Search Results

Search found 22380 results on 896 pages for 'hard drive failure'.

Page 49/896 | < Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >

  • unable to boot from live USB!

    - by ramblinman
    Linux noob here. I was messing around with my new dual-boot (win7 and the latest ubuntu, 12.04 I think?) Long story short, I deleted some partitions that I shouldn't have. When I boot up the machine, I get: error: no such partition. grub rescue _ I know that I could probably fix this by booting from the live USB. But I can't boot from the live USB either! On startup, I can get "boot from drive" options by pressing F12. (This is how I installed Ubuntu in the first place.) But when I select the USB drive, I get this error: error: no such device: [long string of letters and numbers]. grub rescue _ I've searched around for a fix but most threads addressing the first problem suggest booting from live drive. And I can't do that! Any help much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to partition a fully used hard drive

    - by MineCraftMan39
    I installed Ubuntu on my laptop which when I got it I had Fedora 13 installed on it as the OS. Now I want to install Fedora 18 in a dual boot with Ubuntu. Problem is when I installed Ubuntu, I didn't partition for dual boot and I gave the entire hard drive to Ubuntu and no longer have the space to dual boot. How can I lower the partition on Ubuntu to make space on the hard drive for Fedora? I want to split the hard drive 50/50 between the two. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • can't chmod on external hard disk?

    - by G. He
    I have an USB3.0 external hard disk, partitioned to 3 NTFS partitions. When I plug the hard disk in, the 3 partitions automatically mounted under /media. So far so good. I can read and write to files, or mkdir, etc on these partitions. But I can't do chmod/chown on any of the files/directories on these partitions. The owner:group always myself, and the mode are always 700 for directories and 600 for files. I have another partition on internal harddisk also mounted. That partition works fine. I looked the output of mount command, the only difference between mount options is that there is one extra 'default_permissions' on the external hard disks. Anyway I can set the owner:group and mode on these files and directories.

    Read the article

  • Red Hat 5.3 on HP Proliant DL380 G5 and failed drive on RAID controller

    - by thinkdreams
    I have a development ERP server here in my office that I assist with support on, and originally the DBA requested a single drive setup for some of the drives on the server. Thus the hardware RAID controller (an HP embedded controller) looks like: c0d0 (2 drive) RAID-1 c0d1 (2 drive) RAID-1 c0d2 (1 drive) No RAID <-- Failed c0d3 (1 drive) No RAID c0d4 (1 drive) No RAID c0d5 (1 drive) No RAID c0d2 has failed. I replaced the drive immediately with a spare using the hot-swap, but the c0d2 continues to mark itself as failed, even when I umount the partition. I'm loathe to reboot the server since I'm concerned about the server coming back up in rescue mode but I'm afraid that's the only way to get the system to re-read the drive. I assumed there was some sort of auto-detection routine for this, but I haven't been able to figure out the proper procedure. I have installed the HP ACU CLI utilties, so I can see the hardware RAID setup. I'd really like to find out what the proper procedure should have been, where I went wrong, and how to correct it now. Obviously this goes without saying I should NOT have listened to the DBA and set the drives up as RAID-1 throughout as was my first instinct. He wasn't worried about data loss, but it sure would have been easier to replace the failed drive. :)

    Read the article

  • How to correctly partition usb flash drive and which filesystem to choose considering wear leveling?

    - by random1
    Two problems. First one: how to partition the flash drive? I shouldn't need to do this, but I'm no longer sure if my partition is properly aligned since I was forced to delete and create a new partition table after gparted complained when I tried to format the drive from FAT to ext4. The naive answer would be to say "just use default and everything is going to be alright". However if you read the following links you'll know things are not that simple: https://lwn.net/Articles/428584/ and http://linux-howto-guide.blogspot.com/2009/10/increase-usb-flash-drive-write-speed.html Then there is also the issue of cylinders, heads and sectors. Currently I get this: $sfdisk -l -uM /dev/sdd Disk /dev/sdd: 30147 cylinders, 64 heads, 32 sectors/track Warning: The partition table looks like it was made for C/H/S=*/255/63 (instead of 30147/64/32). For this listing I'll assume that geometry. Units = mebibytes of 1048576 bytes, blocks of 1024 bytes, counting from 0 Device Boot Start End MiB #blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 30146 30146 30869504 83 Linux $fdisk -l /dev/sdd Disk /dev/sdd: 31.6 GB, 31611420672 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 3843 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00010c28 So from my current understanding I should align partitions at 4 MiB (currently it's at 1 MiB). But I still don't know how to set the heads and sectors properly for my device. Second problem: file system. From the benchmarks I saw ext4 provides the best performance, however there is the issue of wear leveling. How can I know that my Transcend JetFlash 700's microcontroller provides for wear leveling? Or will I just be killing my drive faster? I've seen a lot of posts on the web saying don't worry the newer drives already take care of that. But I've never seen a single piece of backed evidence of that and at some point people start mixing SSD with USB flash drives technology. The safe option would be to go for ext2, however a serious of tests that I performed showed horrible performance!!! These values are from a real scenario and not some synthetic test: 42 files: 3,429,415,284 bytes copied to flash drive original fat32: 15.1 MiB/s ext4 after new partition table: 10.2 MiB/s ext2 after new partition table: 1.9 MiB/s Please read the links that I posted above before answering. I would also be interested in answers backed up with some references because a lot is said and re-said but then it lacks facts. Thank you for the help.

    Read the article

  • Bitlocker-to-go on fixed drive

    - by Unsigned
    Scenario Two drives are connected to a computer. One via a SATA-to-USB interface, the other directly via a SATA-to-eSATA cable. The drive on USB appears as a removable drive, the drive on eSATA appears as a fixed drive. Both use NTFS. The USB drive offers Bitlocker-To-Go, the eSATA drive only offers BitLocker. Question It is my understanding that drives encrypted with BitLocker-To-Go include an app to allow Windows XP read-only access to the volume. Is this the only difference, and is there a way to use Bitlocker-To-Go on the eSATA drive? Update Another difference is found here: The recovery key is required when a BitLocker-protected fixed data drive configured for automatic unlocking is moved to another computer.[1] Assuming that does not apply to removable drives.

    Read the article

  • External hard drive that gets its power supply from the PC.

    - by AngryHacker
    I need an external drive to connect to my MacMini. I've been using an 80gb 2.5 drive in an enclosure and it's fine, but now I need a 1.5TB drive. Unfortunately all the 1.5TB drives I found need a separate power supply. I'd like it to be able to feed its power off the USB drive (just like my 80gb drive does). Does something like that exists?

    Read the article

  • How to restore a windows 7 system from a secondary drive

    - by Klas Mellbourn
    I have a stationary computer with Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit. The primary (SSD) hard drive seems to have stopped working completely, it is not even visible in BIOS. The computer has a secondary hard drive (non-SSD, NTFS, 2TB). I have had Windows backup running and saving backups to that secondary drive. I am planning to buy a new SSD drive to replace the faulty one. I want to restore the backup to this new SSD drive. What is the most straightforward way to do this? A step-by-step description would be greatly appreciated. Further information: I have a Windows install DVD and the computer has a DVD-drive. The secondary drive is not bootable, so I cannot currently access it. The new SSD drive will probably not be identical to the original, so it might need different drivers

    Read the article

  • Hard drives indication with controller MegaRAID SAS 9261-8i on HP Proliant DL320e Gen8. Is it possible?

    - by ame
    Give me advice, please. My situation: There're the server HP ProLiant DL320e Gen8 and MegaRAID SAS 9261-8i RAID Controller. I installed Controller into server and I reconnected Mini-SAS cord from block of hard drives to controller, but I haven't any indication of hard discs on server front panel. There's indication of activity of drives only during boot of server. Controller has 2-pin connector (JT6B3, SAS Activity LED header) but where and how can I connect it? Thanx.

    Read the article

  • How to Disable secondary drive from booting upon restart - Windows

    - by DevCompany
    I had a Windows 2003 Hard Drive on my server and it went bad so I installed a new clean hard drive and installed Windows 2008 R2 on the new clean drive. I moved the old 2003 drive to be used only for general storage on the same computer. It usually boots into Windows 2008 upon a restart, but just sometimes it starts trying to boot the old 2003 drive and causes boot issues(NTDLR Bootloader, and other errors), even though the order of boot preference is set to boot 2008, and NOT 2003. I need to know how to remove any old code that keeps this old drive as a bootable drive. I still want to use it as a secondary drive just dont want to have any boot code on it. hopefully my situation is clear for everyone to get a good response. Thank you...

    Read the article

  • Importing VMware drive into VirtualBox drive

    - by Bry4n
    I have VMware on my Mac and it crashed. I am unable to access the files used by the VMware. So I downloaded VirtualBox and when I try to add the .vmwarevm file to VirtualBox it says that its unable to read that type. I wasn't sure if there was a way i can get to these files as they are extremely important. I can not shutdown or open my virtual state in VMware whatsoever. Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Spotlight Infinite Indexing issue (external data drive)

    - by Manca Weeks
    This is an external drive, formerly a boot drive which is now in use only to access music files (sibelius, audio, midi, live, logic etc.) without transferring the data into a new boot system, partly because of the issue I am about to describe, but mostly because the majority of the data is mainly there for archival purposes. The user is a composer and prominent musician and needs to be able to rehash the data at will. I have tried several things - here is a list: - make complete filesystem clone with antonio diaz's ddrescue - run Disk Warrior on copy, repair whatever errors occurred - wipe out all ACLs on entire drive - set all permissions to the same value - wide open 777 - remove any system data (applications, system files, including hidden files to the best of my knowledge) by selecting only non-system/app data and using Carbon Copy Cloner to put only the data of interest onto a newly formatted drive - transfer data to newly formatted drive folder by folder, resetting the spotlight index in between adding each to observe for issues (interesting here is that no issues occurred except for in Documents folder - when I transferred only the Documents folder to a newly formatted drive on its own - no trouble. It appears almost as thought it may not be the content but the quantity or specific combination of data that results in problems) - use DataRescue to transfer the data to yet another newly formatted drive to expose any missed hidden files Between each of the above steps I stopped Spotlight (search for anything beginning with md in Activity Monitor - All Processes and quitting it), deleted the .Spotlight-V100 directory from the affected drive. Restart Splotlight indexing by adding drive to Spotlight privacy list and removing it. In each case the same issue occurs - Spotlight begins indexing normally (or so it seems), then the index estimated time increases, usually to 4 hours remaining. This is where it gets stuck and continues to predict 4 hours remaining but never finishes. Sometimes I can't eject the drive and have to quit the md.. processes from Activity Monitor to be able to eject the drive without Force Eject. Once I disconnect the drive after the 4 hours remaining situation - if I reattach it, Spotlight forever estimates remaining time and never gets going again. So there it is. It is apparently not a filesystem issue, not a permissions issue and not tied to any particular piece of hardware or protocol (used USB and FW drives). I have tried this on several machines (3 to be precise) and in 10.5.8 and 10.6.5. Simply disabling Spotlight on this volume is not an option because the owner has no clue where things are as the data on the volume dates back to music projects and compositions from 2003 and before. He needs to be able to query for results. Anyone got any ideas? Thanks, M

    Read the article

  • Boot from Second SATA Drive

    - by Chris
    I have a Dell Precision 490 Workstation, and I just had my other question answered, Install Ubuntu to drive B without impacting drive A, and now I'm having a boot sequence issue. The external drive is great, boots up fine on my laptop, but how do I tell my desktop to boot from my second SATA drive and not the first SATAdrive. My drive configuration as follows SATA-0: Windows SATA-1: DVDR SATA-2: Ubuntu When I choose the boot menu, the option I have is "Internal Hard Drive". I assume it searches all drives, and loads the first bootable one it finds (which happens to be Windows), but I'd like to be able to select the drive from a list. Has anyone experienced this? Is possible without disabling the first hard drive in the BIOS?

    Read the article

  • Fixed or consistent mount location for a USB hard drive

    - by Journeyman Geek
    I store my music on an external hard drive, and play them with foobar2k. However, the drive letter changes, which usually means I need to rebuild a fairly large playlist every so often. I'm wondering if there's a way to reserve a drive letter for a specific external device (or type of device) by device ID or volume name, or if I'm better off using a NTFS mount point, and re-mounting the drive to a folder each time. I'm using either a Windows XP or 7 system, and the external drive is NTFS.

    Read the article

  • ubuntu 12.10 installation failure

    - by Eidelmaim
    Here i am asking this question again because someone deemed it a duplicate to another topic which i over looked and NOTHING AT ALL in that topic pertained to my problem. If your going to close a topic believing it is a duplicate at least do somke reasearch into WHY you think its a duplicate and provide a like to a better source. How do i get past this installation username and password issue? I downloaded ubuntu 12.10 directly from Ubuntu.com and created a bootable USB with linuxlive. after loading the boot drive and ubuntu begins, it goes directly from the purple ubuntu startup screen directly to a black DOS like prompt asking for a ubuntu login. this is COMPLETLY before any installation -begins. i need some help with this. FYI : this is what it is saying after it goes to the login area in the DOS (Full black screen) like screen. Ubuntu 12.10 ubuntu tty1 ubuntu login: now i will provide a few images of the problem i am having. and because i DONT HAVE ANY OS on the computer BECAUSE ubuntu WONT go PAST this... i have to snap these pictuires with a cell phone and upload on another PC. these links are in chronological order from time of pressing power button to time i am presented with log in screen : image 1 image 2 can only post 2 links in messages... will post additional links in comments So, again... how do i get past this ? this is entireley before ubuntu is installed on my system. my PC specs... Homebuilt computer: Motherboard is a Asus Sabertooth x58 with a intel core i7 processor. Mushkin memory @ 12gbs. 4ea. Seagate 150gb hard drives. nvidia GTX 260 graphics card. i initially attempted to install to raid 5. failed. i broke down the raid and attempted to install to a single drive with all other drives disconnected from the PC. again, thanks in advanced for any assistance.

    Read the article

  • HP G42 Ubuntu live cd failure

    - by Jon
    Ok, I have tried every option under the sun. I have surfed through the internet for a good 3 hours straight and to no effect. I installed ubuntu on my HP G42 laptop, it worked fine, then when I tried installing the standard after installation updates my wifi failed. In my attempt to fix my wi-fi I rebooted my laptop, when I rebooted I was stuck on a black screen with nothing that I tried to fix it helping the situation. So I then tried to fix it by reinstalling Ubuntu. When I attempted to boot into the live ccd it failed leaving with the now familar black screen. After numerous attempts using instructions from live cd and instal failure blank screen... page and replacing my hard drive at a cost of $65 I am coming here for help. As for the actual DVD that I tried installing ubuntu from it was able to install ubuntu on a mac just fine after my issues on the HP. After installing the hard drive I loaded up windows just fine but I don't want windows I want ubuntu, can you please provide instructions on how to install ubuntu?

    Read the article

  • What free space thresholds/limits are advisable for 640 GB and 2 TB hard disk drives with ZEVO ZFS on OS X?

    - by Graham Perrin
    Assuming that free space advice for ZEVO will not differ from advice for other modern implementations of ZFS … Question Please, what percentages or amounts of free space are advisable for hard disk drives of the following sizes? 640 GB 2 TB Thoughts A standard answer for modern implementations of ZFS might be "no more than 96 percent full". However if apply that to (say) a single-disk 640 GB dataset where some of the files most commonly used (by VirtualBox) are larger than 15 GB each, then I guess that blocks for those files will become sub optimally spread across the platters with around 26 GB free. I read that in most cases, fragmentation and defragmentation should not be a concern with ZFS. Sill, I like the mental picture of most fragments of a large .vdi in reasonably close proximity to each other. (Do features of ZFS make that wish for proximity too old-fashioned?) Side note: there might arise the question of how to optimise performance after a threshold is 'broken'. If it arises, I'll keep it separate. Background On a 640 GB StoreJet Transcend (product ID 0x2329) in the past I probably went beyond an advisable threshold. Currently the largest file is around 17 GB –  – and I doubt that any .vdi or other file on this disk will grow beyond 40 GB. (Ignore the purple masses, those are bundles of 8 MB band files.) Without HFS Plus: the thresholds of twenty, ten and five percent that I associate with Mobile Time Machine file system need not apply. I currently use ZEVO Community Edition 1.1.1 with Mountain Lion, OS X 10.8.2, but I'd like answers to be not too version-specific. References, chronological order ZFS Block Allocation (Jeff Bonwick's Blog) (2006-11-04) Space Maps (Jeff Bonwick's Blog) (2007-09-13) Doubling Exchange Performance (Bizarre ! Vous avez dit Bizarre ?) (2010-03-11) … So to solve this problem, what went in 2010/Q1 software release is multifold. The most important thing is: we increased the threshold at which we switched from 'first fit' (go fast) to 'best fit' (pack tight) from 70% full to 96% full. With TB drives, each slab is at least 5GB and 4% is still 200MB plenty of space and no need to do anything radical before that. This gave us the biggest bang. Second, instead of trying to reuse the same primary slabs until it failed an allocation we decided to stop giving the primary slab this preferential threatment as soon as the biggest allocation that could be satisfied by a slab was down to 128K (metaslab_df_alloc_threshold). At that point we were ready to switch to another slab that had more free space. We also decided to reduce the SMO bonus. Before, a slab that was 50% empty was preferred over slabs that had never been used. In order to foster more write aggregation, we reduced the threshold to 33% empty. This means that a random write workload now spread to more slabs where each one will have larger amount of free space leading to more write aggregation. Finally we also saw that slab loading was contributing to lower performance and implemented a slab prefetch mechanism to reduce down time associated with that operation. The conjunction of all these changes lead to 50% improved OLTP and 70% reduced variability from run to run … OLTP Improvements in Sun Storage 7000 2010.Q1 (Performance Profiles) (2010-03-11) Alasdair on Everything » ZFS runs really slowly when free disk usage goes above 80% (2010-07-18) where commentary includes: … OpenSolaris has changed this in onnv revision 11146 … [CFT] Improved ZFS metaslab code (faster write speed) (2010-08-22)

    Read the article

  • linux raid 1: right after replacing and syncing one drive, the other disk fails - understanding what is going on with mdstat/mdadm

    - by devicerandom
    We have an old RAID 1 Linux server (Ubuntu Lucid 10.04), with four partitions. A few days ago /dev/sdb failed, and today we noticed /dev/sda had pre-failure ominous SMART signs (~4000 reallocated sector count). We replaced /dev/sdb this morning and rebuilt the RAID on the new drive, following this guide: http://www.howtoforge.com/replacing_hard_disks_in_a_raid1_array Everything went smooth until the very end. When it looked like it was finishing to synchronize the last partition, the other old one failed. At this point I am very unsure of the state of the system. Everything seems working and the files seem to be all accessible, just as if it synchronized everything, but I'm new to RAID and I'm worried about what is going on. The /proc/mdstat output is: Personalities : [raid1] [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md3 : active raid1 sdb4[2](S) sda4[0] 478713792 blocks [2/1] [U_] md2 : active raid1 sdb3[1] sda3[2](F) 244140992 blocks [2/1] [_U] md1 : active raid1 sdb2[1] sda2[2](F) 244140992 blocks [2/1] [_U] md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[2](F) 9764800 blocks [2/1] [_U] unused devices: <none> The order of [_U] vs [U_]. Why aren't they consistent along all the array? Is the first U /dev/sda or /dev/sdb? (I tried looking on the web for this trivial information but I found no explicit indication) If I read correctly for md0, [_U] should be /dev/sda1 (down) and /dev/sdb1 (up). But if /dev/sda has failed, how can it be the opposite for md3 ? I understand /dev/sdb4 is now spare because probably it failed to synchronize it 100%, but why does it show /dev/sda4 as up? Shouldn't it be [__]? Or [_U] anyway? The /dev/sda drive now cannot even be accessed by SMART anymore apparently, so I wouldn't expect it to be up. What is wrong with my interpretation of the output? I attach also the outputs of mdadm --detail for the four partitions: /dev/md0: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:07 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 9764800 (9.31 GiB 10.00 GB) Used Dev Size : 9764800 (9.31 GiB 10.00 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:27:33 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : a3b4dbbd:859bf7f2:bde36644:fcef85e2 Events : 0.7704 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 8 17 1 active sync /dev/sdb1 2 8 1 - faulty spare /dev/sda1 /dev/md1: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:15 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Used Dev Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 1 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:39:06 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : 8bcd5765:90dc93d5:cc70849c:224ced45 Events : 0.1508280 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2 2 8 2 - faulty spare /dev/sda2 /dev/md2: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:19 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Used Dev Size : 244140992 (232.83 GiB 250.00 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 2 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:46:44 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 1 Failed Devices : 1 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : 2885668b:881cafed:b8275ae8:16bc7171 Events : 0.2289636 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3 2 8 3 - faulty spare /dev/sda3 /dev/md3: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Fri Jan 21 18:43:22 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 478713792 (456.54 GiB 490.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 478713792 (456.54 GiB 490.20 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 3 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Tue Nov 5 17:19:20 2013 State : clean, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 4 0 active sync /dev/sda4 1 0 0 1 removed 2 8 20 - spare /dev/sdb4 The active sync on /dev/sda4 baffles me. I am worried because if tomorrow morning I have to replace /dev/sda, I want to be sure what should I sync with what and what is going on. I am also quite baffled by the fact /dev/sda decided to fail exactly when the raid finished resyncing. I'd like to understand what is really happening. Thanks a lot for your patience and help. Massimo

    Read the article

  • How to install an OS on a external hard drive

    - by Nrew
    I made a little research before coming here. And found out that I need to disconnect all internal hard drive before proceeding. http://www.pendrivelinux.com/installing-ubuntu-to-a-usb-hard-drive/ Here's my question: If I install Windows XP or Ubuntu on an external hard drive. Would it be universal? Can I use it or run it on any computer. Assuming that the bios allows you to boot from USB hard drive. Or even not because there's PLoP Bootmanager And has the considerable amount of memory and processor power to run the OS. What other things to consider when installing an OS in an external hard drive? Is installing in the external hard drive the same as when installing in an internal hard drive? Can I also boot multiple OS? What are the things to consider when doing this? And if you have a tutorial there. Showing how to install an OS in an external hard drive. Please link.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >