Search Results

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

Page 47/75 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

• Very poor read performance compared to write performance on md(raid1) / crypt(luks) / lvm

  - by Android5360

  I'm experiencing very poor read performance over raid1/crypt/lvm. In the same time, write speeds are about 2x+ faster on the same setup. On another raid1 setup on the same machine I get normal read speeds (maybe because I'm not using cryptsetup). OS related disks: sda + sdb. I have raid1 configuration with two disks, both are in place. I'm using LVM over the RAID. No encryption. Both disks are WD Green, 5400 rpm. IO test results on this raid1: dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img3 bs=8k count=256k conv=fsync - 2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 22.3392 s, 96.1 MB/s sync echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches dd if=/tmp/output.img3 of=/dev/null bs=8k - 2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 15.9 s, 135 MB/s And here is the problematic setup (on the same machine). Currently I have only one sdc (WD Green, 5400rpm) configured in software raid1 + crypt (luks, serpent-xts-plain) + lvm. Tomorrow I will attach another disk (sdd) to complete this two-disk raid1 setup. IO tests results on this raid1: dd if=/dev/zero of=output.img3 bs=8k count=256k conv=fsync 2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 17.7235 s, 121 MB/s sync echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches dd if=output.img3 of=/dev/null bs=8k 2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 36.2454 s, 59.2 MB/s We can see that the read performance is very very bad (59MB/s compared to 135MB/s when using no encryption). Nothing is using the disks during benchmark. I can confirm this because I checked with iostat and dstat. Details on the hardware: disks: all are WD green, 5400rpm, 64mb cache. cpu: FX-8350 at stock speed ram: 4x4GB at 1066Mhz. Details on the software: OS: Debian Wheezy 7, amd64 mdadm: v3.2.5 - 18th May 2012 LVM version: 2.02.95(2) (2012-03-06) LVM Library version: 1.02.74 (2012-03-06) LVM Driver version: 4.22.0 cryptsetup: 1.4.3 Here is how I configured the slow raid1+crypt+lvm setup: parted /dev/sdc mklabel gpt type: ext4 start: 2048s end: -1 Now the raid, crypt and the lvm configuration: mdadm --create /dev/md1 --level=1 --raid-disks=2 missing /dev/sdc cryptsetup --cipher serpent-xts-plain luksFormat /dev/md1 cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/md1 md1_crypt vgcreate vg_sql /dev/mapper/md1_crypt lvcreate -l 100%VG vg_sql -n lv_sql mkfs.ext4 /dev/mapper/vg_sql-lv-sql mount /dev/mapper/vg_sql-lv_sql /sql So guys, can you help me identify the reason and fix it? It has to be something with the cryptsetup as there is no such read slowdown on the other setup (sda+sdb) where no encryption is present. But I have no idea what to do. Thanks!

  Read the article

• baffling stat pauses - (reiserfs)

  - by Twirrim

  I've got a SuSE server with reiserfs formatted partitions, all on a RAID1 mirror. I'm noticing odd spikes in iowait, but generally all seems okay. iostat claims not even 3% iowait in general: avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 6.53 0.03 1.45 2.92 0.00 89.07 After tracking down some odd behaviour when ls'ing, it appears "stat" (ls is aliased to include color which does a stat process on each file) randomly takes 5 seconds on a file in the directory. ReiserFS does a file system sync every 5 seconds, but that's interval between not length of time taken to sync. Out of curiosity I did remount using noatime to see if that would help though as it would reduce sync's workload, but no joy. Anyone got any thoughts what might be causing this pause? Disks appear healthy, RAID controller believes the RAID is healthy, and io stats show the disks aren't working very hard at all.

  Read the article

• Exchange 2007 Standard Edition

  - by Phrontiste

  We Have : Exchange 2007 Standard Edition IBM System X3650 2 x Intel Xeon 5430 2.66 GHz Version 8.1 Build 240.6 Mailbox, Hub Transport, Client Access Role Installed on One Box Total Number of Mailboxes : 110 - 130 6 Physical Disks Disk 0,1 (68 GB) = Raid-1, OS Partition ( C: Partition) Disk 2,3 (279GB) = Raid-1, Exchange Database (First and Second Storage Groups) ( D: Partition ) Disk 4,5 (68 GB) = Raid-1, Exchange Transaction Logs ( E: Partition ) Setup: Storage Groups : D:\First Storage group\Mailbox database.edb Storage Groups : D:\Second Storage Group\Public Folder Database.edb Transaction Logs : E Partition Problem 1: On our D Partition (Mailbox Database Partition), total size is 279 GB, free space remaining is 64.7 GB, when I select the first storage group and second storage group folders and right click properties they report a size of 165 GB. Mailbox database reports a size of 157GB when right clicked Properties. where as the size displayed in the folder is 164,893,456 KB So, we are missing around 50-54 GB, there is nothing else on these drives, no page file, nothing at all. The partition housing the Transaction logs is reporting the sizes accurately. Any suggestions / fixes on the above ? Problem 2: As you may have already read in Problem 1, the size of the mailbox database is 157GB or 164GB reported; which is not recommended, a) What would you suggest we should do to divide mailboxes in storage groups on this same server ? b) How would we move mailboxes into different storage groups ? c) This is the information store size ? (Am I right in thinking that this is not recommended) d) Having multiple storage groups with one Mailbox DB in each, would that reduce the size of the Information Store? e) Any suggestions / how-to reduce the size of information store ? We didn't install this, we have inherited this - what other recommendations you can make in order to keep ourselves better prepared for any server disaster? We are backing up with Yosemite Backup on RD1000 (320GB) at the moment, which is backing up successfully, flushing the logs daily. We haven't done a test restore YET. I have tried to provide as much info as possible, please let me know if you need further info. Also, we haven't yet faced any problems in mailflow, access speeds, everything is working fine, we have two to five people accessing OWA or Outlook via vpn only. Thanks for your time to read the above - will look forward to your expert suggestions.

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2003 Synchronize Not Sticking

  - by lkessler

  We have a Windows Server 2003. It had Raid running on 2 disks. One disk failed and the Raid Controller failed. We replaced the disk and controller and restored everything. No data was lost. The users of that server found that there were a number of directories that appeared empty. We found that from their machine, we could right-click on the directory and select "Synchronize" and the files in the directory would now be visible to them. However, when opening Internet Explorer and browsing the web and ftp'ing to a web site, the files in the directory would vanish. We would have to "Synchronize" them again to get them to reappear. What is going on to cause this need to Synchronize and then re-Synchronize again? What do we need to do to fix this so that the directories are permanently visible?

  Read the article

• SQL Server Files Local or NAS or SAN?

  - by Jedi Master Spooky

  I have to install a new Server with SQL Server 2008, What do you recommend, One server with Raid 10 or the Files in a NAS? What about iSCSI should I use it? What about SAN? The server has 4Gb of RAM and that database file is about 2GB. To make my self clear today the server has no RAID, I have to implement some kind of strategy so if something happend I can have my files safe, so What should I choose Local Files, NAS, SAN? What option has the most performance, what is the more secure?

  Read the article

• Supermicro SmartOS setup issue with HDDs

  - by Andrew B.

  I'm trying to setup SmartOS on my new Supermicro server (SYS-6027R-N3RF4+). I have 8 HDDs + 2 SSDs installed in the hot-swappable drive bays. I have not configured the Intel RAID controller on the machine (it shows no RAID configured, and lists all 8 HDDs). When I boot SmartOS from my USB key for the first time and get to the initial zpool creation I only see 2 disks listed. How can I tell which two drives are being referenced? How can I get SmartOS to recognize all 8+2 drives? Is there a BIOS setting I need to adjust?

  Read the article

• What are the strategies available to minimise badblocks on an encrypted partition?

  - by David Andreoletti

  Let me explain my backup strategy and the problem I am facing. My current backup strategy: Open encrypted container and execute Carbon Copy Cleaner on it at least once a week. Rotate backup disks. Problem: I have an Truecrypt partition on my 1st external hard disk. I recently found out that some files on this encrypted partition cannot be read due to bad blocks (reported by Antonio Diaz's GNU 'ddrescue'). My backup strategy is ineffective in this scenario because bad blocks are discovered during backup. Possible strategy Strategy #0: Have the encrypted partition over a RAID 1 with 2 disks. Is this a suitable strategy ? Strategy #1: Do you think of any other one ? Environment: Mac OS X 10.8 External 2.5" hard disk (SATA) No RAID

  Read the article

• Recommended Setup

  - by Chris Ryan

  I have been running into issue with my MSSQL Database setup with speed. Here is my scenario. About 100M Rows Average: 1k Updates Per Second Hard Drives: RAID 10 SSD MDF --Active Time: 0 Log Drives: 1 SSD LDF - Simple Recovery --Active Time 99.9 --Queue: 8 I do not need a back up of the log so it is set to simple recovery but my bottleneck is still at my log. I get high WAITLOG times and thus it can not update any faster. I can't do bulk updates/transactions and each update needs to be one at a time. Is my only option to increase write performance of the log drives, add a RAID drives? Any suggestions on increasing the performance?

  Read the article

• Distributed, Parallel, Fault-tolerant File System

  - by Eddified

  There are so many choices that it's hard to know where to start. My requirements are these: Runs on Linux Most of the files will be between 5-9 MB in size. There will also be a significant number of small-ish jpgs (100px x 100px). All of the files need to be available over http. Redundancy -- ideally it would provide the space efficiency similar to RAID 5 of 75% (in RAID 5 this would be calculated thus: with 4 identical disks, 25% of the space is used for parity = 75% efficent) Must support several petabytes of data scalable runs on commodity hardware In addition, I look for these qualities, though they are not "requirements": Stable, mature file system Lots of momentum and support etc I would like some input as to which file system works best for the given requirements. Some people at my organization are leaning towards MogileFS, but I'm not convinced of the stability and momentum of that project. GlusterFS and Lustre, based on my limited research, appear to be better supported... Thoughts?

  Read the article

• XP shared folders not accessible after BIOS changed

  - by stijn

  Here's what worked for over a year: PC A runs Windows 7, PC B runs Windows XP. Both are on the same subnet behind a router. A uses user account X, but logs in to PC B using the Administrator account. PC B is a Dell Precision 470. A known problem with these is that sometimes when plugging in their power cable they somehow loses all BIOS settings. This happened yesterday. After this happens Windows won't boot, because the default BIOS setting is 'RAID ON' while there is no RAID configured. No problem though, changing the BIOS settings to 'RAID OFF' makes it boot without problems. Note that in the meantime, nothing config-related was changed on machine A. It wasn't even on. Indeed after doing this, everything is fine. Everything includes all normal operations, remote desktop from PC A to PC B, running Synergy between A and B, accessing shared folders from B to A. But accessing the shared folders on B from A does not work any more. I tried pretty much everything I found via Google (fiddling with policies/registry kes/...) but no avail. > ping -a 192.168.2.2 Pinging A [192.168.2.2] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.2.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128 > net view \\192.168.2.2 System error 5 has occurred. Access is denied. > net use /persistent:no K: \\A\myshare /user:A\USERNAME PASSWORD > net use /persistent:no K: \\192.168.2.2\myshare /user:192.168.2.2\USERNAME PASSWORD > net use /persistent:no K: \\192.168.2.2\myshare /user:USERNAME PASSWORD System error 86 has occurred. The specified network password is not correct. A solution to this would be great: I haven't been able to do any work since yesterday ;] update after taking the hard drive out of B and putting it in another Precision 470 with almost exactly the same hardware (at first sight, only the video card differs) the shared folders work.. Putting the disk back into A, same problem remains. Why does this depend on hardware, and more important, on which hardware?

  Read the article

• Can storage-spaces drives be moved to a replacement server when there is a failure

  - by Joe C

  I have tried to search here and Google, but cannot find a case explaining this. Storage spaces is similar to software raid. If the server fails due to motherboard or some other issue, can the drives that comprise that storage spaces config be moved to another win2k12 server without restoring from backup? This can be done in linux software raid. If so, does the storage space config have to be re-created prior to the move, or do the drives hold the config so they are essentially plug and play? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Best motherboard power supply combo for backblaze server

  - by jin14

  Building a backblaze server as described in this article. http://blog.backblaze.com/ So 45 hard drives in one box. I'm making it a MSDPM 2010 server so I actually don't even need raid cards in there as MSDPM will figure out how to use all of the hard drives on it's own. So need to know what motherboard, CPU, power supply I should get. Primary hard drive : SSD 128GB Storage : 45 1.5GB sata drives OS : windows 2008 Backup software : Microsoft System center Data protection server 2010 Need to know Which mother board to buy which will support 45 SATA hard drives. Don't need a raid card. Which power supply can power all 45 hard drives, 1 ssd drive, motherboard. Best set of equipment that meets my needs wins

  Read the article

• Provision storage in SAN encironment

  - by wildchild

  hi,.. Can somebody help in understanding how Lun Provisioning is done in clariion based on client requirement. Say, a client needs one 50 GB space on the host( for application) ,two -350 GBs ( for DB and stuff) on the same host and i have 4 raid groups with space of 200 GB in one 50 GB in second and 400 GB and 400GB in rest two all having 5 disks. And , I 'm using Raid 5 only. How do i provision keeping performance in mind( so that performance hit is not there)?..And i need to understand the concept of meta head as well. Please help me by elaborating the above scenario..I am learning to provision storage in non productive environment( b'fore going ahead and working on client prod server) and i have been learning a lot from SF ...I request the seniors here to help me understand it better. Thanks for reading

  Read the article

• Dell 2950 Perc 6/i "physical disk" and "Enclosure(Backplane)" under Connector 1 in OMSA tree- Troubleshoot help

  - by user66357

  Just looking for someone who might know why this could occur... In OMSA, on my Dell 2950, there usually is only one "Physical Disks" child under "Enclosure (Backplane)" in the tree view. Currently, the tree looks like this: Dell PERC 6/i Integrated Connector 1 (RAID) Enclosure (Backplane) Physical Disks (1:04 good, 1:05 removed) Physical Disks (1:33 Ready but unused) Normally it's like this: Connector 1 (RAID) Enclosure (Backplane) Physical Disks (1:04 good, 1:05 good) From the front, 6 of 6 3.5" SAS drives are connected. The server is showing Slot 5 as bad and the disk as removed. It seems that the drive in Slot 5 is being sensed as external to the Enclosure. Any ideas why this would happen? Think I can get away with rebuilding the virtual disk by replacing 1:05 with 1:33? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Reliable Backup Solution for Linux for Complete System Restoration

  - by Chris S

  What's the best backup solution for Linux that can completely restore the entire filesystem to a blank harddrive (including partitioning) after an old harddrive dies? I'm currently running a few Ubuntu machines, some with RAID-1 and others without RAID (mostly laptops). I'd like to implement a backup solution that can take incremental snapshots of the entire filesystem, so that if I were to replace all the harddrives in a machine, I could use the backup to restore a perfect copy of the previous filesystem. Unfortunately, nearly all the backup solutions I've found seem to be glorified rsync scripts, which only backup some files, and have no easy way to restore once the entire filesystem is gone. Some of the more complicated solutions, like Bacula, might do what I need, but require a complicated server/client setup and are notoriously difficult to maintain. I've heard that Apple's TimeMachine utility has this ability, and I've had similar success taking differential disk images with Acronis True Image on Windows, but of course neither of these work on Linux. Is there anything comparable for Ubuntu?

  Read the article

• AFP AD ACL permissions issues with external drive

  - by AlanGBaker

  Mac OS X Server 10.4.11 connected to an AD domain system serving AFP shares to Mac OS X 10.5.8. If I create a share on the the internal RAID of the server with an ACL that allows RW to all ("Domain Users"), then it works, but a share created identically on the external RAID appliance (Drobo v2) doesn't. When the share from the Drobo is mounted, it shows no sign that it has any ACLs associated with it: neither in the Finder (Get Info), nor when checked via the terminal with "ls -lae". The Drobo does show that the ACLs exist when I ssh into the server and check it there, but when the clients mount that share, they just... ...disappear. Any thoughts?

  Read the article

• MSA20 RAID5 recovery failure due to URE on another disk

  - by Andrey

  I have MSA20 with one disk array on 12 disks and 3 LUNs on it (each raid 5). A few days ago one disk in one of the LUNs was failed and I replaced it. But raid5 recovering failed at 13% and I see in ADU report that one of the disk has "Errors Logged = 5566" and according SCSI specifications it is URE (Sense Code=0x11, Qualifier=0x00). In serial log I also see URE error. It seems that Raid5 can't be rebuilt because of this. So I have a few questions: Is there a way to recover raid5 still? If I leave new disk that was replaced and remove disk with URE, will other LUNs be destroyed or just failed LUN? If all LUNs will fail what is the sense to make each LUN with own raid on one disk group array if 2 failed disk can destroy all? As I understand the preferred way is to create one disk array for one LUN in future and not one array with few LUNs? Thanks.

  Read the article

• How to repair unbootable Fedora install

  - by Cerin

  How do you repair/reinstall Fedora without deleting any existing partitions or data? I was attempting to upgrade some old Fedora 13 servers to 17, following the instructions in the wiki. After the 14-15 upgrade, rebooting resulted in the output: Dropping to debug shell. sh: can't access tty; job control turned off dracut:/# Running dmesg also shows: dracut Warning: No root device "block:/dev/mapper/VolGroup-lv_root" found Googling shows this error is typically related to some weird RAID issues, but my server is a virtual machine not using any RAID. Using a rescue CD, I can chroot /mnt/sysimage, and all packages and data still seems to be there. How do I make the system bootable again?

  Read the article

• Solution for storing sata drives outside of case

  - by Jeffrey Kevin Pry

  I have a system that has 8 sata disks in a software raid 5 array using mdadm. My issue is that I want to move the drives from inside of the computer case in order to cool more efficiently. I have looked all over the web and only seem to find enclosures that hide the drives connectors behind an estata port or some other internal raid controller. Basically what I want is an enclosure or equivalent that I can run independent sata cables to and either power as well, or have it have its own power supply. I have the sata ports on the motherboard available and don't want to limit io by using one port with a multiplier or the like. One final caveat, I am a college student on a budget and don't have a fortune to spend on such an enclosure. Thanks in advance for your help and advice.

  Read the article

• HP DL370 G6 expansion

  - by user72185

  Hi, we are running a HP DL370 server with 6 x 300 gb disks on RAID 5. Due to a Windows update causing our server to fail recently, we couldn't access the data. I now want to separate the data from the OS (Windows server 2008 r2) so that if anything like that happens again, we can route everyone through a separate server. I have seen these HP storageworks enclosures (msa70) and have a couple of questions: Can I just take out our 2.5 inch 10k SAS drives, install them in the new Storageworks NAS and hey presto we would be up and running? If I wanted to then add another drive (I think there are 25 bays), can I just insert a blank but identical drive and the RAID 5 would dynamically expand to incorporate the new drive. Many thanks Adrian

  Read the article

• How create partitions with custom layout in VM on Xen Server?

  - by Valter Silva

  We use XenServer with RAID 0, as one disk only (I wonder if this is a good approach, if not what would be ?), then we install Xen. After that we put the centOS 6.4 x64 DVD in the server and try to install it. But when it should came the option to create a custom layout of the partitions, it don't. So when we choose the 'use entire disk', the OS start to be installed, and then create the default layout. With /home bigger than / which we don't want to do that. I wonder if this is a problem with : raid or xenserver or xenclient or centos ?

  Read the article

• High disk time on sql-server

  - by Patrik

  Hi We have a dedicated sql-server 2008 r2 enterprise edition. The setup is: D: (data files) - stored on local ssd disks (not the same disks as log files) (raid 10) E: (log files) - stored on local ssd disks (not the same disks as data files) (raid 1) F: (transaction log backup) - stored remote on a SAN Today we moved our log files to new disks (from F: to E:). From a shared volume ( F:(SAN)) to dedicated local disks (E:). What then happend was that the "disk time", "avg. transfer time" and "avg disk write queue length" increased on the volume where we have the data files (D:) (not on the volume where the log files are located). The data volume and log volume does not share disks, however they share the same controller card. "Disk idle time" is low for all volumes. One thought is ofcourse that the controller card might be overloaded. But, we need more ideas on where the problem might be.

  Read the article

• Intel SASWT4I SAS/SATA Controller Question

  - by Joe Hopfgartner

  Hey there! I want to assemble a cheap storage sytem based on the Norco RPC-4020 Case. When searching for controllers I found this one: Intel® RAID Controller SASWT4I This is a quote form the Spec Sheet: Scalability. Supports up to 122 physical devices in SAS mode which is ideal for employing JBODs (Just a Bunch Of Disks) or up to 14 devices in RAID 0, 1, 1E/10E mode through direct connect device attachment or through expander backplane support. Does that mean I can attatch 14 SATA drives directly to the controller using SFF-8087 - 4x SATA breakout cables? That would be nice because then I can choose a mainboard that has 6 Onboard SATA and i can connect all 20 bays while only spending 155$ on the controller and like another 100$ on cables. Would that work? And why is it 14 and not 16 when there are 4 Ports? I am really confused about all the breakout/fanout/(edge-)expanding/multiplying/channel stuff...

  Read the article

• Large file copy from NFS to local disk performance drop

  - by Bernhard

  I'm trying to copy a 200GB file from an NFS mount to a local disk. The local disk is an XFS filesystem on a LVM on top of a RAID 5 system (hardware RAID controler). I'm using rsync to monitor the transfer speed. At the beginning the IO speed is about 200MB/s, stable for the first 18GB. But then the performance drops by a factor of 10-20 and never recovers to the initial rate. Sometimes it reaches about 50-100MB/s but just for a few seconds and then the process seems to hang for a bit. At the same time all file-stat operations on the target filesystem are blocking for a long time (minutes). Also interrupting the copy process blocks for several minutes, a sub-sequent delete of the partly copied file takes also several minutes. Any ideas what could be causing this?

  Read the article

• Vista stuck at "Shutting down..." screen. Any way to get verbose logging?

  - by CapBBeard

  Hi all, My home machine has been running fine for about 3 years, no problems at all. Within the last couple of weeks it's had real trouble trying to shut down. It'll get so far and then just sit there at the "Shutting down..." screen for hours. I've left it overnight, I've tried in safe mode, all to no avail. These days, I just wait for the disk activity to finish up and then hold the power button to turn it off. Feels dirty as, especially because there's a RAID involved! The hardware itself is in pretty good shape and of decent spec; Core 2 Quad, 4GB RAM, 1TB RAID 1+0, so it's not quite like a 7 year old PC coming to end of life! In the last month, hardware hasn't changed except for a new monitor. Admittedly I haven't tried unplugging the monitor but I've never heard of that preventing a shutdown. I might give it a whirl later I guess, as a last resort. I've uninstalled old apps, done updates, checked the event log, looked in device manager, uninstalled all non-present devices, disabled various non-critical devices (imaging, audio etc), unplugged peripherals, stopped non-essential services, unplugged the network, disabled the network adapter entirely, ran chkdsk, verified my RAID, the list goes on. But not a single lead. I'm pretty stumped. It could be hardware, but I have no other evidence to suggest so; when the PC is running, it runs fine. Temperatures are good, gaming is smooth as always, disk performance is fine. Event log even makes it look like the shutdown was completed (gets to the point where the event log service stops). In fact, the PC doesn't appear to realise that I cut the power to it. So my question is, does anyone know if there is a way I can get some verbose output (or a log) from shutdown to give me some idea of what is causing the issue? I'm guessing it's stuck unloading some app/driver but it would be good to get some specifics! Unless anyone has any other ideas? I suspect a reinstall would resolve the issue, however I'm looking to get a new PC built in the next month or so, and the reinstall is going to be quite a big job so I'd rather just wait until then if it comes to that. Would still be nice to get this sorted in the mean time though. Cheers!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >