Search Results

Search found 44026 results on 1762 pages for 'raid question'.

Page 51/1762 | < Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58  | Next Page >

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

  - by rakslice

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

  Read the article

• Dell R910 with Integrated PERC H700 Adapter

  - by Alex

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

  Read the article

• Openfiler crashing without cause or leaving any log messages

  - by user44725

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

  Read the article

• How decode xfs lost+found directory

  - by Satpal

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

  Read the article

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

  - by Walter Zomb

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

  Read the article

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

  - by Josh

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

  Read the article

• hp proliant dl360 disk diagnostic issue

  - by user1039384

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

  Read the article

• IBM x260m won't boot from PCI SATA card

  - by syrenity

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

  Read the article

• flashcache with mdadm and LVM

  - by Backtogeek

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

  Read the article

• Question about Linux Device Drivers.

  - by smwikipedia

  I have just installed the Xubuntu. My box runs quite slower than before when installed with a Win7. I am wondering if I am missing some device drivers. I can use gnome-device-manager to list my devices. In the device list view, I saw several blue question mark on the left side of devices. Based on my windows experience, the question mark should indicate the device is not properly configured. Is it the same with gnome-device-manager? And most importantly, how could I know for sure whether or not the corresponding device drivers have been installed? Many thanks.

  Read the article

• Enterprise class storage best practices

  - by churnd

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

  Read the article

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

  - by Glyph

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

  Read the article

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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 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

< Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58  | Next Page >