Search Results

Search found 139 results on 6 pages for 'raid10'.

Page 4/6 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6  | Next Page >

  • Unable to create system partition or locate existing system partition during Windows-7 installation

    - by glenneroo
    I have Windows XP 32-bit installed on an ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe with 2x 500gb drives in RAID1 using the NV RAID controller. On this there are 3 partitions (XP, XP backup and DATA) There are also 4x 500gb drives in RAID10 using the Silicon Image 3114R RAID controller. I just purchased a Windows 7 64-bit as an ISO download upgrade version which I promptly burned to DVD and attempted to perform an upgrade installation. Here is the error message I am getting: Firstly, where are these "Setup log files" located? Second, does this mean I need to find compatible (64-bit?) drivers for the Mainboard and put them on floppy? EDIT: As suggested on another forum, I tried downloading the nVidia Mainboard RAID drivers for Windows 2003 64-bit. I loaded the drivers successfully using the Load Driver button, but pressing NEXT still returns this error.

    Read the article

  • Is there anyway to build a raid system without all drives?

    - by xenoterracide
    I'm building a raid1 (ok it will probably be a raid10,f2 but the difference with 2 drives... isn't much) system with 2 1TB drives. However, 1 of the drives I've ordered is bad so I'm RMA-ing it. I'm wondering if I could partition and install to the 1 drive and then rebuild the array when I get the second drive (after I test it of course) My initial investigation doesn't show me a way of creating the array without specifying all devices... and the device the second drive will be is one that has data that I will need to migrate (plus it's not big enough). Is it possible that I could create an array without specifying all devices? or specify false ones and reconfigure to the right ones later? Or some other method I'm not thinking of.

    Read the article

  • Rail's FileStore with Linux Disk Caching or RAMdisk?

    - by Yo Ludke
    I have a Ruby on Rails application that stores it's catched files on the filesystem (Rails file-system cache). I was thinking about changing to memcached Store, but a short test shows it isn't a big difference in speed. From linuxatemyram.com I learned a bit about file caching. On the current machine there would be around 40..45GB RAM left which isn't needed for the application and which can be used to linux-disk-cache this rails file cache store. The disk is a RAID10 system with almost 120MB disk perfomance. How can I tell Linux to use free RAM more deliberately and not to be shy about using it? Do think it's necessary to adjust a sysyctl/.. value here, or would I have performance advantages to put the File Store root diretory on a ramdisk? (Loosing the cache during a reboot wouldn't be a problem)

    Read the article

  • Areca 1880ix RAID hangs

    - by Dave
    Areca RAID controller ARC-1880ix-12 (firmware 1.50) hangs when on high load. My setup is: Chenbro 3U chassis Intel S5500BC mainboard Xeon 5603 CPU 16GB of RAM 12 Seagate SAS drives ST32000645SS (2 of them as hot spare, 10 as RAID10) Mellanox Infiniband HBA card This server is working as external infiniband storage for Xen VMs. When load is quite big Areca's firmware hangs - it becomes unreachable even from Areca's ethernet adapter. After resetting the server power it returns to normal operation. While Areca is hanged I can confirm that it is powered (ethernet link is active) and Infiniband HBA works Ok. Thanks in advance for any idea or suggestion where the problem might be!

    Read the article

  • mdadm - Recovering a 'split' RAID1 array

    - by Hamza
    I have two drives that used to be part of a single RAID1 volume but it appears that one of them went offline for some time, something I've noticed just now when I rebooted my system. I now seem to have two RAID volumes, as reported by: # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md126 : active raid1 sdc[1] 2096116 blocks super 1.2 [2/1] [_U] md127 : active (auto-read-only) raid1 sdb[0] 2096116 blocks super 1.2 [2/1] [U_] unused devices: <none> Not exactly sure where to go from here. How can I merge and re-sync these volumes without data loss? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Changed array composition, mdadm --detail still shows the old array size

    - by Prody
    I have a machine with 8 disks. I installed it with my hoster's install automation (it's OVH, I don't have physical access to it). The machine installed correctly, but it made an array that I wanted to change. It created a raid5 array across 5/8 disks and I've changed it to raid10 across 8 disks. I've done this by first --stopping the old array and then --creating the new array. It warned me that a previous array was there, but I chose to continue. So it created the array, spent 10ish hours syncing it and now that it's ready I get this strange behavior: When I fdisk p on it, I see the correct size. But when I mdadm --detail it I see the old array's size even tho I get the new composition and level. When I try to pvcreate on it, i get the old size again for some reason. Did I have to do something else? Did I miss something?

    Read the article

  • High load on a nagios server -- How many service checks for a nagios server is too many?

    - by Josh
    I have a nagios server running Ubuntu with a 2.0 GHz Intel Processor, a RAID10 array, and 400 MB of RAM. It monitors a total of 42 services across 8 hosts, most of which are checked using the check_http plugin even 5 minutes, some every minute. Recently the load on the nagios server has been above 4, often as high as 6. The server also runs cacti, gathering statistics every minute for 6 hosts. I wonder, how many services should hardware like this be able to handle? Is the load so high because I am pushing the limits of the hardware, or should this hardware be able to handle 42 service checks plus cacti? If the hardware is inadequate, should I look to add more RAM, more cores, or faster cores? What hardware / service checks are others running?

    Read the article

  • What is the value/cost of enabling "spread spectrum clocking" on my hard drives?

    - by Stu Thompson
    I'm building up a biggish NAS box (10x WD RE4 2TB SATA RAID10) and ran into some problems. During the course of my research, debugging, investigations, etc, I discovered a jumper on the physical drives labeled "spread spectrum clocking". After some googling about this on teh internets, it seems to be a feature that some suggest (without reference or explanation) enabling in 'a storage configuration' that makes the drive less sussesptable to EMI. But why? I've got three core questions: Why is this feature not enabled by default? What are the actual benefits? Are there any costs?

    Read the article

  • ASUS P5B Plus motherboard - no any drives found - how to restore RAID array?

    - by Moha
    We have a small server machine with an ASUS P5B Plus motherboard and 4 SATA HDDs. The HDDs were configured in a RAID10 array. Up until now, everything worked fine, but now the system doesn't recognize the drives. BIOS is set to RAID, jMicron controller is set to RAID, yet I can't see any of the drives in the BIOS setup, and jMicron BIOS tells me "no any drives found" The HDDs all spin up, I hear no clicking sounds or anything that would suggest HDD error. I did a search on this problem and replaced the SATA cables as suggested, but nothing's changed. What I have in mind is checking the CMOS battery and resetting the BIOS to use IDE mode, but I don't know if it will ruin the RAID system on the HDDs. It is not a critical server and there's only one database running on it (which I have backup of), but I don't want to setup the server from scratch if not necessary. What should I try to restore the RAID array and put the server back to working order?

    Read the article

  • Power outage, Server 2K3 remains on "applying computer settings"

    - by syuroff
    My reward for clicking the "test" button in the APC UPS software was that it completely cut the power to my SQL server. The server promptly rebooted, the SQL service is running (verified by the app on another server that queries it), but the GUI has remained on "applying computer settings" for 20 minutes and counting, and it forbids RDC connections. Since SQL is up, it is fulfilling its key role, but it's obviously not right. What step to take next? Wait longer? Hardware is a Dell Poweredge 2850, internal RAID10.

    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

  • Backup Mongodb on EC2 through EBS snapshots - timing issue

    - by DmitrySemenov
    I'm following this guidance http://docs.mongodb.org/ecosystem/tutorial/backup-and-restore-mongodb-on-amazon-ec2/ I have 4 EBS 1000 IOPS volumes assigned to instance These 4 volumes through MDADM assembled into software RAID10 array. I want to do backups through EBS Snapshots as explained in the article above Question: Mongodb says - that I need to mongo shelldb.runCommand({fsync:1,lock:1}); -- this will lock the db for writing ....run snapshot creation... mongo shell db.$cmd.sys.unlock.findOne(); -- this will unlock the db for writing so do I need to unlock the DB for writing after I issued the comand ec2-create-snapshot or after it's finished and the actual snapshot is created thanks, Dmitry

    Read the article

  • mdadm starts resync on every boot

    - by Anteru
    Since a few days (and I'm positive it started shortly before I updated my server from 13.04-13.10) my mdadm is resyncing on every boot. In the syslog, I get the following output [ 0.809256] md: linear personality registered for level -1 [ 0.811412] md: multipath personality registered for level -4 [ 0.813153] md: raid0 personality registered for level 0 [ 0.815201] md: raid1 personality registered for level 1 [ 1.101517] md: raid6 personality registered for level 6 [ 1.101520] md: raid5 personality registered for level 5 [ 1.101522] md: raid4 personality registered for level 4 [ 1.106825] md: raid10 personality registered for level 10 [ 1.935882] md: bind<sdc1> [ 1.943367] md: bind<sdb1> [ 1.945199] md/raid1:md0: not clean -- starting background reconstruction [ 1.945204] md/raid1:md0: active with 2 out of 2 mirrors [ 1.945225] md0: detected capacity change from 0 to 2000396680192 [ 1.945351] md: resync of RAID array md0 [ 1.945357] md: minimum _guaranteed_ speed: 1000 KB/sec/disk. [ 1.945359] md: using maximum available idle IO bandwidth (but not more than 200000 KB/sec) for resync. [ 1.945362] md: using 128k window, over a total of 1953512383k. [ 2.220468] md0: unknown partition table I'm not sure what's up with that detected capacity change, looking at some old logs, this does have appeared earlier as well without a resync right afterwards. In fact, I let it run yesterday until completion and rebooted, and then it wouldn't resync, but today it does resync again. For instance, yesterday I got: [ 1.872123] md: bind<sdc1> [ 1.950946] md: bind<sdb1> [ 1.952782] md/raid1:md0: active with 2 out of 2 mirrors [ 1.952807] md0: detected capacity change from 0 to 2000396680192 [ 1.954598] md0: unknown partition table So it seems to be a problem that the RAID array does not get marked as clean after every shutdown? How can I troubleshoot this? The disks themselves are both fine, SMART tells me no errors, everything ok.

    Read the article

  • Raid 5 mdadm Problem - Help Please

    - by user66260
    My Raid 5 array (4 1tb Disks WD10EARS) had was showing as degraded. I looked and one of the disks wasnt installed, so i re-added it with the mdadm add command. the array is now showing as (null)Array , but cant be mounted if i run: root@warren-P5K-E:/home/warren# sudo mdadm --misc --detail /dev/md0 I get: mdadm: cannot open /dev/md0: No such file or directory and running: root@warren-P5K-E:/home/warren# cat /proc/mdstat gives me: Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] unused devices: < none > The data is very important root@warren-P5K-E:/home/warren# mdadm --examine /dev/sda /dev/sda: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 0.90.00 UUID : 00000000:00000000:00000000:00000000 Creation Time : Sat May 26 12:08:14 2012 Raid Level : -unknown- Raid Devices : 0 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat May 26 12:08:40 2012 State : active Active Devices : 0 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 4 Checksum : 82d5b792 - correct Events : 1 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 1 8 0 1 spare /dev/sda 0 0 8 16 0 spare /dev/sdb 1 1 8 0 1 spare /dev/sda 2 2 8 32 2 spare /dev/sdc 3 3 8 48 3 spare /dev/sdd root@warren-P5K-E:/home/warren# mdadm --examine /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 0.90.00 UUID : 00000000:00000000:00000000:00000000 Creation Time : Sat May 26 12:08:14 2012 Raid Level : -unknown- Raid Devices : 0 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat May 26 12:08:40 2012 State : active Active Devices : 0 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 4 Checksum : 82d5b7a0 - correct Events : 1 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 0 8 16 0 spare /dev/sdb 0 0 8 16 0 spare /dev/sdb 1 1 8 0 1 spare /dev/sda 2 2 8 32 2 spare /dev/sdc 3 3 8 48 3 spare /dev/sdd root@warren-P5K-E:/home/warren# oot@warren-P5K-E:/home/warren# mdadm --examine /dev/sdc /dev/sdc: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 0.90.00 UUID : 00000000:00000000:00000000:00000000 Creation Time : Sat May 26 12:08:14 2012 Raid Level : -unknown- Raid Devices : 0 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat May 26 12:08:40 2012 State : active Active Devices : 0 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 4 Checksum : 82d5b7b4 - correct Events : 1 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 2 8 32 2 spare /dev/sdc 0 0 8 16 0 spare /dev/sdb 1 1 8 0 1 spare /dev/sda 2 2 8 32 2 spare /dev/sdc 3 3 8 48 3 spare /dev/sdd root@warren-P5K-E:/home/warren# mdadm --examine /dev/sdd /dev/sdd: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 0.90.00 UUID : 00000000:00000000:00000000:00000000 Creation Time : Sat May 26 12:08:14 2012 Raid Level : -unknown- Raid Devices : 0 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 0 Update Time : Sat May 26 12:08:40 2012 State : active Active Devices : 0 Working Devices : 4 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 4 Checksum : 82d5b7c6 - correct Events : 1 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State this 3 8 48 3 spare /dev/sdd 0 0 8 16 0 spare /dev/sdb 1 1 8 0 1 spare /dev/sda 2 2 8 32 2 spare /dev/sdc 3 3 8 48 3 spare /dev/sdd That on the 4 drives.

    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

  • Do I have to worry about "error: superfluous RAID member"?

    - by 0xC0000022L
    When running update-grub on the newly installed Ubuntu 12.04 with an older software RAID (md), I get: error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Generating grub.cfg ... error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-24-generic Found initrd image: /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-24-generic error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-23-generic Found initrd image: /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-23-generic error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Found memtest86+ image: /boot/memtest86+.bin error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Found Debian GNU/Linux (5.0.9) on /dev/sdb1 Found Debian GNU/Linux (5.0.9) on /dev/sdc1 done I would be less worried if the message would say warning: ..., but since it says error: ... I'm wondering what the problem is. # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md2 : active raid1 sdc1[1] sdb1[0] 48829440 blocks [2/2] [UU] md3 : active raid1 sdc2[1] sdb2[0] 263739008 blocks [2/2] [UU] md1 : active raid5 sdg1[3] sdf1[2] sde1[1] sdh1[0] sdi1[4] sdd1[5](S) 1250274304 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/5] [UUUUU] unused devices: <none> Do I have to worry or is this harmless? btw: disregard the mentioning of Debian 5.0.9, that was the previously installed system and is going to be overwritten. It's on /dev/md2 actually.

    Read the article

  • Dell Perc 6i with FreeBSD 8.1 errors with mfi0: COMMAND xxxxxxxx TIMEOUT AFTER xxx SECONDS

    - by jDempster
    We've recently bought two Dell PowerEdge R710 servers with Perc 6i controllers and 6x 135GB SAS Drives. We'd done some pretty extensive testing on a Dell PowerEdge R510 server with a Perc 6i and 4x 135GB SAS Drives running FreeBSD 8.1 for it's wonderful ZFS support and mfiutil. We hadn't had any problems with the R510 and had got to a point where we where happy with the performance of ZFS. Since running FreeBSD 8.1 on the R710 we've been getting errors from the RAID controller. mfi0: COMMAND 0xffffff80005d1770 TIMEOUT AFTER 6178 SECONDS This usually brings the system to a stand still. But it doesn't always happen, and performs very well up until it does happen. We've been running the disk as 3 mirrored drives striped in ZFS. So far we've noticed that running the drives with RAID10 on the RAID seems to work without errors (still testing). At first I thought hardware error as we'd been running FreeBSD on the R510 with the same controller without any issues. But both R710 have the same issue. All controllers are running the same firmware.

    Read the article

  • How can I fix my corrupted RAID1 ext4 partition on a Synology DS212 NAS?

    - by Neil
    I have two identical 3 TB disks that were in a RAID1 array, where one disk crashed. I replaced the failed disk, but not after the RAID partitions got messed up. I need to figure out how to restore the RAID array and get at my ext4 partition. Here are the properties of the surviving disk: # fdisk -l /dev/sda fdisk: device has more than 2^32 sectors, can't use all of them Disk /dev/sda: 2199.0 GB, 2199023255040 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 267349 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 1 267350 2147483647+ ee EFI GPT # parted /dev/sda print Model: ATA ST3000DM001-9YN1 (scsi) Disk /dev/sda: 3001GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: gpt Disk Flags: Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 131kB 2550MB 2550MB ext4 raid 2 2550MB 4698MB 2147MB linux-swap(v1) raid 5 4840MB 3001GB 2996GB raid I replaced the failed drive, and cloned the surviving drive to it so I have something to work with. I cloned the drives with dd if=/dev/sdb of=/dev/sda conv=noerror bs=64M, and now /dev/sda and /dev/sdb are identical. Here is the RAID information: # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] md1 : active raid1 sdb2[1] 2097088 blocks [2/1] [_U] md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] 2490176 blocks [2/1] [_U] unused devices: <none> It seems that md2 is missing. Here is what testdisk 6.14-WIP finds: Disk /dev/sda - 3000 GB / 2794 GiB - CHS 364801 255 63 Current partition structure: Partition Start End Size in sectors 1 P Linux Raid 256 4980735 4980480 [md0] 2 P Linux Raid 4980736 9175039 4194304 [md1] Invalid RAID superblock 5 P Linux Raid 9453280 5860519007 5851065728 5 P Linux Raid 9453280 5860519007 5851065728 # After a quick search Disk /dev/sda - 3000 GB / 2794 GiB - CHS 364801 255 63 Partition Start End Size in sectors D MS Data 256 4980607 4980352 [1.41.12-2197] D Linux Raid 256 4980735 4980480 [md0] D Linux Swap 4980736 9174895 4194160 D Linux Raid 4980736 9175039 4194304 [md1] >P MS Data 9481056 5858437983 5848956928 [1.41.12-2228] And listing the files on the last partition in the list shows all of my files intact. What should I do?

    Read the article

  • 2 Server FC SAN Configuration

    - by BSte
    I have 2 identical servers: -48GB Ram -8GigE NIC's -2FC NIC's -2x72GB RAID1 Hard Drives -Server 2008R2 Host I also Have a Fibre Channel SAN: -16x146GB RAID10 Hard Drives -2xDual-port FC Controllers (Controller A and B both have ports 1 and 2) -Server 1 has Fiber to Ports A1 and B1 -Server 2 has Fiber to Ports A2 and B2 -I kept the default config with 1 Virtual Disk and 1 Volume -The default mappings show ports A1,A2,B1,B2 on LUN 0 with read-write My goal is: -2xVM's with IIS and Guest Level Failover -2xVM's with SQL 2008 Enterprise using a Single DB and Guest Level Failover -1xVM that is an application server, preferable with Host Failover. From what I read, this will also need AD for clustering to work. -I need at least 1 VM always running for IIS and the SQLDB. This includes hardware failover and application (ie: reboot a VM for Critical updates) I was told I could install the VM's and run them from the SAN, and this is what I've tried: Installed MPIO and HyperV on Server1 and Server 2 Added the SAN as Disk E: on both servers, made it GPT and formatted NTFS Configured HyperV on both server to store use E:\VD and E:\VHD On server1, I was able to install 3 VM's on the SAN and all worked well. On server2, I would start installing the other 2 VM's, but always at some point the VM's would get a corrupt .VHD message (either server). Everything I found about the message typically related to antivirus, so I removed all antivirus on both Host servers (now only running 2008R2). I reformatted drive E: (SAN), recreated the VHD and VD directories, installed 3 VM's on Server 1, and then had the same issue when installing VM's on Server2. Obviously something is wrong, but I'm not certain what exactly. My questions: 1) Are my goals possible with this hardware setup? -I've read 2008R2 supports FC SAN's, but a lot of articles seem to only give examples with iSCSCI setups 2) What would be the suggested route on setting up the SAN (disks,volumes,LUN's)? I've worked with HyperV on a single machine before and never had issues. Actual experience working on SAN's and clustering is new to me. Any suggestions or recommendations to get me in the right direction would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Server Performance

    - by sb12
    I know very little about performance tuning of servers etc... so i thought i'd put this up here as i start some research on it, just to get some direction. I am in the process of migrating from my old server to a new one - both are 64 bit machines. One is a few years old, the other brand new (PowerEdge R410). The old server spec is: 2 cpus, 3.4GHz Pentiums, 8G of RAM, Fedora 11 currently installed The new server spec is: 16 cpus, 3.2 GHz Xeon, 16G of RAM, CentOS 6.2 installed. Also RAID10 is on the new server - no RAID on the old one. Both servers currently have the same database (MySQL) with the same data migrated. I wrote a Perl script that simply steps through each row of a table in the database (about 18000 rows) and updates a value in that row. Every row in the table is updated. Out of curiosity i ran this perl script on both machines, just to see how the new server would perform vs. the old one, and it produced interesting results: The old server was twice as fast as the new one to complete. Looking at the database, both are configured exactly the same (the new one being a dump of the old one...)... Anyone any ideas why this would be given the hardware gap between both? As i said i'm about to start some digging, but thought i'd put this up here to maybe get some good direction.... Many thanks in advance..

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu raid 1 write errors

    - by Micah
    I have an Ubuntu server set up with two SATA drives in a RAID 1 configuration with MDADM. The machine is used to record raw video, which involves a lot of writing to the disk. Sometimes during video recording the computer will crash, will the following errors in kern.log: Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629864] ata2.00: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x400100 action 0x6 Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629870] ata2.00: BMDMA stat 0x26 Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629875] ata2.00: SError: { UnrecovData Handshk } Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629880] ata2.00: failed command: WRITE DMA EXT Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629889] ata2.00: cmd 35/00:00:28:6d:f6/00:04:06:00:00/e0 tag 0 dma 524288 out Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629891] res 51/84:b1:77:6e:f6/84:02:06:00:00/e0 Emask 0x30 (host bus error) Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629896] ata2.00: status: { DRDY ERR } Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629899] ata2.00: error: { ICRC ABRT } Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.629910] ata2.00: hard resetting link Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414501.973009] ata2.01: hard resetting link Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414502.482642] ata2.00: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414502.482658] ata2.01: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300) Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414502.546160] ata2.00: configured for UDMA/133 Mar 15 10:39:41 video kernel: [414502.546203] ata2: EH complete Is this the result of faulty drives? Is software RAID just not performant enough for data rates ~15 MB/s, even with a quad-core i7? Thanks for your help. Edit: cat /proc/mdstat returns this: Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0] 976760768 blocks [2/2] [UU] unused devices: <none>

    Read the article

  • Getting Grub2 to recognize a Raid 10 boot/root

    - by xenoterracide
    I've been trying to get my raid to boot from grub2 for about 2 days now and I don't seem to be getting closer. The problem appears to be that it doesn't recognize my raid at all. It doesn't see (md0) etc. I'm not sure Why or how to change this. I'm using mdadm, 2 device (essentially a raid1) raid10,f2, which is currently degraded. I have tried adding the raid and mdraid modules with grub install along with others. I've tried several variation on grub-install such as grub-install --debug --no-floppy --modules="biosdisk part_msdos chain raid mdraid ext2 linux search ata normal" /dev/md0 I've been searching the net for an answer to what I haven't done but no luck. On my other drive which I plan on removing the raid is initialized and mounted fine on boot, but it's not the boot/root for that setup. My grub.cfg isn't recognized by grub since it can't read the raid partition so I'm not posting that. md0 is not listed in my /boot/grub/device.map.

    Read the article

  • Hourly SQL Server 2005 Slowness (Possibly caused by SYSTEM)

    - by Zorlack
    We're trying to diagnose the cause of slowness on our Database server. We're running the latest rev SQL Server 2005 on Windows 2008x64. The behavior that we're seeing is this: We see the SYSTEM process spike one of the CPUs for about 2 minutes, during this time SQL server slows down by a factor of 10. The slowness lasts until SYSTEM is done, then in an hour everything starts again. During these slowdowns disk writes don't spike, paging doesn't spike, the only noticeable precursor we see is that SYSTEM maxes out one of the sixteen (HT)CPUs. Note that this doesn't happen at the top of the hour, it just happens once an hour, and it shifts a bit depending on the length of the incident. At the moment this is causing intermittent slowdowns, but when the server is really busy it can cause Worker Thread starvation. The server is a Dual Quad Dell R710 with 96GB of RAM and RAID10 data/log disks. Has anyone experienced this kind of problem? Does anyone know where we should look?

    Read the article

  • Why do I get a DegradedArray event with mdadm

    - by azera
    Hello Just so we're clear on what's happening: I bought 4 new sata 2 drives, with the intent of using them in a raid5 all drive are fully recognised by both my bios and my linux box (gentoo) I created a raid5 array, fiddled a bit with it to understand how it works, how to monitor ect At some point, this triggered a degradedarray event, even though the array is brand new. I tried to stopping the array and recreating a new array with the same drive but the new array starts degraded too. here is what I used to create it mdadm --create -l5 -n4 /dev/md/md0-r5 /dev/sdb /dev/sdd /dev/sde /dev/sdf here are the output from my /proc/mdstat and mdadm --detail --scan **mdstat** Personalities : [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md127 : active raid5 sdf[4] sde[2] sdd[1] sdb[0] 4395415488 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_] [>....................] recovery = 2.8% (41689732/1465138496) finish=890.3min speed=26645K/sec unused devices: <none> **detail** ARRAY /dev/md/md0-r5 metadata=0.90 spares=1 UUID=453e2833:81f22a74:64188b84:66721085 As such I have a couple questions: does a raid5 array always start in degraded mode at first ? why does sdf have the number 4 between bracket instead of 3, why does it see a spare disk and why is the 4th drive marked with _ instead of U ? (bad configuration ?) How can I recreate the array from scratch, do i have to format each drive on its own before recreating it ? Thanks for any help, I'm not sure about what I should do at the moment

    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

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6  | Next Page >