Search Results

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

Page 40/75 | < Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >

• Turn computer into DAS (Direct Attached Storage)

  - by Damon

  Can we build a direct attached storage by taking a computer/server, adding an HBA, and installing some appropriate software? We would use Debian as a host OS for both the DAS and the server. If so, what software do we use? And do we simply need a HBA for the DAS and the Server? Or do we need more hardware? The goal is to use an older server that does not have enough room for drives but does have ECC memory, server processors, redundant power supplies, dual nics, etc. Then find any boxes, server or not, the key being having enough room for 8-12 drives, fans, etc. and turning them into a DAS; build two of these DAS's and have them connected to the server. Eventually we want to have two servers using DRBD and associated services like heartbeat and pace maker to create an HA setup for our server(s) but that will take a long time to configure since I have no experience with anything related to DRBD (yet) and have a learning curve I have to get past, not to mention the additional cost of more hardware (two servers vs one).

  Read the article

• Growing a Linux software RAID5 array

  - by chrismetcalf

  On my home file server, I've got a 1.5TB software RAID5 array, built from four 500gb Western Digital drives. I've got a fifth drive that I usually run as a hot spare (but have out of the array at the moment), but if I can I'd like to add that to the array and grow it to 2TB since I'm running out of space. I Googled for guidance, but there seem to be a lot of differing opinions out there (many of them probably now out-of-date) as to whether or not that is possible and/or smart. What's the right way to go about this, or should I start looking into building a new array with more space? Version details: %> cat /etc/issue Debian GNU/Linux 5.0 \n \l %> uname -a Linux magrathea 2.6.26-1-686-bigmem #1 SMP Sat Jan 10 19:13:22 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux %> /sbin/mdadm --version mdadm - v2.6.7.2 - 14th November 2008 %> cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] md1 : active raid1 hdc1[0] hdd1[1] 293033536 blocks [2/2] [UU] md0 : active raid5 sde1[3] sda1[0] sdc1[2] sdb1[1] 1465151808 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/4] [UUUU]

  Read the article

• Start a ZFS RAIDZ zpool with two discs then add a third?

  - by Doug S.

  Let's say I have two 2TB HDDs and I want to start my first ZFS zpool. Is it possible to create a RAIDZ with just those two discs, giving me 2TB of usable storage (if I understand it right) and then later add another 2TB HDD bringing the total to 4TB of usable storage. Am I correct or does there need to be three HDDs to start with? The reason I ask is I already have one 2TB drive I'm using that's full of files. I want to transition to a zpool but I'd rather only buy two more 2TB drives if I can. From what I understand, RAIDZ behaves similarly to RAID5 (with some major differences, I know, but in terms of capacity). However, RAID5 requires 3+ drives. I was wondering if RAIDZ has the same requirement. If I have to, I can buy the three drives and just start there, later adding the fourth, but if I could start with two and move to three that would save me $80.

  Read the article

• Can I take a HDD in Raid1 and plug it straight into a different machine?

  - by jacko

  I would assume that I can just take my HDD out of my NAS (in raid1 mirror) and plug it into another enclosure and have it work off the bat but I'd like to make sure... Any ideas? Edit: My current setup is a Netgear ReadyNAS in (hardware) raid1. I'm hoping to replace this with a home theatre type PC (possibly running Ubuntu), and would like to migrate my data without having to do a bulk transfer over my network between the 2 machines. Can anyone confirm the case for the Netgear ReadyNAS?

  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

• FreeNAS pool configuration - RAID1 + other drives

  - by trnelson

  Simple questions, really. I found this answer with a similar setup, but not sure it answers my question. If it does, I'm curious why since the answer seems a bit unsure: ZFS Hard Drive Configuration in FreeNAS I'm building a server which will be used primarily for backup, plus some media streaming, possibly with Plex. I seem to understand most everything I need, but I'm still a bit confused on how pools work, and how to configure them for my scenario. I will have 2x 2TB WD Red drives, which I plan on using in a mirrored set up (RAID1). This would be for backup, and I'd also like to do offsite backup to my CrashPlan account from this array. I also have a few other drives: 1.5TB, 320GB, 250GB. I'm not sure exactly what to do with them yet, but looking for options. FreeNAS OS will be running from a 16GB USB Flash drive. Would it be wise to use the 1.5TB as a backup-backup, essentially as a mirror or perhaps for snapshots of the 2TB RAID1? I'm still learning about snapshots. Should the 2TB mirrored drives be in their own pool? Should the other drives be set up in their own pools as well, or should they be JBOD in a single pool? They may or may not get much use since the 2TB array is plenty for me. Does a dataset basically mimic the idea of a partition or a network share? In other words, I would map \SERVER\Share to X: on my laptop? Let's say I wanted to use the 250GB drive as an encrypted drive to store all of my cat pictures. Would it have to be in its own pool? If I use jails apps, should they go in the backup RAID1, or in another place? Thank you!

  Read the article

• spontaneous hard disk password

  - by sc

  I had an HP proliant server go down recently. All of the sudden the sas controller (e200i) would not see any of the physical disks. New disks were detected just fine. I thought it was odd that all 6 disks would go down at one time so sent them to a data recovery firm to find out what happened. I'm being told that, somehow, all of the disks were spontaneously password protected. These are Hitachi 2.5" drives and I guess this is something of a known issue. The company has worked for a while to try and recover them, with no luck. Has anyone had experience with this? Any recommendations for how to recover the drives or a company that might have the expertise to do so?

  Read the article

• Server drives: 2.5" SCSI less reliable than 3.5" ?

  - by Bill

  Just had an HP 2.5" SAS 10k drive fail on a RAID5 array after about 2.5 years. It made me wonder if this was a fluke or an indication that 2.5" drives are less reliable than 3.5" SAS drives. I've had many 3.5" SAS drives running for many years without any issues (knock on wood). I would think that smaller drives would generate less heat and therefore be more reliable, but couldn't find any evidence of this. I realize all drives will eventually fail and that it's a crap shoot with any particular model, but was hoping someone could point out some related studies or comment on the SCSI drive sizes they've found to be most reliable in servers. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Issue with broken disk on Solaris with raidctl - how to proceed

  - by weismat

  I have a SunFire T2000 server which has 2 mirrored disks pairs. The server required an exchange of the system battery. After swaping the battery first no disks were found. After booting from CD we managed to find the disks, but now one disk is broken and the raidctl reports a failed synchronisation. The boot process stops now when trying to mount the file systems. The power light of the broken drive is not even blinking. What is the best way to proceed now ? Fortunately I could live with loosing the data on the drive as it is backed up, but I would like to keep the rest of the data as it contains /etc and get the server booting again.

  Read the article

• What happens to missed writes after a zpool clear?

  - by Kevin

  I am trying to understand ZFS' behaviour under a specific condition, but the documentation is not very explicit about this so I'm left guessing. Suppose we have a zpool with redundancy. Take the following sequence of events: A problem arises in the connection between device D and the server. This causes a large number of failures and ZFS therefore faults the device, putting the pool in degraded state. While the pool is in degraded state, the pool is mutated (data is written and/or changed.) The connectivity issue is physically repaired such that device D is reliable again. Knowing that most data on D is valid, and not wanting to stress the pool with a resilver needlessly, the admin instead runs zpool clear pool D. This is indicated by Oracle's documentation as the appropriate action where the fault was due to a transient problem that has been corrected. I've read that zpool clear only clears the error counter, and restores the device to online status. However, this is a bit troubling, because if that's all it does, it will leave the pool in an inconsistent state! This is because mutations in step 2 will not have been successfully written to D. Instead, D will reflect the state of the pool prior to the connectivity failure. This is of course not the normative state for a zpool and could lead to hard data loss upon failure of another device - however, the pool status will not reflect this issue! I would at least assume based on ZFS' robust integrity mechanisms that an attempt to read the mutated data from D would catch the mistakes and repair them. However, this raises two problems: Reads are not guaranteed to hit all mutations unless a scrub is done; and Once ZFS does hit the mutated data, it (I'm guessing) might fault the drive again because it would appear to ZFS to be corrupting data, since it doesn't remember the previous write failures. Theoretically, ZFS could circumvent this problem by keeping track of mutations that occur during a degraded state, and writing them back to D when it's cleared. For some reason I suspect that's not what happens, though. I'm hoping someone with intimate knowledge of ZFS can shed some light on this aspect.

  Read the article

• How is it possible for SSD's drives to have such a good latency?

  - by tigrou

  First time i read some information about SSD's, i was surprised to learn they internally use NAND flash chips. This kind of memory is generally slow (low bandwidth) and have high latency while SSD's are just the opposite. But here is how it works : SSD drives increase their bandwidth by using several NAND flash chips in parallel. In other words, they do some data striping (aka RAID0) across several chips (done by the controller). What i don't understand is how SSD's drives have such a low latency, whereas they are using NAND chips? (or at least lot better than what a typical single NAND chip would do) EDIT: I think under-estimate NAND chip capabilities. USB drives, while powered by NAND's are mostly limited by USB protocol (which have a pretty high latency) and the USB controller. That explain their poor performance in some cases.

  Read the article

• Installing Solaris 10 on sunT5220 - ZFS/UFS raid 10?

  - by Matthew

  I am in a bit of a time crunch, and need to get two T5220's built. We were very happy to see two boxes in our aged inventory which had 8 HDD's each, but didn't think to check if they were running hardware RAID or not. Turns out that they aren't. When we install, we are given the option to use UFS or ZFS, but when we select a place to install we're only given the option of installing on one single disk. Is it possible to create a software raid 10 across all of the disks and install the OS on that? Sorry if any lingo is wrong, I'm not really a Sun guy and our guru is out of town right now. Any help would be really appreciated! Note: Most of the guides I've found on google entail installing the OS on a single disk, and then creating a separate RAID 10 on other disks. We would actually like the OS to reside on the RAID 10. Hope that clarifies things.

  Read the article

• Expendable, Redundant, Easily recoverable

  - by MeIr

  I am desperate at this point, I have been looking for "Big storage" solution for a while on my own and I can't find anything that would suite my needs. But now push came to shove. Current situation: I have about 6TB data storage (already full) - Drobo. Yesterday Drobo died on me and it put me into bad situation - I can't recover my data without buying another Drobo. From extensive research online I realized that Drobo is not the safest bet and by now it seems very poor choice. I ordered new Drobo to try to get my data back, however I don't want to be in the same situation later and continuing using Drobo promises this event to re-occur. What I am looking for: 1) Inexpensive setup. 2) Dynamically extendable - add more drives and/or replace a drive with bigger capacity. 3) Redundant - setup against 1-3 drive failure, will depend on total number of drives. For the sake of argument let's assume for every 4 drives one should be able to fail without data loss. 4) Easy data recovery - let's say unforeseen happens, I would like to be able to recover information without buying new tools or replacements - example: new Drobo. 5) Should be USB or Network Attach Storage 6) No demand on speed. Doesn't have to be fast, I am not doing video editing on the setup. However if option exists, would be nice to have a decent speed. After thoughts: I reviewed few options and FreeNAS looks nice, but it doesn't have #2 - Dynamic extendability. There are work around with Pools but it seems a bit complicated and unnecessary. More over it seems like data safety is a big question - saw some horror stories. Please advise on what options I have and what seems like an optimal solution (if any). I don't care if it has to be Windows or Linux box or any other OS and/or software that has to run on top, but simple solution is more attractive. Thank you! P.S: Feel free to ignore "After thoughts".

  Read the article

• How to figure out disks performance in Xen?

  - by cpt.Buggy

  So, I have a Dell R710 with PERC 6/i Integrated and 6 450Gb Seagate 15k SAS disks in RAID10, I have 30 Xen vps working on it. Now I need to deploy second server with same hardware for same tasks and I want to figure out maybe it's a good idea to use RAID5 instead of RAID10 because we have a lot of "free" memory on first server and not so much "free space". How do I find out disks performance on first server and find out could I move it to RAID5 without slowing down of whole system?

  Read the article

• How SSD's drives reduce their latency?

  - by tigrou

  First time i read some information about SSD's, i was surprised to learn they internally use NAND flash chips. This kind of memory is generally slow (low bandwidth) and have high latency while SSD's are just the opposite. But here is how it works : SSD drives increase their bandwidth by using several NAND flash chips in parallel. In other words, they do some data striping (aka RAID0) across several chips (done by the controller). What i don't understand is how SSD's drives managed to reduce latency? (or at least lot better than what a single NAND chip without any controller can do)

  Read the article

• How can one implement RAID1 with a Dell Latitude laptop containing one normal hard drive, and one hard drive in an external bay?

  - by user12583188

  OS: Win7 professional Laptop: latitude e6420 The answer to this question should address how to deploy RAID1 software wise on a dell latitude e6420. I have two Hitachi Z5K500 320GB drives (new). There is one hard drive (320GB capacity) in the system now, which contains the current installation that I would prefer to keep. The drive currently inside the laptop will be replaced with one of the Hitachi drives, and the other Hitachi drive will be fitted into the laptop by way of a Dell hard drive "caddy" enclosure, which inserts into the media bay of the laptop (you remove the cd-rom bay, insert hd-bay).

  Read the article

• HP DL380 G5 Predictive failure of a new drive

  - by CharlieJ

  Consolidated Error Report: Controller: Smart Array P400 in slot 3 Device: Physical Drive 1I:1:1 Message: Predictive failure. We have an HP DL380 G5 server with two 72GB 15k SAS drives configured in RAID1. A couple weeks ago, the server reported a drive failure on Drive 1. We replaced the drive with a brand new HDD -- same spares number. A few days ago, the server started reporting a predictive drive failure on the new drive, in the same bay. Is it likely the new drive is bad... or more likely we have a bay failure problem? This is a production server, so any advice would be appreciated. I have another spare drive, so I can hot swap it if this is a fluke and new drive is just bad. THANKS! CharlieJ

  Read the article

• ZFS Configuration advice

  - by rbarrette

  I need some advice on configuring ZFS. Here is what I have: Physical Disks: 4x 3 TB 2x 2 TB 2x 1 TB What is the best configuration for my Vdevs and storage pool. I want to maximaze space but still maintain redundancy. Should I just get 2 more 3TB's and just create 2x 3-3TB raid2z storage pools? Create a 1x 4-3TB raidz2 vdev? Can I put redundancy at the pool level and create individual vdevs for each drive and then add 2x 1TB+2TB striped vdevs to keep all vdevs the same size. Keep in mind I do need to migrate data from the smaller drives and am planning on adding more 3tb drives later on. What do you think?

  Read the article

• When using RAID10 + BBWC why is it better to separate PostgreSQL data files from OS and transaction logs than to keep them all on the same array?

  - by Vlad

  I've seen the advice everywhere (including here and here): keep your OS partition, DB data files and DB transaction logs on separate discs/arrays. The general recommendation is to use RAID1 for OS, RAID10 for data (or RAID5 if load is very read-biased) and RAID1 for transaction logs. However, considering that you will need at least 6 or 8 drives to build this setup, wouldn't a RAID10 over 6-8 drives with BBWC perform better? What if the drives are SSDs? I'm talking here about internal server drives, not SAN.

  Read the article

• Is it possible to create a Mirror or Stripe volume for the boot partition in Windows 2008/R2?

  - by Georgios

  Hello, I have a server with two identical disks and I have installed Windows Server 2008 R2 on C, which is a 60GB volume on Disk 0. Using the disk manager, I have attempted to create both a Mirror and Stripe volume in Disk 1 but every time I get the same error "No extents found in the plex". This error occurs after Windows has converted both disks to Dynamic. The fact that the manager allows me to attempt to do this would point to the fact that this is possible. However I have been unable to find any solutions to this error. Any ideas on how to solve this? Thanks Georgios

  Read the article

• Can I split one RAID1 partition in two?

  - by Prosys

  I have a linux box with CentOS 6.2 and a RAID1 (2x 2Tb) configuration: /dev/md1 -> / (10G) /dev/md2 -> /home (1.9T) I want to split the md2 in two different partitions, so I can get the following configuration: /dev/md1 -> / (10G) /dev/md2 -> /home (1T) /dev/md3 -> /example (900G) How can I achieve this? I already know that I can resize the partition, but that doesn't alter the real partition table (only the md device), so how can I do this?

  Read the article

• what is RAID5 + Hotspare?

  - by maruti

  does this mean setting aside one more disk for hotspare than you actually need for RAID5 only?

  Read the article

• RAID1: Which disk will be mirrored?

  - by tmelen

  How does a RAID1 system determine which disk to use as the source and which disk to use as the destination when mirroring? Assume for instance the following scenario: A RAID1 array is created with two disks A and B. A is replaced by disk C, which is added to the array. Files are beeing modified as time goes by. Now B is removed and A is reinserted. Will the RAID1 system realize that A and C are out of sync? And that C is more up-to-date than A? And if not, is there a safe way to avoid the mirroring process to start immediately when disk A is inserted?

  Read the article

• How does a Promise FastTrak 133 interleave a striped array?

  - by Jemenake

  I co-worker had two drives configured as a stripe on a motherboard with an on-board Promise FastTrak 133. The motherboard failed, and we've been unable to find any others with an on-board Promise controller which can recognize the array. With Linux or some disk editors, I can see data on both drives... and I want to see if I can combine the data from both drives onto a single, larger drive. But I need to know how that information is interleaved on the drives. I've tried dmraid on Linux, but that doesn't recognize the drives as an array. I guess I could just try combining alternating blocks from the drives, starting with a block size of 256B and keep doubling until I get a result that looks intact. But I'd like to avoid that if someone already knows how Promise controllers spread the data over a striped array.

  Read the article

• Have two partitions in RAID1

  - by mateikav

  The answers are unclear wherever I look. I have two 2TB drives for a RAID1 and I want to mirror them while having two partitions on the drives. One partition will be 100GB and contain programs, the other partition will be 1.8TB and contain personal files. Some may ask why? The answer is that my programs are currently on another older drive and I want to save time and pain uninstalling and re-installing critical programs while merely copying them to the new drives via Shadowcopy. When I create the RAID1, will both partitions be mirrored? Is this possible? I am sorry if I am being confusing or unclear.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >