Search Results

Search found 1607 results on 65 pages for 'disks'.

Page 55/65 | < Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >

• AHCI, Windows 7 and can only boot with Windows DVD present

  - by Rob Pridham

  Foolishly, I installed Windows 7 with my new SSD set to IDE. I would like to change it to AHCI. I have done this before, with a different motherboard. What happens: I set the controller to AHCI in the BIOS; I also check correct boot order On boot, I get the 'BOOTMGR not found' error I use the Windows Recovery Console on the DVD Diskpart etc can see the disks, and bootrec claims to have rewritten the MBR/bootloader I reboot, same problem Recovery Console again and it detects a problem, fixes, reboots Recovery Console again and it detects the OS, and a problem - fixes, reboots I ignore the 'press any key to boot from DVD' prompt Windows boots fine I restart without the DVD and I'm back to square one That optional 'press a key to boot from DVD' stage is something that the recovery process introduces - normally you have to choose to boot to the DVD at the BIOS stage. You also see this when installing Windows. I suspect that whatever temporary state that is is compatible with AHCI - but not the standard it returns to. I have done the msahci/iaStorV registry hacks to no avail (this worked with the previous board). I can put it back to IDE where normal service is resumed. The board is an Asus M5A99X, the southbridge is AMD SB950, and this is Windows 7 x64. I would quite like not to have to reinstall it again. Any ideas as to what I can do as a permanent fix?

  Read the article

• Linux Software RAID1: How to boot after (physically) removing /dev/sda? (LVM, mdadm, Grub2)

  - by flight

  A server set up with Debian 6.0/squeeze. During the squeeze installation, I configured the two 500GB SATA disks (/dev/sda and /dev/sdb) as a RAID1 (managed with mdadm). The RAID keeps a 500 GB LVM volume group (vg0). In the volume group, there's a single logical volume (lv0). vg0-lv0 is formatted with extfs3 and mounted as root partition (no dedicated /boot partition). The system boots using GRUB2. In normal use, the systems boots fine. Also, when I tried and removed the second SATA drive (/dev/sdb) after a shutdown, the system came up without problem, and after reconnecting the drive, I was able to --re-add /dev/sdb1 to the RAID array. But: After removing the first SATA drive (/dev/sda), the system won't boot any more! A GRUB welcome message shows up for a second, then the system reboots. I tried to install GRUB2 manually on /dev/sdb ("grub-install /dev/sdb"), but that doesn't help. Appearently squeeze fails to set up GRUB2 to launch from the second disk when the first disk is removed, which seems to be quite an essential feature when running this kind of Software RAID1, isn't it? At the moment, I'm lost whether this is a problem with GRUB2, with LVM or with the RAID setup. Any hints?

  Read the article

• Is there a clean way to obtain exclusive access to a physical partition under Windows?

  - by zneak

  Hey guys, I'm trying, under Windows 7, to run a virtual machine with VMWare Player from an OS installed on a physical partition. However, when I boot the virtual machine, VMWare Player says that it couldn't access the physical drive for writing. This seems to be a generally acknowledged problem in the VMWare community, as Windows Vista introduced a compelling new security feature that makes it impossible to write to a raw drive without obtaining exclusive access to it first. I have googled the issue and found a few workarounds. However, the clean ones seem to only work on whole physical disks, and not on partitions. So I would be left with the dirty solution. In short, it meddles with the MBR to erase any trace of the partitions to use, makes Windows forget about them, then restores the MBR so we can launch the VM. I'm not sure I want to do that. Is there a way to let VMWare acquire exclusive access to the partition without requiring me to nuke it away? What I'd be looking for, I suppose, is a way to put just partitions offline instead of whole physical drives.

  Read the article

• Computer does not boot, often

  - by tam

  I've ran into a issue with my computer that it does no longer reach POST, but simply powers on for a fraction of a second and powers off. But this is not always, some times it boots just normally and it works as it should, no issues with not enough power or anything. But as soon as I turn it of, I can not turn it back on, but then again at some random point it just powers up again, and resumes normal operation. If I disconnect the 8pin ATX connector from the motherboard, it powers up, fans and disks spinning normally until I power it off again. So this problem only happens when ATX is connected, which seems odd, I normally always saw this kind of an error if ATX was not connected, but here it's the exact opposite. It also does not emit any sound on the buzzer, except the normal beep, when it powers up normally. I have already tried: Remove graphics card Remove one and/or all RAM sticks Disconnect everything non-essential, even hard drives Clear CMOS I have not yet tried to remove all components and tried to boot everything outside of the case, because I did not have the time to disassemble and bleed the water loop. However, I can confirm that nothing is stuck underneath the motherboard, not is any of those brass raisers touching the board where it should not. Specs: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3 AMD FX6300 ATI HD7850 I think this should be enough for this issue.

  Read the article

• Server slowdown

  - by Clinton Bosch

  I have a GWT application running on Tomcat on a cloud linux(Ubuntu) server, recently I released a new version of the application and suddenly my server response times have gone from 500ms average to 15s average. I have run every monitoring tool I know. iostat says my disks are 0.03% utilised mysqltuner.pl says I am OK other see below top says my processor is 99% idle and load average: 0.20, 0.31, 0.33 memory usage is 50% (-/+ buffers/cache: 3997 3974) mysqltuner output [OK] Logged in using credentials from debian maintenance account. -------- General Statistics -------------------------------------------------- [--] Skipped version check for MySQLTuner script [OK] Currently running supported MySQL version 5.1.63-0ubuntu0.10.04.1-log [OK] Operating on 64-bit architecture -------- Storage Engine Statistics ------------------------------------------- [--] Status: +Archive -BDB -Federated +InnoDB -ISAM -NDBCluster [--] Data in MyISAM tables: 370M (Tables: 52) [--] Data in InnoDB tables: 697M (Tables: 1749) [!!] Total fragmented tables: 1754 -------- Security Recommendations ------------------------------------------- [OK] All database users have passwords assigned -------- Performance Metrics ------------------------------------------------- [--] Up for: 19h 25m 41s (1M q [28.122 qps], 1K conn, TX: 2B, RX: 1B) [--] Reads / Writes: 98% / 2% [--] Total buffers: 1.0G global + 2.7M per thread (500 max threads) [OK] Maximum possible memory usage: 2.4G (30% of installed RAM) [OK] Slow queries: 0% (1/1M) [OK] Highest usage of available connections: 34% (173/500) [OK] Key buffer size / total MyISAM indexes: 16.0M/279.0K [OK] Key buffer hit rate: 99.9% (50K cached / 40 reads) [OK] Query cache efficiency: 61.4% (844K cached / 1M selects) [!!] Query cache prunes per day: 553779 [OK] Sorts requiring temporary tables: 0% (0 temp sorts / 34K sorts) [OK] Temporary tables created on disk: 4% (4K on disk / 102K total) [OK] Thread cache hit rate: 84% (185 created / 1K connections) [!!] Table cache hit rate: 0% (256 open / 27K opened) [OK] Open file limit used: 0% (20/2K) [OK] Table locks acquired immediately: 100% (692K immediate / 692K locks) [OK] InnoDB data size / buffer pool: 697.2M/1.0G -------- Recommendations ----------------------------------------------------- General recommendations: Run OPTIMIZE TABLE to defragment tables for better performance MySQL started within last 24 hours - recommendations may be inaccurate Enable the slow query log to troubleshoot bad queries Increase table_cache gradually to avoid file descriptor limits Variables to adjust: query_cache_size (> 16M) table_cache (> 256)

  Read the article

• NTFS frequent corruption when writing many small files, index $I30 error

  - by david sedai

  I'm running Windows 7 Ultimate on a laptop with a 500G HDD, and had all partitions formatted as NTFS. I do a lot of programming and LaTeX typesetting, both of these involves a large amount of reading/writing/deleting to a lot of small files, such as C++ library headers or LaTeX packages. The problem is that frequently, when there is a large number of writing to files, the partition being written to often corrupts, the chkntfs e: returns dirty, where e: is the partition being written. I've re-formatted the drive, I've contacted the laptop manufacturer and had the HDD checked, the HDD is not faulty, there are no bad sectors, and I've tried a brand new HDD, to no avail, and the other partition on the same physical drive doesn't have this issue. I'm pretty sure that it's no hardware related. I've searched the Microsoft support pages, one page http://support.microsoft.com/kb/982018 provides an update for Advanced Format Disks, which I've already installed. The chkntfs log shows $130 index errors. I'm at a loss here. Can anyone help? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Virtual machine lost after power cut

  - by dannymcc

  We have just had a power issue and our ESX (ESXi 4.1.0) host lost power and then rebooted. All but one of the virtual servers have rebooted with no problem, however one of them refused to power up. I try to power it on and I get the following error: File <unspecified filename> was not found Reason: The system cannot find the file specified. Cannot open the disk '/vmfs/volumes/4e03076e-90834647-b846-001185c38f42/LAMP- Stack/turnkey-lamp-11.3-lucid-x86.vmdk' or one of the snapshot disks it depends on. VMware ESX cannot find the virtual disk "/vmfs/volumes/4e03076e-90834647-b846- 001185c38f42/LAMP-Stack/turnkey-lamp-11.3-lucid-x86.vmdk". Verify the path is valid and try again. I have logged into the ESX host to see if the file is there an have found only the following file that matches the filename: /vmfs/volumes/4e03076e-90834647-b846-001185c38f42/LAMP-Stack/turnkey-lamp-11.3-l ucid-x86-s001.vmdk I notice that the above file has '-s001' after the filename. Is this recoverable? Any help of advice is greatly appreciated! EDIT: Running ls -l on the directory that contains the file shows this: drwxr-xr-t 1 root root 1680 Feb 9 09:49 4e03076e-90834647-b846-001185c38f42 The databrowser file system looks like this: and in a different directory there is the file that matches the missing one:

  Read the article

• EC2 AMI won't boot after edit

  - by Eric Lars0n

  I did something stupid, I got a new laptop and copied everything over to the new one, then wiped the old one clean. Then I realized that I forgot to copy the private key out of .ssh that I use to connect to my AWS EBS backed instance. So I can't log in to my custom AMI. So I created a new Volume from the Snapshot of the AMI, then started up a public instance and attached the Volume to it, edit the sshd_config to allow for password log in. Unmounted the volume, detached it, made a snapshot of it, then made a new AMI from the snapshot. The new AMI launches, but never passes the Status Checks and is not reachable. What am I doing wrong? Or alternatively how can I fix my problem? Edit: Adding some of the console output Linux version 2.6.16-xenU ([email protected]) (gcc version 4.0.1 20050727 (Red Hat 4.0.1-5)) #1 SMP Mon May 28 03:41:49 SAST 2007 BIOS-provided physical RAM map: Xen: 0000000000000000 - 000000006a400000 (usable) 980MB HIGHMEM available. 727MB LOWMEM available. NX (Execute Disable) protection: active IRQ lockup detection disabled RAMDISK driver initialized: 16 RAM disks of 4096K size 1024 blocksize NET: Registered protocol family 2 Registering block device major 8 XENBUS: Timeout connecting to devices! Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(8,0)

  Read the article

• Why can't I mount an image hosted on a read-only HFS+ partition via Boot Camp?

  - by deceze

  I have come across the following phenomenon and would like to know how leaky Windows' file system abstraction is or if there's something else involved. I partitioned the hard disk of my MacBook Pro and installed Windows 7 (64 bit). The Boot Camp driver package includes file system drivers that enable Windows to access the Mac OS HFS+ partition. It's read-only access, but it works. Now, I have some disk images of stuff I usually install, so I grabbed a copy of Daemon Tools to mount them. When I mount an image saved on the HFS+ partition, about two out of three installers on these disks (usually InstallShield) crash with all sorts of weird errors. Most are just gibberish that lead to all sorts of non-solutions on Google, one was "This application is not the right type for your computer, check if you need 32 or 64 bit versions." When moving the image files to another Windows 7 computer on the network and mounting them from the network share, they work fine. My question now is, why do applications behave differently depending on whether the read-only image file, which should be abstracted away through the read-only virtual Daemon Tools drive, is located on a read-only HFS+ partition or on a Windows network share? And I'll just roll this into the question as well since I was wondering: Does the file system of a network share matter? Does the client system need to understand the file system of the share host or is that abstracted away in SMB?

  Read the article

• Removing a device in "removed" state from Linux software RAID array

  - by Sahasranaman MS

  My workstation has two disks(/dev/sd[ab]), both with similar partitioning. /dev/sdb failed, and cat /proc/mdstat stopped showing the second sdb partition. I ran mdadm --fail and mdadm --remove for all partitions from the failed disk on the arrays that use them, although all such commands failed with mdadm: set device faulty failed for /dev/sdb2: No such device mdadm: hot remove failed for /dev/sdb2: No such device or address Then I hot swapped the failed disk, partitioned the new disk and added the partitions to the respective arrays. All arrays got rebuilt properly except one, because in /dev/md2, the failed disk doesn't seem to have been removed from the array properly. Because of this, the new partition keeps getting added as a spare to the partition, and its status remains degraded. Here's what mdadm --detail /dev/md2 shows: [root@ldmohanr ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md2 /dev/md2: Version : 1.1 Creation Time : Tue Dec 27 22:55:14 2011 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 52427708 (50.00 GiB 53.69 GB) Used Dev Size : 52427708 (50.00 GiB 53.69 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Intent Bitmap : Internal Update Time : Fri Nov 23 14:59:56 2012 State : active, degraded Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Name : ldmohanr.net:2 (local to host ldmohanr.net) UUID : 4483f95d:e485207a:b43c9af2:c37c6df1 Events : 5912611 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2 1 0 0 1 removed 2 8 18 - spare /dev/sdb2 To remove a disk, mdadm needs a device filename, which was /dev/sdb2 originally, but that no longer refers to device number 1. I need help with removing device number 1 with 'removed' status and making /dev/sdb2 active.

  Read the article

• Why do disk images hosted on a read-only HFS+ partition behave differently?

  - by deceze

  I have come across the following phenomenon and would like to know how leaky Windows' file system abstraction is or if there's something else involved. I partitioned the hard disk of my MacBook Pro and installed Windows 7 (64 bit). The Boot Camp driver package includes file system drivers that enable Windows to access the Mac OS HFS+ partition. It's read-only access, but it works. Now, I have some disk images of stuff I usually install, so I grabbed a copy of Daemon Tools to mount them. When I mount an image saved on the HFS+ partition, about two out of three installers on these disks (usually InstallShield) crash with all sorts of weird errors. Most are just gibberish that lead to all sorts of non-solutions on Google, one was "This application is not the right type for your computer, check if you need 32 or 64 bit versions." When moving the image files to another Windows 7 computer on the network and mounting them from the network share, they work fine. My question now is, why do applications behave differently depending on whether the read-only image file, which should be abstracted away through the read-only virtual Daemon Tools drive, is located on a read-only HFS+ partition or on a Windows network share? And I'll just roll this into the question as well since I was wondering: Does the file system of a network share matter? Does the client system need to understand the file system of the share host or is that abstracted away in SMB?

  Read the article

• OS X won't boot up unless I hold down option key

  - by Gazzer

  I have a strange issue on an early 2008 Mac Pro running OS 10.6: if I restart the computer it restarts normally if I shutdown and boot, it stops at the grey screen just before the boot process if I shutdown and boot but hold down the option key, I can select the boot disk and all is good. I've just cloned the disk, and the same thing happens. The disk is a SAMSUNG HD154UI The disk is partitioned (the second partition holds a clone of the Snow Leopard Install disk) One weird thing on the original disk was one of the partitions said 'EFI Boot' in a non-aliased font rather than the name of the disk when the disks are listed upon holding down option. Solution: it seems that there was a problem with the disk. Part of the difficulty in finding the solution was that you need to remove the disk from the computer completely. For example, a good disk in Bay 3, wouldn't boot up if the bad disk was in Bay 2. So for ages I thought the problem was hardware related in Bay 3. So if you think you have a dodgy disk remove it totally if you are testing the hardware with a 'clean' disk. Cleaning the PRAM helped to get the new disk to work too.

  Read the article

• How to setup RAID 1 with Intel RST on an existing Windows 7 system?

  - by instcode

  I'd like to setup RAID-1 using Intel Rapid Storage Technology on my Windows 7 64-bit system. I have an 1TB SATA HDD with Windows 7 system installed on the first primary partition (leftmost, ~200GB). The rest of this HDD is unallocated (~800GB). I bought another 2TB SATA, then created a primary partition (leftmost, ~500GB) and filled my data in. The rest of this HDD is unallocated (~1.5TB). A quick disk layout (XXX is the unallocated region): HDD1 (1TB): [ 200GB C:\ SYSTEM | XXXXXXXXXXXX ] HDD2 (2TB): [ 500GB Z:\ PROGRAM | XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ] Now, I want to create a 500GB RAID-1 partition (I'm not sure if using "partition" is correct here) on the rightmost of the 2 HDDs above without losing any existing data from both disks. Here is the expected layout: HDD1 (1TB): [ 200GB C:\ SYSTEM | XXXXXX | 500GB D:\ DATA - RAID-1 ] HDD2 (2TB): [ 500GB Z:\ PROGRAM | XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | 500GB D:\ DATA RAID-1] Let's not concern about data lost, is it possible to have that final layout using Intel RST? Previously, I tried this layout using dynamic disk & software RAID from Windows and it worked as expected, however, it's quite ugly in resynching after an OS failure that I don't want. If yes, is there a way to keep the data on existing partitions untouched or, at least, it should keep the SYSTEM partition safe (I'm okay if the PROGRAM partition has to be gone.)? Well, are there any strict/special steps I should follow when using the Intel RST manager in order to achieve that? If none of those questions above are "Yes", could you please suggest some other possible layouts that leave the C:SYSTEM partition untouched?

  Read the article

• Choice of filesystem for GNU/Linux on an SD card

  - by gspr

  Hi. I have am embedded ARM-based system running on an SD card. It's currently Debian GNU/Linux using ext3 as filesystem. As I'm about to reinstall the system, I started wondering about changing to a more flash-friendly filesystem. I've heard about JFFS2, YAFFS2 and LogFS, and they all seem suited to the job. Which one would you recommend? Also, I've heard there have been a lot of ext4 improvements to better suit SSD disks; am I to interpret that as running ext4 should be just fine? What do I need to think especially about in that case? I guess the usage of the system is important. But for the sake of generality, imagine it'll do standard desktop stuff (even though it is infact a small ARM-based system). Thanks for any replies. Edit: Wikipedia tells me (in a "citation needed" statement) that Removable flash memory cards and USB flash drives have built-in controllers to perform wear leveling and error correction so use of a specific flash file system does not add any benefit. Thus, I'm leaning towards sticking with an ext filesystem.

  Read the article

• Decrease in disk performance after partitioning and encryption, is this much of a drop normal?

  - by Biohazard

  I have a server that I only have remote access to. Earlier in the week I repartitioned the 2 disk raid as follows: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/sda1_crypt 363G 1.8G 343G 1% / tmpfs 2.0G 0 2.0G 0% /lib/init/rw udev 2.0G 140K 2.0G 1% /dev tmpfs 2.0G 0 2.0G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda5 461M 26M 412M 6% /boot /dev/sda7 179G 8.6G 162G 6% /data The raid consists of 2 x 300gb SAS 15k disks. Prior to the changes I made, it was being used as a single unencrypted root parition and hdparm -t /dev/sda was giving readings around 240mb/s, which I still get if I do it now: /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 730 MB in 3.00 seconds = 243.06 MB/sec Since the repartition and encryption, I get the following on the separate partitions: Unencrypted /dev/sda7: /dev/sda7: Timing buffered disk reads: 540 MB in 3.00 seconds = 179.78 MB/sec Unencrypted /dev/sda5: /dev/sda5: Timing buffered disk reads: 476 MB in 2.55 seconds = 186.86 MB/sec Encrypted /dev/mapper/sda1_crypt: /dev/mapper/sda1_crypt: Timing buffered disk reads: 150 MB in 3.03 seconds = 49.54 MB/sec I expected a drop in performance on the encrypted partition, but not that much, but I didn't expect I would get a drop in performance on the other partitions at all. The other hardware in the server is: 2 x Quad Core Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5405 @ 2.00GHz and 4gb RAM $ cat /proc/scsi/scsi Attached devices: Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 32 Lun: 00 Vendor: DP Model: BACKPLANE Rev: 1.05 Type: Enclosure ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Host: scsi0 Channel: 02 Id: 00 Lun: 00 Vendor: DELL Model: PERC 6/i Rev: 1.11 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Host: scsi1 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00 Vendor: HL-DT-ST Model: CD-ROM GCR-8240N Rev: 1.10 Type: CD-ROM ANSI SCSI revision: 05 I'm guessing this means the server has a PERC 6/i RAID controller? The encryption was done with default settings during debian 6 installation. I can't recall the exact specifics and am not sure how I go about finding them? Thanks

  Read the article

• MySQL stops accepting connections over 3306, still working on localhost

  - by Ben Dilts

  I have a MySQL database that stopped accepting connections from my web server altogether. So I SSH'ed into the server and started checking its vitals. The hard disks had plenty of open space, and there was plenty of available memory and swap space. Nothing was eating up the CPU (close to 100% idle). I even connected to MySQL locally and ran a few queries without any issues. But SHOW PROCESSLIST only showed my own connection, no others. Worst of all, in the MySQL log, no errors even remotely coincided with the unavailability of the server. On the web server, I got an error saying "Lost connection to MySQL server during query" at the moment the unavailability started, followed by a bunch of "MySQL server has gone away" errors. There's only one other application on the server that accepts network connections, and I killed that one (in case it was holding too many open connections or something), but it didn't help. Finally I just restarted the MySQL process, and everything is (for now) working again. What else should I check in these circumstances? Any idea what the problem might be? And how might I verify that is in fact the problem?

  Read the article

• Can not boot windows XP from cloned hard disk - what can I do?

  - by Martin

  My configuration: a PC (some years old) with MSI K8N-Neo-4F Motherboard, 1 GB RAM. Disk 1 (Maxtor, SATA II, 250 GB): 2 Partitions, on Partition 1 (48 GB): Windows XP Professional (NTFS) on Partition 2 (190 GB): data (NTFS) I wanted to have a larger and faster disk (the PC is incredibly slow and permanently the disk is rattling when I try to open an application or during Windows startup), so I took Disk 2 (Seagate, Sata II, 500 GB), installed in the PC, created at first a 400 GB-partition at the end of the disk and cloned the data to it, which worked well Installed a swap partition and a partition for Ubuntu Linux 12.10 on the first "part" of the disk so I was able to boot Linux and the old Windows XP with the Linux "System selection" at startup. Now I wanted to move Windows XP to the new disk, deleted the Linux partitions cloned Windows XP to the new disk (with free tools - EASESUS), left both disks in the PC and tried to select the new hard drive during boot as boot partition. This did not work, the PC refused to boot from this second disk. I tried many things like making the boot partition on the 2nd drive "active" in the Windows System Preferences modifying the boot.ini file to boot from the second disk - tried to boot from it, but ended with an error message stating that it was not possible to boot from this disk because of a hardware failure or something else or so removing the original disk and plugging the new one on the same SATA port as the original one - also booting failed with an error message repairing the MBR by booting into recovery mode from the Windows XP Installation CD-ROM, selecting the second disk and doing "FIXMBR" which said that everything was fine with the MBR. after that at least the PC tried to boot from the newer disk and then startup was hanging during the blue screen with the Windows Logo.... no luck. ... deleting the cloned partition and cloning again - this time with Macrium Reflect Free version... - no success during booting. I tried a lot of things with no success, so I wonder what I am doing wrong?! What could I do to successfully clone my Win XP partition to replace the original disk by a larger one which is bootable.

  Read the article

• Migrating from one linux install to another: How to keep the second disk around?

  - by Jim Miller

  I've got a linux box running Fedora 19 that I want to move to CentOS 6.4. Rather than trying to do something fancy with the current disk (which has also accumulated a lot of sludge over the years), I'm going to get a new disk, put CentOS on that, and then move the to-be-preserved bits of stuff from the old disk to the new one. I haven't done this yet, but I presume it should be semi-straightforward -- do the CentOS install on the new disk, mount the old disk on /olddisk or somesuch, and start copying. However, I'm not sure how to handle getting the machine to recognize the new empty disk as the target of the CentOS install (I suppose I can just pull the old disk during the installation), remember that this is the intended boot disk once the install has happened), and tweak /etc/fstab (right?) to set up the old disk on the desired mount point. (Both disks are, or will be, SATA.) I could probably hack it together without losing too much hair or doing too much damage, but could anyone offer some advice that would get/keep me on the right track? Thanks!

  Read the article

• GRUB reporting wrong partition type

  - by plok

  It all started when I had to replace one of the disks that the software RAID 1 on this machine currently uses. From that moment on I have not been able to boot to the Windows XP that is installed on the fourth hard drive, /dev/sdd. I am almost positive that the problem is related not to Windows but to GRUB, as if I unplug all the other hard drives so that the Windows XP disk is now /dev/sda it boots with no problem. The problem seems to be that GRUB detects a wrong partition type, which I understand suggest that something is really messed up. This is what I get when I try to follow the steps that until now had worked like a charm: grub> map (hd0) (hd3) grub> map (hd3) (hd0) grub> root (hd3,0) Filesystem type is ext2fs, partition type 0xfd 0xfd? That doesn't make sense. /dev/sdb and sdc are 0xfd (Linux raid), but not /dev/sdd: edel:~# fdisk -l [...] Disk /dev/sdd: 250.0 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00048d89 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 * 1 30400 244187968+ 7 HPFS/NTFS edel:/boot/grub# cat device.map (hd0) /dev/sda (hd1) /dev/sdb (hd2) /dev/sdc (hd3) /dev/sdd I have been trying to work this out for hours, to no avail. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

  Read the article

• Windows 7 breaks even in safe mode

  - by delenda

  Hi, I have a Dell XPS M1730 with Windows 7 installed. I noticed last night that after a few hours of use, the fans kicked into full and I couldn't do anything without it taking forever. Minimising windows, opening device manager or even opening process explorer took minutes and a game install I had just started took nearly 4 hours to complete. When procexp finally loaded, the refresh was so slow that it was mostly useless. From what I could gather, it was reporting 60% idle processes with procexp using nearly 40%. There were no hardware interrupts listed. When I rebooted, the problem went away for about 10 minutes and then the same thing happened. The issue persists in safe mode and even after I removed the graphics drivers, which have been an issue in the past, it still happens. Icons flash quite quickly on the desktop periodically and screen refresh is painfully slow. When booting now, the fans kick in to full as soon as the windows logon box comes up and it's taking 10 minutes to bring the desktop up. Chkdsk reports nothing and the raid check says that everything is fine. I'm thinking hardware failure, probably HDD but wanted some other opinions. I'm planning to try a linux live cd to see if it works without using the hard disks. If anyone has any input, it would be greatly appreciated. Delenda

  Read the article

• Relayout LVM Disk

  - by Tom

  I have an Ubuntu 11.10 system with two 500GB disks. The partition tables look like this: /dev/sda1 primary 465.52GB /dev/sda2 extended 243.17MB -> /dev/sda5 logical 243.14MB /dev/sdb1 primary 465.76GB sda1 and sdb1 are in a single LVM physical volume group containing a single logical volume containing a single logical filesystem which is mounted as /. sda5 is mounted as /boot. The problem comes when I want to upgrade to Ubuntu 12.04, which requires at least 247MB free on /boot. So I need to reduce the size of sda1 so that I can increase the size of sda2 and sda5. How the heck do I do that? I can find how to shrink the logical volume group, but I'm not at all clear on how to clear out the end part of sda1 so that I can reduce the physical volume group. Does pvresize just deal with this automagically? Or is that wild wishful thinking? I guess the alternatives are to back everything up onto something or other and recreate the thing from scratch or find out whether GRUB2 supports using LVM for /boot.

  Read the article

• Proper approach to debug PC startup problems (POST)

  - by saurabhj

  My CPU was heating up to around 65 deg C and last time this had happened (about a year ago), I got thermal paste put between the CPU and heat sink and this managed to get it down to about 45 - 50 degrees. This time, I got some thermal paste and put it myself. However, my PC is not showing the POST display and not starting up. This is what happens LEDs light up HDDs spin Mouse is getting power All fans including the processor fan starts No display on monitor No diagnostic beep sounds (no sounds at all) What I have tried Removing everything including RAM, HDD, PCI cards, AGP card Boot up machine No changes from first state. What steps can I take to figure out where the problem lies? Note (might be important) When I removed the heat sink, the processor came out with it (it was stuck to it inspite of the processor latch on) Had to pry it separate with a screw-driver. Configuration Pentium 4, 2.8 Ghz with HT (very old, I know) Original Intel Mobo with onboard sound and graphics (GB series) 2x512 Mb DDR-RAM 2 SATA disks (320 Gigs / 250 gigs) DVD Writer Creative Sound Card Network card Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Debian Wheezy (testing) df reported volume size

  - by TheRoadrunner

  I am a bit confused about the /dev/sda* references since I installed Wheezy instead of Squeeze on a testing box. fdisk -l returns: Disk /dev/sda: 250.1 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders, total 488397168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000e9623 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 2048 480278527 240138240 83 Linux /dev/sda2 480280574 488396799 4058113 5 Extended /dev/sda5 480280576 488396799 4058112 82 Linux swap / Solaris This seems correct. But df -h /dev/sda (and /dev/sda1 and /dev/sda2 and /dev/sda5) returns: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on udev 10M 0 10M 0% /dev The same happens with every entry under /dev/disk/by-id and /dev/disk/by-path. Only one of two entries under /dev/disk/by-uuid returns the correct volume size: df -h /dev/disk/by-uuid/cacdbad6-7e6b-4e80-84ba-e3c77ef48796 Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/disk/by-uuid/cacdbad6-7e6b-4e80-84ba-e3c77ef48796 229G 22G 196G 11% / Contents of /etc/fstab: # /etc/fstab: static file system information. # # Use 'blkid' to print the universally unique identifier for a # device; this may be used with UUID= as a more robust way to name devices # that works even if disks are added and removed. See fstab(5). # # <file system> <mount point> <type> <options> <dump> <pass> # / was on /dev/sda1 during installation UUID=cacdbad6-7e6b-4e80-84ba-e3c77ef48796 / ext4 errors=remount-ro 0 1 # swap was on /dev/sda5 during installation UUID=45840d13-ee36-4e77-8e73-16cbdff25eb1 none swap sw 0 0 /dev/sr0 /media/cdrom0 udf,iso9660 user,noauto 0 0 /dev/fd0 /media/floppy0 auto rw,user,noauto 0 0 It seems all other references than the uuid points to the swap partition. Is this because Wheezy is in testing, and should it be reported as an error?

  Read the article

• 150 TB and growing, but how to grow?

  - by seandavi

  My group currently has two largish storage servers, both NAS running debian linux. The first is an all-in-one 24-disk (SATA) server that is several years old. We have two hardware RAIDS set up on it with LVM over those. The second server is 64 disks divided over 4 enclosures, each a hardware RAID 6, connected via external SAS. We use XFS with LVM over that to create 100TB useable storage. All of this works pretty well, but we are outgrowing these systems. Having build two such servers and still growing, we want to build something that allows us more flexibility in terms of future growth, backup options, that behaves better under disk failure (checking the larger filesystem can take a day or more), and can stand up in a heavily concurrent environment (think small computer cluster). We do not have system administration support, so we administer all of this ourselves (we are a genomics lab). So, what we seek is a relatively low-cost, acceptable performance storage solution that will allow future growth and flexible configuration (think ZFS with different pools having different operating characteristics). We are probably outside the realm of a single NAS. We have been thinking about a combination of ZFS (on openindiana, for example) or btrfs per server with glusterfs running on top of that if we do it ourselves. What we are weighing that against is simply biting the bullet and investing in Isilon or 3Par storage solutions. Any suggestions or experiences are appreciated.

  Read the article

• What are the replacement options for an IDE hd for a DOS based system?

  - by dummzeuch

  I have got a few "embedded" systems running MSDOS 6.2 which boot from and store data to IDE hard disks. Since these drives are nearing their end of life, the question arises how we can replace them. The requirements are: DOS must be able to install and boot from these drives. They must be able to sustain heavy (mostly) write access. If possible, they should be able to survive moderate vibrations (not too bad since the current hds have survived several years of that) I considered the following options so far: other ide hard drives: Unfortunately modern IDE drives are too large so DOS cannot boot from them even if I create small partitions. Older IDE drives are just that: old, so they are probably not the most reliable ones any more. SSDs: There are a few SSDs with IDE interface available. I have not yet tried them. Does anybody have any experience with them? They look like the ideal replacement provided that DOS can boot from them and that writing speed does not deteriorate too much (the old hds are no race cars either). Compact Flash: There are adapters for using CF with IDE controllers and they work fine. DOS can boot from them and they have no problems at all with vibrations. What I am not sure about is their durability. DOS uses FAT so some very few sectors are written every time the medium is being written to. IDE to SATA converters: I have no idea whether they are any good. Has anybody tried them? It might be an option to use one of these to connect an SATA SSD to the system. Are there any alternatives that I have missed? (We are working on replacing these systems, but it will still take a few years.)

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >