroring? If so, this seems like Intel RST would report on it, but I wanted to consider it as an option.

    Read the article

  • DIR $file "File Not Found" vs DIR $filedir shows it....not permissions, not USB

    - by Kev
    I was having this problem before on a USB drive, but now it's happening on my main RAID5-backed hard disk: 2013-10-17 9:37 C:\>dir "C:\Shares\Shared\Reference\Safety Management System\Vid eo CD\AutoPlay\Docs\Manuel*" Volume in drive C has no label. Volume Serial Number is 3C18-E114 Directory of C:\Shares\Shared\Reference\Safety Management System\Video CD\AutoP lay\Docs 2003-09-09 11:29 PM 1,056,768 Manuel d'intervention d'urgence MFC.doc 2004-06-20 10:36 PM 139,849 Manuel d'intervention d'urgence MFC.pdf 2 File(s) 1,196,617 bytes 0 Dir(s) 196,068,691,968 bytes free 2013-10-17 9:38 C:\>dir "C:\Shares\Shared\Reference\Safety Management System\Vid eo CD\AutoPlay\Docs\Manuel d'intervention d'urgence MFC.doc" Volume in drive C has no label. Volume Serial Number is 3C18-E114 Directory of C:\Shares\Shared\Reference\Safety Management System\Video CD\AutoP lay\Docs File Not Found 2013-10-17 9:38 C:\> This is from a Command Prompt window where I went to Properties and told it I wanted to modify who it ran as. I opened it, had it run as me with the "restricted access" unchecked, then ran the above. The file in question has the following ACLs: Administrators, SYSTEM, and OurCompanyUsers. All three have full control of everything. Nobody has any Deny bits set. I am a member of Administrators. So I don't believe it's a permissions issue. It's not a USB drive, so this time there is no question of USB hardware. Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition SP2. What does this mean? Is this more likely a hardware or software problem?

    Read the article

  • Very poor SCSI hd performance on IBM x336 with LSI 1030 RAID1

    - by David Tschoepe
    I'm experiencing very poor performance on an IBM x336 server with dual 73GB 15k hard drives on a U320 controller, LSI 1030. We're getting maybe 3.5MB/sec max (per HD Tune utility). It should be over 100MB/sec at least, I would think (another x335 box is running 70-80MB/sec). The server was recently setup and didn't really notice the problem, but may have been there from the beginning, so not sure. I have installed the IBM ServerRAID Windows utility. The server is running Windows 2008 R2 Web edition (if that matters). I thought maybe one of the drives was bad, so far I have removed one of the drives out of the array and tested again, but still the same results. I'm waiting for the RAID1 to resync and I will try pulling the other drive next. I've also used the ServerRAID utility but haven't noticed anything in there that might indicate a problem. Not sure if I'm on the right path here. So looking for some advice to track this down.

    Read the article

  • Creating RAID1 on Windows Server causes not enough disk space error

    - by northpole
    I have three disks. Disk0 (boot), Disk1 and Disk2. Disk 1 and 2 are both unformatted and unallocated drives. I am trying to mirror Disk0 to Disk1. They are both Dynamic and are both the same size (1TB). When I select Disk1 to be the mirror I get the error "There is not enough space available on the disk(s) to complete this operation". I have spent several hours searching for a solution but have not found one. Why do I get this error when they are both the same size? EDIT: Shrinking the volume size on the boot disk by 100MB allowed me to get past this error. From what I read the mirror drive needs to be the same size or larger than the boot drive. So I am confused why that change worked. However, I now get the error " all disks holding extents for a given volume must have the same sector size and the sector size must be valid". I believe this is because the drives are different and one has 512B and the other is the Advanced Drive that is 4KB. What the different sector sizes cause both problems? If I got the same disks would both issues go away?

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 - cancel mirror synchronisation

    - by Chris W
    I've got basic disk OS managed disk mirroring setup in Windows 7 for a couple of volumes. After a power failure the mirrors are currently resynching. These are only small volumes of data but the sync has not completed after more than 24 hours. Is there any way to stop this as it's driving me nuts? I need to get the machine back to a usable state to get some work done but it's a bit of a dog whilst this synch is going on. I've tried removing the mirrors but it won't let me do that whilst the re-sync is in progress.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 - cancel mirror synchronisation

    - by Chris W
    I've got basic disk OS managed disk mirroring setup in Windows 7 for a couple of volumes. After a power failure the mirrors are currently resynching. These are only small volumes of data but the sync has not completed after more than 24 hours. Is there any way to stop this as it's driving me nuts? I need to get the machine back to a usable state to get some work done but it's a bit of a dog whilst this synch is going on. I've tried removing the mirrors but it won't let me do that whilst the re-sync is in progress.

    Read the article

  • prevent filesystem from entering read-only mode

    - by user788171
    I have found that my server's filesystem is continuously entering read-only mode. There have been some issues with the raid1 array, but I have removed the bad disk from the array. However, it is still physically plugged into the system because I haven't had a chance to go over to the datacentre, I suspect udev and the system kernel is still picking up the bad disk and throwing errors. In /var/log/messages, there are errors like this: Mar 2 06:53:14 nocloud kernel: ata1: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x4010000 action 0xe frozen Mar 2 06:53:14 nocloud kernel: ata1: irq_stat 0x00400040, connection status changed Mar 2 06:53:14 nocloud kernel: ata1: SError: { PHYRdyChg DevExch } Mar 2 06:53:14 nocloud kernel: ata1: hard resetting link Mar 2 06:53:20 nocloud kernel: ata1: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0) Mar 2 06:53:21 nocloud kernel: ata1: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) Mar 2 06:53:21 nocloud kernel: ata1.00: configured for UDMA/133 Mar 2 06:53:21 nocloud kernel: ata1: EH complete This happens fairly randomly throughout the day until eventually the filesystem becomes read-only. When this happens, my system becomes non-operational which kind of defeats the purpose of having a raid1. Note, ata1 is the bad disk (I think ata1 corresponds to /dev/sda because they are both first in line). Under mdadm, /dev/sda1,2 is no longer being used, but I can't prevent the system kernel from continuing to query that disk when I am no longer using it and throwing these errors. Is there a way to prevent my filesystem from automatically going into read-only mode? Furthermore, is it safe to do so? Thanks in advance. EDIT: Additional information: output from cat /proc/mdstat md1 : active raid1 sdb2[1] 976554876 blocks super 1.1 [2/1] [_U] bitmap: 5/8 pages [20KB], 65536KB chunk md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] 204788 blocks super 1.0 [2/1] [_U] Output from mount: /dev/mapper/VolGroup-LogVol00 on / type ext4 (rw,noatime) proc on /proc type proc (rw) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620) tmpfs on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw,rootcontext="system_u:object_r:tmpfs_t:s0") /dev/md0 on /boot type ext4 (rw) none on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw) sunrpc on /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs type rpc_pipefs (rw) EDIT2: pvdisplay output: --- Physical volume --- PV Name /dev/md1 VG Name VolGroup PV Size 931.32 GiB / not usable 2.87 MiB Allocatable yes (but full) PE Size 16.00 MiB Total PE 59604 Free PE 0 Allocated PE 59604

    Read the article

  • Add Mirror for volumes other than the last one in Windows 7 (disk "not up-to-date")

    - by rakslice
    I'm using Windows 7 x64 Ultimate. I have an existing 4TB disk with 3 NTFS volumes, a new 3TB blank disk, and I'm trying to mirror the volumes onto the new disk. My Windows install is on an SSD which is Disk 0. The 4TB disk with volumes is Disk 1, and the new blank disk is Disk 2. I can add a mirror successfully for the last volume, but when I try to add a mirror for the first volume I immediately get errors (see below). Is there something I special I need to do to add a mirror for a volume other than the last one? More info: I opened Disk Management, right-clicked on the first volume on the existing disk, went to Add Mirror, and selected the new disk. The first time I did this I was prompted to convert the new disk to a Dynamic Disk, which I approved. Subsequently I got a message: The operation failed to complete because the Disk Management console view is not up-to-date. Refresh the view by using the refresh task. If the problem persists close the Disk Management console, then restart Disk Management or restart the computer. I've refreshed disk management, restarted the computer, and converted the new disk to basic and back to dynamic, but I still get that error message. Looking around for suggestions of a workaround, I saw a suggestion to use the diskpart command line tool. Running diskpart from the Start Menu as Administrator, I did select volume 2 (the first volume I want to mirror) and then add disk 2 (the new disk), and received a somewhat similar error: Virtual Disk Service error: The disk's extent information is corrupted. DiskPart has referenced an object which is not up-to-date. Refresh the object by using the RESCAN command. If the problem persists exit DiskPart, then restart DiskPart or restart the computer. A rescan appears to be successful: DISKPART> select disk 2 Disk 2 is now the selected disk. DISKPART> rescan Please wait while DiskPart scans your configuration... DiskPart has finished scanning your configuration. but attempting to add the mirror again resulted in the same error. The only similar report I found online was this: http://www.sevenforums.com/hardware-devices/335780-unable-mirror-all-but-last-partition-drive.html Based on that I attempted to mirror the last volume on the disk to the new disk using diskpart, and that started successfully -- it is currently resynchronizing. More Background: In the course of dealing with a failing 3TB hard drive, I bought a replacement 4TB drive and installed it, then copied the partitions from the failing drive to it using Minitool Partition Wizard Home, and then removed the failing drive and was up and running again normally. Now I've received a warranty replacement for the failing drive, and installed it, and now I'm attempting to mirror my partitions to it.

    Read the article

  • Dell R910 with Integrated PERC H700 Adapter

    - by Alex
    I am in the process of designing an architecture based around a single Dell R910 server running Windows Server 2008 Enterprise. I would like the server to have 8 RAID1 pairs of spinning disks, so I intend to implement: Dell R910 Server Integrated PERC H700 Adapter with 1 SAS expander on each SAS connector (so 8 expanders in total) 7 RAID1 pairs of 143Gb 15K HDD, each paired on one connector using an expander 1 RAID1 pair of 600Gb 10K HDD, paired on the remaining connector using an expander My main concern is not to introduce bottlenecks in this architecture, and I have the following questions. Will the PERC H700 Adapter act as a bottleneck for disk access? Will using SAS expanders for each RAID1 pair cause a bottleneck or would this be as fast as pairing disks directly attached to the SAS connectors? Can I mix the disks, as long as the disks in each RAID1 pair are the same? I assume so. Can anyone recommend any single-to-double SAS Expanders that are known to function well with the H700? Cheers Alex

    Read the article

  • Openfiler crashing without cause or leaving any log messages

    - by user44725
    So my linux machine keeps crashing, without so much as a bye or a leave. I've tried and tried and failed again to work out whats happening. Any help would be much appreciated. Linux chai 2.6.29.6-0.24.smp.gcc3.4.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Mar 9 05:06:08 GMT 2010 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Openfiler Here is what the /var/log/messages file says at the time of the latest crash. Nothing that unusual - just greg logging in and out via samba. You'll notice there is a cron running for root every minute - ignore this - this isn't the issue either it was some check I've been doing to discover its problem. Jun 2 10:32:01 chai crond(pam_unix)[16529]: session closed for user root Jun 2 10:32:49 chai samba(pam_unix)[15454]: session opened for user greg by (uid=0) Jun 2 10:33:01 chai crond(pam_unix)[16537]: session opened for user root by (uid=0) Jun 2 10:33:04 chai crond(pam_unix)[16537]: session closed for user root Jun 2 10:41:40 chai syslogd 1.4.1: restart. Jun 2 10:41:43 chai syslog: syslogd startup succeeded That restart was called manually by hand - by clicking the restart button on the box. So basically messages isn't revealing many secrets. dmesg only shows from startup. If there is any output I should paste. Just say when and where and it'll be done. Thanks for your help! Tim

    Read the article

  • How decode xfs lost+found directory

    - by Satpal
    I have managed to trash my homebrew Nas box (an old hp d530 + 2x 750gb sata soft raid1 + 17gb boot disk with ubuntu server 8.10) I have searched the web and tried to repair the file system but to no avail :( I was thinking that the dirs/files located under the root of the lost+found directory are 64 bit numbers. Is there any way that I could decant the number into binary form, from there reconstruct the directory/file structure. More to the point can anyone point to the information on how xfs inodes are broken down(does that make sense)?

    Read the article

  • Auto-rebuild RAID6 with MDADM

    - by user65632
    Hello everybody, i'm new in this forum, and because I see that a lot of people get helped here, i'll ask my question here! I have a openSUSE 11.3 Linux computer with 5 disks of 1TB (WD enterprise disks) in it. with mdadm I configured an RAID6 device. Now, after a lot of thorough testing, i've noticed that when the computer goes down unsuspectedly it could happen (1 time out of 10) that while booting, the md0 device isn't recognised, and then the machine goes in "recovery mode", which means that i have to 'CTRL + C' it so it can boot to openSUSE. Once in openSUSE i have to readd the drive manually with 'mdadm /dev/md0 --add /dev/sdX'. After this everything works back fine (after resynching). So my question is: Is there a way to auto-rebuild the RAID6 device when there are problems? and how can I stop this "recovery mode" from happening. Because the computer will be in a place I can't go to, to connect a keyboard, 'CTRL + C' it just to get in openSUSE. If you could help me, I would be a very very very! happy man! :-) thanks in advance! Mikhail

    Read the article

  • P4 vs. i3/i5 *T in power consumption and performance [migrated]

    - by Walter Zomb
    I am running an Intel P4 prescott with HT on my home server (linux file server on encrypted disks on software-RAID5 and virtualisation host for three further machines). The performance for this purpose is really okay. When the system is idle it consumes about 140W power. I am considering buying a new mainboard for an e.g. Intel i3-2100T or an Intel i5-2390T. Both are low power CPUs with a TDP about 40W. Has anyone experiences how much power a recent mainboard with one of these CPUs an 3-4 'green-energy' disks (6W each) consumes? Do I get underneath the 100W threshold? What's about the performance of these low power CPUs? Are they comparable to an Intel P4 with HT? regards, walter

    Read the article

  • Should I worry about the integrity of my linux software RAID5 after a crash or kernel panic?

    - by Josh
    I have a dual core Intel i5 Ubuntu Server 10.04 LTS system running kernel 2.6.32-22-server #33-Ubuntu SMP with three 1TB SATA hard drives set up in a RAID5 array using linux md devices. I have read about the RAID5 write hole and am concerned: if my linux system locks up or kernel panics, should I be assume that the integrety of my data has been compromised and restore from backup? How can I know if the data on the RAID5 array is "safe"?

    Read the article

  • hp proliant dl360 disk diagnostic issue

    - by user1039384
    We recently got two used drives (15000) and installed on our HP proliant dl360 G5 server. Created RAID1 and used HP SmartStart CD to perform diagnostics. Interestingly, the Diagnostic tab immidiately fails on Logical drive testing saying the Disk1 should be replaced, while the Test tab successfully runs all the complete tests on both disks and does not find any issue. At the meantime, when booting to esxi 5, vSphere periodically shows the Disk1 as Unknown and Logical drive in recovery process. This happens every 5-10 minutes. Here is the log from HP SmartScan diagnostic: 1 - Device, Test: Logical Drive 1, Storage Controller in Slot 0 1 - Description: The controller has reported a critical error in the drive error log. 1 - Recommended Repair: This drive should be replaced. 1 - Failed Count: 44 1 - Error code: F157 There is also another error log record (see below): 2 - Device, Test: test_components/libstorage.so ID 2 - Description: An unexpected exception occurred while performing an operation. Exception message: CISS_StatusHandler::evaluate: commandStatus = 4 (INVALID); hexdump of CISS_ErrorInfo: 00000000: __ __ 04 __ 20 __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ .... ... ........ 00000010: __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ........ ........ 00000020: __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ........ ........ Device: Hard Drive 2, Storage Controller in Slot 0 Property name: Bad Target Count 2 - Recommended Repair: Reboot or restart Insight Diagnostics. Retry the test. If the problem persists, upgrade to the latest version of Insight Diagnostics. 2 - Failed Count: 48 2 - Error Code: F62 Note that rebooting didn't help and I was running the latest diagnostic software version. Anyone has a clue? Is this a real disk issue? BTW, the controller is Smart Array E200i Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • IBM x260m won't boot from PCI SATA card

    - by syrenity
    Hi. We ghosted our old Windows 2003 drive to a new 1TB one, and connected through new PCI SATA card. The x260m server fails to boot with error 1962: "Boot sector not found." When we connect the drive directly to motherboard, it boots fine, so the problem is probably in getting BIOS to boot from the SATA card. Has anyone encountered and solved such issue? EDIT: We tried disabling the on-board Sata controller (Hostraid/SAS?), but there is no such option - only enable, enhanced and compatible. Tried also to chance boot device priority to all possible choices - no luck. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • flashcache with mdadm and LVM

    - by Backtogeek
    I am having trouble setting up flashcache on a system with LVM and mdadm, I suspect I am either just missing an obvious step or getting some mapping wrong and hoped someone could point me in the right direction? system info: CentOS 6.4 64 bit mdadm config md0 : active raid1 sdd3[2] sde3[3] sdf3[4] sdg3[5] sdh3[1] sda3[0] 204736 blocks super 1.0 [6/6] [UUUUUU] md2 : active raid6 sdd5[2] sde5[3] sdf5[4] sdg5[5] sdh5[1] sda5[0] 3794905088 blocks super 1.1 level 6, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [6/6] [UUUUUU] md3 : active raid0 sdc1[1] sdb1[0] 250065920 blocks super 1.1 512k chunks md1 : active raid10 sdh1[1] sda1[0] sdd1[2] sdf1[4] sdg1[5] sde1[3] 76749312 blocks super 1.1 512K chunks 2 near-copies [6/6] [UUUUUU] pcsvan PV /dev/mapper/ssdcache VG Xenvol lvm2 [3.53 TiB / 3.53 TiB free] Total: 1 [3.53 TiB] / in use: 1 [3.53 TiB] / in no VG: 0 [0 ] flashcache create command used: flashcache_create -p back ssdcache /dev/md3 /dev/md2 pvdisplay --- Physical volume --- PV Name /dev/mapper/ssdcache VG Name Xenvol PV Size 3.53 TiB / not usable 106.00 MiB Allocatable yes PE Size 128.00 MiB Total PE 28952 Free PE 28912 Allocated PE 40 PV UUID w0ENVR-EjvO-gAZ8-TQA1-5wYu-ISOk-pJv7LV vgdisplay --- Volume group --- VG Name Xenvol System ID Format lvm2 Metadata Areas 1 Metadata Sequence No 2 VG Access read/write VG Status resizable MAX LV 0 Cur LV 1 Open LV 1 Max PV 0 Cur PV 1 Act PV 1 VG Size 3.53 TiB PE Size 128.00 MiB Total PE 28952 Alloc PE / Size 40 / 5.00 GiB Free PE / Size 28912 / 3.53 TiB VG UUID 7vfKWh-ENPb-P8dV-jVlb-kP0o-1dDd-N8zzYj So that is where I am at, I thought that was the job done however when creating a logical volume called test and mounting it is /mnt/test the sequential write is pathetic, 60 ish MB/s /dev/md3 has 2 x SSD's in Raid0 which alone is performing at around 800 MB/s sequential write and I am trying to cache /dev/md2 which is 6 x 1TB drives in raid6 I have read a number of pages through the day and some of them here, it is obvious from the results that the cache is not functioning but I am unsure why. I have added the filter line in the lvm.conf filter = [ "r|/dev/sdb|", "r|/dev/sdc|", "r|/dev/md3|" ] It is probably something silly but the cache is clearly performing no writes so I suspect I am not mapping it or have not mounted the cache correctly. dmsetup status ssdcache: 0 7589810176 flashcache stats: reads(142), writes(0) read hits(133), read hit percent(93) write hits(0) write hit percent(0) dirty write hits(0) dirty write hit percent(0) replacement(0), write replacement(0) write invalidates(0), read invalidates(0) pending enqueues(0), pending inval(0) metadata dirties(0), metadata cleans(0) metadata batch(0) metadata ssd writes(0) cleanings(0) fallow cleanings(0) no room(0) front merge(0) back merge(0) force_clean_block(0) disk reads(9), disk writes(0) ssd reads(133) ssd writes(9) uncached reads(0), uncached writes(0), uncached IO requeue(0) disk read errors(0), disk write errors(0) ssd read errors(0) ssd write errors(0) uncached sequential reads(0), uncached sequential writes(0) pid_adds(0), pid_dels(0), pid_drops(0) pid_expiry(0) lru hot blocks(31136000), lru warm blocks(31136000) lru promotions(0), lru demotions(0) Xenvol-test: 0 10485760 linear I have included as much info as I can think of, look forward to any replies.

    Read the article

  • Enterprise class storage best practices

    - by churnd
    One thing that has always perplexed me is storage best practices. Filesystems brag about how they can be petabytes or exabytes in size. Yet, I do not know many sysadmins who are willing to let a single volume grow over several terrabytes. I do know the primary reason behind this is how long it would take to rebuild the array should a drive fail. The more drives in a single LUN, the longer this takes and the greater your risk of losing another drive while the rebuild is taking place. Then there's usage reasons. Admins will carve out a LUN based on how much space they think needs to be allocated to the project. It seems more practical to me for the LUN to be one large array and to use quotas. I understand this wouldn't satisfy every requirement (iSCSI), but I see a lot of NAS systems (NFS) managed this way. I also understand that the underlying volumes can be grown/shrunk as needed quite easily, but wouldn't it be less "risky" to use quotas rather than manipulating volumes and bringing possible data loss into the equation? There may be some other reasons I'm missing, so please enlighten me. Can we not expect filesystems to ever be so large? Are we waiting for the hardware to get faster to cut down on rebuild times?

    Read the article

  • Zpool disk failure - Where am I at?

    - by JT.WK
    After checking the status of one of my zpools today, I was faced with the following: root@server: zpool status -v myPool pool: myPool state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an unrecoverable error. An attempt was made to correct the error. Applications are unaffected. action: Determine if the device needs to be replaced, and clear the errors using 'zpool clear' or replace the device with 'zpool replace'. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-9P scrub: resilver completed after 3h6m with 0 errors on Tue Sep 28 11:15:11 2010 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM myPool ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t8d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spare ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t9d0 ONLINE 54 0 0 c6t36d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t10d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t11d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t12d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c6t36d0 INUSE currently in use c6t37d0 AVAIL c6t38d0 AVAIL errors: No known data errors From what I can see, c6t9d0 has encountered 54 write errors. It seems as though it has automatically resilvered with the spare disk c6t36d0, which is now currently in use. My question is, where exactly am I at? Yes the 'action' tells me to determine whether or not the disk needs replacing, but is this disk currently still in use? Can I replace / remove it? Any explanation would be much appreciated as I'm quite new to this stuff :) update: After following the advice from C10k Consulting, ie detaching: zpool detach myPool c6t9d0 and adding as a spare: zpool add myPool spare c6t9d0 It appears as though all is well. The new status of my zpool is: root@server: zpool status -v myPool pool: myPool state: ONLINE scrub: resilver completed after 3h6m with 0 errors on Tue Sep 28 11:15:11 2010 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM muPool ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t8d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t36d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t10d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t11d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t12d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c6t37d0 AVAIL c6t38d0 AVAIL c6t9d0 AVAIL errors: No known data errors Thanks for your help c10k consulting :)

    Read the article

  • should I put my multi-device btrfs filesystem on disk partitions or raw devices?

    - by Glyph
    If I'm going to create a multi-device btrfs filesystem. The official recommendation from the documentation apppears to be to create it on raw devices; i.e. /dev/sdb, /dev/sdc, etc, but this is not explained. Are there any advantages to creating a partition table on these devices first, either GPT or MBR, and then creating the filesystem on /dev/sdb1, /dev/sdc1 et cetera? Does feeding btrfs whole devices have some particular advantage, or are these basically equivalent?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >