Search Results

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

Page 7/65 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • How do I know if my disks are being hit with too much IO reads or writes or both?

    - by Mark F
    Hi All, So I know a bit about disk I/O and bottlenecks relating to this especially when relating to databases. But how do I really know what the max IO numbers will be for my disks? What metric might be available to me for working out roughly (but needs to be a good approximation) of how much capacity (if you will) have I got left available in I/O. I've seen it before where things are bubbling along nicely and then all of a sudden, everything screams to a halt, and it ends up being an IO bound problem. Is there a better way to predict when IO is reaching its limits? This article was interesting but not giving the answer I desire. "http://serverfault.com/questions/61510/linux-how-can-i-see-whats-waiting-for-disk-io". So is my best bet surrounding just looking at 'CPU IO WAIT'? There must be a more reactive method for this? Best, M

    Read the article

  • LVM vs RAID0 vs RAID "linear" - Combine 2 disks as one, data recovery?

    - by leto
    Hi there, given two 2TB USB external disks that have to be combined to one 4TB volume and formatted with one big Filesystem (XFS), I have a small question to ask. Does LVM provide better Data recovery, should one disk be unplugged/damaged by being able to recover the data of the still working disk or is everything lost? I would appreciate a solution where only the data of one disk is lost and I can recover the content of the other with the usual filesystem/lvm/raid tools. Is that possible with LVM or RAID "linear"? This is for storing unimportant files that can be retrieved from backup, but I want to save time :) Thank you in advance

    Read the article

  • 3TB non-boot hard disk on older motherboard

    - by Bcos
    It is time to expand the capacity of my Ubuntu home file server so I would like to purchase some 3TB hard disks. However, I am concerned with potential compatibility issues. I've tried searching around but I haven't found information which clearly addresses my particular situation. My server is running Ubuntu 10.04 on an Intel P35 chipset based system. The motherboard does not support UEFI (and, by extension, GPT?). However, Ubuntu does support 2TB disks. Will I be able to properly utilize these new disks, or does the motherboard limitation trump all else? The boot disk is <2TB and will not be updated nor am I dual-booting; these disks will be used strictly as slaves in a pure Ubuntu environment. I'd hate to pull the trigger on these new disks just to be unpleasantly surprised, so any feedback is appreciated. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • I flashed my DS4700 with a 7 series firmware, now my DS4300 cannot read the disks I moved to that lo

    - by Daniel Hoeving
    In preparation for adding a number of 1Tb SATA disks to our DS4700 I flashed the controller firmware from a 6 series (which only supports up to 2Tb logical drives) to a 7 series (which supports larger than 2Tb logical drives). Attached to this DS4700 was a EXP710 expansion drawer that we had planned to migrate out to our co-location to allieviate the storage issues we were having there. Unfortunately these two projects were planned in isolation to one another so I was at the time unaware of the issue that this would cause. Prior to migrating the drawer I was reading the "IBM TotalStorage DS4000 EXP700 and EXP710 Storage Expansion EnclosuresInstallation, User’s, and Maintenance Guide" and discovered this: Controller firmware 6.xx or earlier has a different metadata (DACstore) data structure than controller firmware 7.xx.xx.xx. Metadata consists of the array and logical drive configuration data. These two metadata data structures are not interchangeable. When powered up and in Optimal state, the storage subsystem with controller firmware level 7.xx.xx.xx can convert the metadata from the drives configured in storage subsystems with controller firmware level 6.xx or earlier to controller firmware level 7.xx.xx.xx metadata data structure. However, the storage subsystem with controller firmware level 6.xx or earlier cannot read the metadata from the drives configured in storage subsystems with controller firmware level 7.xx.xx.xx or later. I had assumed that if I deleted the logical drives and array information on the EXP710 prior to migrating it to the DS4300 (6.60.22 firmware) this would satisfy the above, unfortunately I was wrong. So my question is a) Is it possible to restore the DAC information to its factory settings, b) What tool(s) would I use to accomplish this, or c) is this a lost cause? Daniel.

    Read the article

  • ZFS and SAN -- best practices?

    - by chris
    Most discussions of ZFS suggest that the hardware RAID be turned off and that ZFS should directly talk to the disks and manage the RAID on the host (instead of the RAID controller). This makes sense on a computer with 2-16 or even more local disks, but what about in an environment with a large SAN? For example, the enterprise I work for has what I would consider to be a modest sized SAN with 2 full racks of disks, which is something like 400 spindles. I've seen SAN shelves that are way more dense than ours, and SAN deployments way larger than ours. Do people expose 100 disks directly to big ZFS servers? 300 disks? 3000 disks? Do the SAN management tools facilitate automated management of this sort of thing?

    Read the article

  • Xen kernel can't see 2 disks of 6 of 1TB, does it have a limitation?

    - by PartySoft
    Linux gentoo-xen 2.6.18-xen-r12 #3 SMP Tue Oct 5 09:28:53 PDT 2010 x86_64 Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5506 @ 2.13GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux I have 6 disks of 1 TB and i can't see all of them only 4, can anyone give me an ideea what can i do ? Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on rootfs 886G 4.4G 836G 1% / /dev/sda3 886G 4.4G 836G 1% / rc-svcdir 1.0M 44K 980K 5% /lib64/rc/init.d shm 7.9G 0 7.9G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sdb1 917G 200M 871G 1% /home2 /dev/sdc1 917G 200M 871G 1% /home3 /dev/sdd1 917G 200M 871G 1% /home4 The hardware is Dual xeon E5506 processors on a supermicro X8DTL mobo 4.346585] ata3.00: ATA-8, max UDMA/133, 1953525168 sectors: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/32) [ 4.346588] ata3.00: ata3: dev 0 multi count 16 [ 4.352861] ata3.00: configured for UDMA/133 [ 4.352867] scsi3 : ata_piix [ 4.352875] PM: Adding info for No Bus:host3 [ 4.510584] ata4.00: ATA-8, max UDMA/133, 1953525168 sectors: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/32) [ 4.510587] ata4.00: ata4: dev 0 multi count 16 [ 4.516848] ata4.00: configured for UDMA/133 [ 4.516861] PM: Adding info for No Bus:target2:0:0 [ 4.516905] Vendor: ATA Model: SAMSUNG HD103SJ Rev: 1AJ1 [ 4.516910] Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 [ 4.516920] PM: Adding info for scsi:2:0:0:0 [ 4.517452] SCSI device sde: 1953525168 512-byte hdwr sectors (1000205 MB) [ 4.517460] sde: Write Protect is off [ 4.517461] sde: Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00 [ 4.517478] SCSI device sde: drive cache: write back [ 4.517514] SCSI device sde: 1953525168 512-byte hdwr sectors (1000205 MB) [ 4.517521] sde: Write Protect is off [ 4.517522] sde: Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00 [ 4.517532] SCSI device sde: drive cache: write back [ 4.517534] sde: sde1 [ 4.524551] sd 2:0:0:0: Attached scsi disk sde [ 4.524855] sd 2:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg4 type 0 [ 4.524874] PM: Adding info for No Bus:target3:0:0 [ 4.524928] Vendor: ATA Model: SAMSUNG HD103SJ Rev: 1AJ1 [ 4.524933] Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 [ 4.524946] PM: Adding info for scsi:3:0:0:0 [ 4.525216] SCSI device sdf: 1953525168 512-byte hdwr sectors (1000205 MB) [ 4.525227] sdf: Write Protect is off [ 4.525228] sdf: Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00 [ 4.525242] SCSI device sdf: drive cache: write back [ 4.525280] SCSI device sdf: 1953525168 512-byte hdwr sectors (1000205 MB) [ 4.525286] sdf: Write Protect is off [ 4.525289] sdf: Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00 [ 4.525301] SCSI device sdf: drive cache: write back [ 4.525302] sdf: sdf1 [ 4.532691] sd 3:0:0:0: Attached scsi disk sdf [ 4.533010] sd 3:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg5 type 0 [ 4.977669] scsi: <fdomain> Detection failed (no card) [ 5.030479] GDT-HA: Storage RAID Controller Driver. Version: 3.05 [ 5.030635] GDT-HA: Found 0 PCI Storage RAID Controllers [ 5.372350] Fusion MPT base driver 3.04.01 [ 5.372358] Copyright (c) 1999-2005 LSI Logic Corporation [ 5.579176] Fusion MPT SPI Host driver 3.04.01 [ 5.881777] ieee1394: Initialized config rom entry `ip1394' [ 6.166745] ieee1394: sbp2: Driver forced to serialize I/O (serialize_io=1) [ 6.166748] ieee1394: sbp2: Try serialize_io=0 for better performance [ 6.428866] md: md driver 0.90.3 MAX_MD_DEVS=256, MD_SB_DISKS=27 [ 6.428872] md: bitmap version 4.39 [ 6.431518] md: raid0 personality registered for level 0 [ 6.495979] md: raid1 personality registered for level 1 [ 6.570270] raid5: automatically using best checksumming function: generic_sse [ 6.575523] generic_sse: 6608.000 MB/sec [ 6.575526] raid5: using function: generic_sse (6608.000 MB/sec) [ 6.596226] raid6: int64x1 1835 MB/s [ 6.613231] raid6: int64x2 1773 MB/s [ 6.630256] raid6: int64x4 1675 MB/s [ 6.647296] raid6: int64x8 1027 MB/s [ 6.664267] raid6: sse2x1 3578 MB/s [ 6.681268] raid6: sse2x2 4207 MB/s [ 6.698280] raid6: sse2x4 4625 MB/s [ 6.698281] raid6: using algorithm sse2x4 (4625 MB/s) [ 6.698285] md: raid6 personality registered for level 6 [ 6.698286] md: raid5 personality registered for level 5 [ 6.698288] md: raid4 personality registered for level 4 [ 6.781090] md: raid10 personality registered for level 10 [ 7.007043] Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - version 7.1.9-k4 [ 7.007046] Copyright (c) 1999-2006 Intel Corporation. [ 9.229465] kjournald starting. Commit interval 5 seconds [ 9.229476] EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode.

    Read the article

  • How many disks is too many in this RAID 5 configuration??

    - by Tom
    HP 2012i SAN, 7 disks in RAID 5 with 1 hot spare, took several days to expand the volume from 5 to 7 300GB SAS drives. Looking for suggestions about when and how I would determine that having 2 volumes in the SAN, each one with RAID 5, would be better?? I can add 3 more drives to the controller someday, the SAN is used for ESX/vSphere VMs. Thank you...

    Read the article

  • Use Drive Mirroring for Instant Backup in Windows 7

    - by Trevor Bekolay
    Even with the best backup solution, a hard drive crash means you’ll lose a few hours of work. By enabling drive mirroring in Windows 7, you’ll always have an up-to-date copy of your data. Windows 7’s mirroring – which is only available in Professional, Enterprise, and Ultimate editions – is a software implementation of RAID 1, which means that two or more disks are holding the exact same data. The files are constantly kept in sync, so that if one of the disks fails, you won’t lose any data. Note that mirroring is not technically a backup solution, because if you accidentally delete a file, it’s gone from both hard disks (though you may be able to recover the file). As an additional caveat, having mirrored disks requires changing them to “dynamic disks,” which can only be read within modern versions of Windows (you may have problems working with a dynamic disk in other operating systems or in older versions of Windows). See this Wikipedia page for more information. You will need at least one empty disk to set up disk mirroring. We’ll show you how to mirror an existing disk (of equal or lesser size) without losing any data on the mirrored drive, and how to set up two empty disks as mirrored copies from the get-go. Mirroring an Existing Drive Click on the start button and type partitions in the search box. Click on the Create and format hard disk partitions entry that shows up. Alternatively, if you’ve disabled the search box, press Win+R to open the Run window and type in: diskmgmt.msc The Disk Management window will appear. We’ve got a small disk, labeled OldData, that we want to mirror in a second disk of the same size. Note: The disk that you will use to mirror the existing disk must be unallocated. If it is not, then right-click on it and select Delete Volume… to mark it as unallocated. This will destroy any data on that drive. Right-click on the existing disk that you want to mirror. Select Add Mirror…. Select the disk that you want to use to mirror the existing disk’s data and press Add Mirror. You will be warned that this process will change the existing disk from basic to dynamic. Note that this process will not delete any data on the disk! The new disk will be marked as a mirror, and it will starting copying data from the existing drive to the new one. Eventually the drives will be synced up (it can take a while), and any data added to the E: drive will exist on both physical hard drives. Setting Up Two New Drives as Mirrored If you have two new equal-sized drives, you can format them to be mirrored copies of each other from the get-go. Open the Disk Management window as described above. Make sure that the drives are unallocated. If they’re not, and you don’t need the data on either of them, right-click and select Delete volume…. Right-click on one of the unallocated drives and select New Mirrored Volume…. A wizard will pop up. Click Next. Click on the drives you want to hold the mirrored data and click Add. Note that you can add any number of drives. Click Next. Assign it a drive letter that makes sense, and then click Next. You’re limited to using the NTFS file system for mirrored drives, so enter a volume label, enable compression if you want, and then click Next. Click Finish to start formatting the drives. You will be warned that the new drives will be converted to dynamic disks. And that’s it! You now have two mirrored drives. Any files added to E: will reside on both physical disks, in case something happens to one of them. Conclusion While the switch from basic to dynamic disks can be a problem for people who dual-boot into another operating system, setting up drive mirroring is an easy way to make sure that your data can be recovered in case of a hard drive crash. Of course, even with drive mirroring, we advocate regular backups to external drives or online backup services. Similar Articles Productive Geek Tips Rebit Backup Software [Review]Disabling Instant Search in Outlook 2007Restore Files from Backups on Windows Home ServerSecond Copy 7 [Review]Backup Windows Home Server Folders to an External Hard Drive TouchFreeze Alternative in AutoHotkey The Icy Undertow Desktop Windows Home Server – Backup to LAN The Clear & Clean Desktop Use This Bookmarklet to Easily Get Albums Use AutoHotkey to Assign a Hotkey to a Specific Window Latest Software Reviews Tinyhacker Random Tips CloudBerry Online Backup 1.5 for Windows Home Server Snagit 10 VMware Workstation 7 Acronis Online Backup Windows Firewall with Advanced Security – How To Guides Sculptris 1.0, 3D Drawing app AceStock, a Tiny Desktop Quote Monitor Gmail Button Addon (Firefox) Hyperwords addon (Firefox) Backup Outlook 2010

    Read the article

  • Desktop SATA drives in SATA <-> FC array

    - by chris
    Let's assume you've got a box like one of these with space for 24 SATA disks. What are the best bits of advice for deploying this? For instance, should you be greedy and go for the 1.5 or 2tb disks or are they just not reliable enough to be used in an array like this and you should stick with 640gb or 750gb disks instead? Also, I know that FC (or generically, "enterprise class") disks have a different error recovery strategy than desktop disks. An enterprise disk will fail a read quickly and report to the controller that it wasn't able to read that block, and the RAID controller will quickly regenerate the info from the parity disk and mark the block as bad. A desktop disk, on the other hand, will try and try and try again to get the data, and in pathological cases this may cause a raid controller to fail the whole disk because the read operation times out. So there are a couple aspects to this question: What's the best sort of disk to get today? (ie specific disks on the market in Feb 2010) Generically, what should someone look for when trying to buy something like this that kinda walks the line between enterprise and consumer? Lastly -- is there anything that can be done with current "consumer" disks to make them more suitable for array use? IE can you use a SMART configuration to change the error recovery strategy used by the disk? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • New Dell PE R710 - Storage Question

    - by rihatum
    Hi All, Dell PE R710, received from Dell in the following state : Windows Disk 0 1800GB ( Volume C & D ) Windows Disk 1 526 GB (Volume E ) Perc6i Integrated Raid Controller 6 x 500GB Nearline SAS 7200RPM HDDs Raid 5 Configuration with two Virtual Disks I have installed Dell open Manage and it shows the following : Virtual Disk 0 - State : Background Initialization ( 7% ) Virtual Disk 1 - State : Background Initialization ( 25% ) Now when I click on Virtual Disk 0 it shows me all 6 Disks and the same happens when I click on Virtual Disk 1 it displays all 6 disks. But when I click on Storage Perc6i Connector 0 I get 4 Physical disks with the following numbers : Physical Disk 0:0:0 Physical Disk 0:0:1 Physical Disk 0:0:2 Physical Disk 0:0:3 When I click on Storage Perc6i Connector 1 I get 2 Physical Disks Listed in the following way : Physical Disk 1:0:4 Physical Disk 1:0:5 I am a little confused in this description, does this 1:0:4 interprets to Controller1, Disk4. Does this integrated raid card have two controllers coming out of it ? Also, When I first switched on the machine, the boot partition was showing 1GB Available out of 40GB, now its showing 38GB available out of 40GB. Is this because the Virtual Disks are still Initializing ? Any recommendations or suggestions ? Also, this server have 6 x 500GB NearLine SAS Hard drives, what would be a good raid config ? We are planning to use it for Hyper-V with quite a few (7 or 8) virtual servers, your suggestions would be helpful. Also, while the virtual disks are in a initialization state, can I destroy and re-create the raid configuration ? I would have to do it at the BIOS CTRL-M ? Thanks and Regards

    Read the article

  • Creating mdraid device on top of other existing mdraid devices

    - by Dmitriusan
    I'm considering creating something like "hierarchical raid" and wondering whether it is possible using pure mdraid. Moreover, I'm going to boot from this device. I'm using Ubuntu Server 12.04 LTS with Grub2 bootloader. Motivation behind doing that is: I have 4 x 1tb 7200rpm disks. Two are newer and faster (up to 200mb/sec) and other two are slower (up to 140mb/sec). I want to create RAID-0 device from them. When creating such RAID-0 directly from 4 hard disks, I get summary speed up to ~480mb/sec. That is roughly 4*120mb/sec, so RAID-0 works with speed of the slowest device. I have an idea to create a separate RAID-0 md0 device from 500gb partitions of slower hard disks. Theoretically, this md0 device will have speed 2*140=240~280mb/sec. After that, I'm going to add this md0 device to RAID-0 with faster disks, finishing with up to 3*200=600mb/sec. Stripe-width for this raid will be 2x times bigger than for underlying raid with slow disks. Questions are: is it possible or I'm missing something? will that work as expected? can I boot from such consolidated raid device? any better ideas? any pitfalls? I don't want to use fakeraid for consolidating slow disks for multiple reasons (portability, ability to customize parameters and so on). PS Speed is needed for home virtualization server and just for experience/fun. Reliability is provided via regular automatic backups to a separate device. PPS I considered also using different stripe-width for hard disks with different speed in single raid, but mdraid does not seem to support that.

    Read the article

  • Managing disk in a VM

    - by dst
    I'm replacing my two old rack servers with a new one that has plenty of power to take over the functionality my current servers. The server is a 4U rack mount with 16 3.5" SAS drive bays, two 2.5" bays, a Xeon E3-1230v2 CPU and 32GB of ECC RAM. My issue is the following. I would like to have a FreeBSD file server with ZFS managing disks. However, I need other VMs for e.g. a shell/git server, mail server etc. I'm wondering how to deal with the following issues: I want ZFS to fully manage the disks, so I'm not using any hardware RAID. Should I pass the SAS controller directly to the FreeBSD system as passthrough PCI? I want to maximize the reliability of the setup. On what disks should I install the hypervsor and keep server system disks? For (2) I have the option of having a RAID setup on the SAS controller and using that as system disk to store the hypervisor as well as VM images. However, this makes PCI passthrough to the file server impossible. Another option is using the two 2.5" bays. In terms of reliability how are SSDs compared to e.g. WD RE4 disks? Would it make sense to have two SSDs in software RAID as boot disks for the hypervisor or should I just go with e.g. WD RE4 disks in a software RAID setup. I also need to think about where to store the mails for the mail server, but this could be done over NFS between the VMs. BTW, this is for home use, so the load is not really that big. What I'm looking for is best practices for splitting up a server.

    Read the article

  • How to resolve virtual disk degraded in Windows Server 2012

    - by harrydev
    I am using the new Storage Spaces feature in Windows Server 2012. I have the following disks: FriendlyName CanPool OperationalStatus HealthStatus Usage Size ------------ ------- ----------------- ------------ ----- ---- PhysicalDisk2 False OK Healthy Auto-Select 2.73 TB PhysicalDisk3 False OK Healthy Auto-Select 2.73 TB PhysicalDisk4 False OK Healthy Auto-Select 2.73 TB PhysicalDisk5 False OK Healthy Auto-Select 2.73 TB There is also a separate OS disk. The above disks are part of a single storage pool: FriendlyName OperationalStatus HealthStatus IsPrimordial IsReadOnly ------------ ----------------- ------------ ------------ ---------- Pool OK Healthy False False Within this storage pool some virtual disks are defined, see below: FriendlyName ResiliencySettingNa OperationalStatus HealthStatus IsManualAttach Size me ------------ ------------------- ----------------- ------------ -------------- ---- Docs Mirror OK Healthy False 500 GB Data Mirror Degraded Warning False 500 GB Work Mirror Degraded Warning False 2 TB Now the virtual disks are all running normal 2-way mirror, but two of the virtual disks are degraded. This is probably because one of the physical disks was offline for a short period of time. However, now the virtual disk cannot be repaired, even though, all physical disks are healthy. There is plenty of available space in the storage pool. This I cannot understand so I was hoping for some help, on how to resolve this? Below I have listed the full output from the Get-VirtualDisk CmdLet for the "Work" disk: ObjectId : {XXXXXXXX} PassThroughClass : PassThroughIds : PassThroughNamespace : PassThroughServer : UniqueId : XXXXXXXX Access : Read/Write AllocatedSize : 412316860416 DetachedReason : None FootprintOnPool : 824633720832 FriendlyName : Work HealthStatus : Warning Interleave : 262144 IsDeduplicationEnabled : False IsEnclosureAware : False IsManualAttach : False IsSnapshot : False LogicalSectorSize : 512 Name : NameFormat : NumberOfAvailableCopies : 0 NumberOfColumns : 2 NumberOfDataCopies : 2 OperationalStatus : Degraded OtherOperationalStatusDescription : OtherUsageDescription : Disk for data being worked on (not backed up) ParityLayout : PhysicalDiskRedundancy : 1 PhysicalSectorSize : 4096 ProvisioningType : Thin RequestNoSinglePointOfFailure : True ResiliencySettingName : Mirror Size : 2199023255552 UniqueIdFormat : Vendor Specific UniqueIdFormatDescription : Usage : Other PSComputerName :

    Read the article

  • Error when installing wubi on windows 7

    - by P'sao
    Im installing ubuntu on windows 7(wubi 11.10): when its nearly done it gives me this error in the log file: Usage: /cygdrive/c/Users/Psao/AppData/Local/Temp/pyl10D2.tmp/bin/resize2fs.exe -f C:/ubuntu/disks/root.disk 17744M [-d debug_flags] [-f] [-F] [-p] device [new_size] Traceback (most recent call last): File "\lib\wubi\backends\common\tasklist.py", line 197, in __call__ File "\lib\wubi\backends\win32\backend.py", line 461, in expand_diskimage File "\lib\wubi\backends\common\utils.py", line 66, in run_command Exception: Error executing command >>command=C:\Users\P'sao\AppData\Local\Temp\pyl10D2.tmp\bin\resize2fs.exe -f C:\ubuntu\disks\root.disk 17744M >>retval=1 >>stderr= >>stdout=resize2fs 1.40.6 (09-Feb-2008) Usage: /cygdrive/c/Users/Psao/AppData/Local/Temp/pyl10D2.tmp/bin/resize2fs.exe -f C:/ubuntu/disks/root.disk 17744M [-d debug_flags] [-f] [-F] [-p] device [new_size] 10-25 20:31 DEBUG TaskList: # Cancelling tasklist 10-25 20:31 DEBUG TaskList: # Finished tasklist 10-25 20:31 ERROR root: Error executing command >>command=C:\Users\P'sao\AppData\Local\Temp\pyl10D2.tmp\bin\resize2fs.exe -f C:\ubuntu\disks\root.disk 17744M >>retval=1 >>stderr= >>stdout=resize2fs 1.40.6 (09-Feb-2008) Usage: /cygdrive/c/Users/Psao/AppData/Local/Temp/pyl10D2.tmp/bin/resize2fs.exe -f C:/ubuntu/disks/root.disk 17744M [-d debug_flags] [-f] [-F] [-p] device [new_size] Traceback (most recent call last): File "\lib\wubi\application.py", line 58, in run File "\lib\wubi\application.py", line 132, in select_task File "\lib\wubi\application.py", line 158, in run_installer File "\lib\wubi\backends\common\tasklist.py", line 197, in __call__ File "\lib\wubi\backends\win32\backend.py", line 461, in expand_diskimage File "\lib\wubi\backends\common\utils.py", line 66, in run_command Exception: Error executing command >>command=C:\Users\P'sao\AppData\Local\Temp\pyl10D2.tmp\bin\resize2fs.exe -f C:\ubuntu\disks\root.disk 17744M >>retval=1 >>stderr= >>stdout=resize2fs 1.40.6 (09-Feb-2008) Usage: /cygdrive/c/Users/Psao/AppData/Local/Temp/pyl10D2.tmp/bin/resize2fs.exe -f C:/ubuntu/disks/root.disk 17744M [-d debug_flags] [-f] [-F] [-p] device [new_size] can some one help me?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2005 Disk Configuration: Single RAID 1+0 or multiple RAID 1+0s?

    - by mfredrickson
    Assuming that the workload for the SQL Server is just a normal OLTP database, and that there are a total of 20 disks available, which configuration would make more sense? A single RAID 1+0, containing all 20 disks. This physical volume would contain both the data files and the transaction log files, but two logical drives would be created from this RAID: one for the data files and one for the log files. Or... Two RAID 1+0s, each containing 10 disks. One physical volume would contain the data files, and the other would contain the log files. The reason for this question is due to a disagreement between me (SQL Developer) and a co-worker (DBA). For every configuration that I've done, or seen others do, the data files and transaction log files were separated at the physical level, and were placed on separate RAIDs. However, my co-workers argument is that by placing all the disks into a single RAID 1+0, then any IO that is done by the server is potentially shared between all 20 disks, instead of just 10 disks in my suggested configuration. Conceptually, his argument makes sense to me. Also, I've found some information from Microsoft that seems to supports his position. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc966414.aspx In the section titled "3. RAID10 Configuration", showing a configuration in which all 20 disks are allocated to a single RAID 1+0, it states: In this scenario, the I/O parallelism can be used to its fullest by all partitions. Therefore, distribution of I/O workload is among 20 physical spindles instead of four at the partition level. But... every other configuration I've seen suggests physically separating the data and log files onto separate RAIDs. Everything I've found here on Server Fault suggests the same. I understand that a log files will be write heavy, and that data files will be a combination of reads and writes, but does this require that the files be placed onto separate RAIDs instead of a single RAID?

    Read the article

  • Why does only "network" appear in Startup Disks on my Mac?

    - by nbolton
    I have a Linux dual boot setup with my Mac (with Leopard). When I open System Preferences Startup Disk I only see "Network Startup" and no HDD or BOOTCAMP as expected. So now, annoyingly, because "Network Startup" is the only option, it tries to start using the network (the flashing globe) for a short while rather than booting directly into Mac OS X. Is there a way to either fix Startup Disk or manually hack this?

    Read the article

  • How to block some disks from probes on Linux boot?

    - by Igor Velkov
    My linux host connected to SAN with FC interface. It connect with one path, and see some luns, that can't access, because they need anohter path, not available to host. On boot linux probe all lun he can see, get read error on unaccessible luns, and hangs there for a long-long time. Is there a way to disable any access to some luns at boot time, and later? I found a filters for device ignoration for LVM and MULTIPATH, but it not help during boot process. Generally, lvm still affected too despite of filter, and gives me a IO error on every operation like lvdisplay and vgdisplay, but this is another question.

    Read the article

  • Does the Win XP/7 dual boot "missing restore points" problem apply to systems with separate hard disks for each O/S?

    - by Robert Oschler
    I'm in the process of installing Windows 7/64 on a system with Windows XP/32 on it. During my research, I read about a problem that occurs in the dual boot scenario where Windows XP deletes Windows 7's restore points when it accesses the Windows 7 volume: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926185 I found a workaround but it seems pretty painful since it appears to involve using the registry to make the Windows 7 volume appear invisible or "offline" to Windows XP, making sharing disk data between the two O/S annoying since you have to use something like an external storage device to get it done: http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/127417-system-restore-points-stop-xp-dual-boot-delete.html I was wondering if this problem only occurs with systems that have both O/S installed on the same physical hard drive (in different partitions)? In my case, I will have each O/S on a completely separate physical hard drive. Any other tips would be appreciated. -- roschler

    Read the article

  • Is there a reason to use library backups if I'm backup up full disks?

    - by Ben Brocka
    In Windows Backup I can backup libraries or whole drives (or specific folders). I want a complete backup of all relevant drives. After selecting the drives, there's still the option to backup libraries: Is the backup going to do anything different if I include libraries as well as drives? Should I just backup the whole drive instead? Space used by the backup shouldn't be an issue, since I know the incremental backup is pretty smart..

    Read the article

  • ZFS/Btrfs/LVM2-like storage with advanced features on Linux?

    - by Easter Sunshine
    I have 3 identical internal 7200 RPM SATA hard disk drives on a Linux machine. I'm looking for a storage set-up that will give me all of this: Different data sets (filesystems or subtrees) can have different RAID levels so I can choose performance, space overhead, and risk trade-offs differently for different data sets while having a few number of physical disks (very important data can be 3xRAID1, important data can be 3xRAID5, unimportant reproducible data can be 3xRAID0). If each data set has an explicit size or size limit, then the ability to grow and shrink the size limit (offline if need be) Avoid out-of-kernel modules R/W or read-only COW snapshots. If it's a block-level snapshots, the filesystem should be synced and quiesced during a snapshot. Ability to add physical disks and then grow/redistribute RAID1, RAID5, and RAID0 volumes to take advantage of the new spindle and make sure no spindle is hotter than the rest (e.g., in NetApp, growing a RAID-DP raid group by a few disks will not balance the I/O across them without an explicit redistribution) Not required but nice-to-haves: Transparent compression, per-file or subtree. Even better if, like NetApps, analyzes the data first for compressibility and only compresses compressible data Deduplication that doesn't have huge performance penalties or require obscene amounts of memory (NetApp does scheduled deduplication on weekends, which is good) Resistance to silent data corruption like ZFS (this is not required because I have never seen ZFS report any data corruption on these specific disks) Storage tiering, either automatic (based on caching rules) or user-defined rules (yes, I have all-identical disks now but this will let me add a read/write SSD cache in the future). If it's user-defined rules, these rules should have the ability to promote to SSD on a file level and not a block level. Space-efficient packing of small files I tried ZFS on Linux but the limitations were: Upgrading is additional work because the package is in an external repository and is tied to specific kernel versions; it is not integrated with the package manager Write IOPS does not scale with number of devices in a raidz vdev. Cannot add disks to raidz vdevs Cannot have select data on RAID0 to reduce overhead and improve performance without additional physical disks or giving ZFS a single partition of the disks ext4 on LVM2 looks like an option except I can't tell whether I can shrink, extend, and redistribute onto new spindles RAID-type logical volumes (of course, I can experiment with LVM on a bunch of files). As far as I can tell, it doesn't have any of the nice-to-haves so I was wondering if there is something better out there. I did look at LVM dangers and caveats but then again, no system is perfect.

    Read the article

  • Is keeping the primary hard disk as disk C: still relevant?

    - by Jeremy French
    Back in the day, floppy disks were a: and if you were lucky b:, then when permanent storage came along c: was the default for hard disks (as I remember it) Now that many computers no longer have floppy disks is it possible to have your primary hard disk as A: is the convention out dated? Removable drives (like DVDs and flash readers) now seem to take lower precedence than permanent storage so it is a bit of an oddity that floppy disks should have higher letters.

    Read the article

  • RAID0 array of USB 2 disks, both connected to a single hub. Any benefit?

    - by Josh
    I have two unused USB 2 drives. I wanted to stripe them in a RAID0 configuration for fast disk access for virtual machines. (I find running a VMware virtual machine off a USB2 drive to be painfully slow. Especially Windows Vista) If I have both USB drives attached to the same USB2 hub, will that negate any benefit I gain by creating a RAID0 array? That is to say, is the speed of USB2 the limiting factor or is the speed of the drives? Would I get better performance by attaching one or both drives directly to my computer?

    Read the article

  • Proliant server will not accept new hard disks in RAID 1+0?

    - by Leigh
    I have a HP ProLiant DL380 G5, I have two logical drives configured with RAID. I have one logical drive RAID 1+0 with two 72 gb 10k sas 1 port spare no 376597-001. I had one hard disk fail and ordered a replacement. The configuration utility showed error and would not rebuild the RAID. I presumed a hard disk fault and ordered a replacement again. In the mean time I put the original failed disk back in the server and this started rebuilding. Currently shows ok status however in the log I can see hardware errors. The new disk has come and I again have the same problem of not accepting the hard disk. I have updated the P400 controller with the latest firmware 7.24 , but still no luck. The only difference I can see is the original drive has firmware 0103 (same as the RAID drive) and the new one has HPD2. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks in advance Logs from server ctrl all show config Smart Array P400 in Slot 1 (sn: PAFGK0P9VWO0UQ) array A (SAS, Unused Space: 0 MB) logicaldrive 1 (68.5 GB, RAID 1, Interim Recovery Mode) physicaldrive 2I:1:1 (port 2I:box 1:bay 1, SAS, 73.5 GB, OK) physicaldrive 2I:1:2 (port 2I:box 1:bay 2, SAS, 72 GB, Failed array B (SAS, Unused Space: 0 MB) logicaldrive 2 (558.7 GB, RAID 5, OK) physicaldrive 1I:1:5 (port 1I:box 1:bay 5, SAS, 300 GB, OK) physicaldrive 2I:1:3 (port 2I:box 1:bay 3, SAS, 300 GB, OK) physicaldrive 2I:1:4 (port 2I:box 1:bay 4, SAS, 300 GB, OK) ctrl all show config detail Smart Array P400 in Slot 1 Bus Interface: PCI Slot: 1 Serial Number: PAFGK0P9VWO0UQ Cache Serial Number: PA82C0J9VWL8I7 RAID 6 (ADG) Status: Disabled Controller Status: OK Hardware Revision: E Firmware Version: 7.24 Rebuild Priority: Medium Expand Priority: Medium Surface Scan Delay: 15 secs Surface Scan Mode: Idle Wait for Cache Room: Disabled Surface Analysis Inconsistency Notification: Disabled Post Prompt Timeout: 0 secs Cache Board Present: True Cache Status: OK Cache Status Details: A cache error was detected. Run more information. Cache Ratio: 100% Read / 0% Write Drive Write Cache: Disabled Total Cache Size: 256 MB Total Cache Memory Available: 208 MB No-Battery Write Cache: Disabled Battery/Capacitor Count: 0 SATA NCQ Supported: True Array: A Interface Type: SAS Unused Space: 0 MB Status: Failed Physical Drive Array Type: Data One of the drives on this array have failed or has Logical Drive: 1 Size: 68.5 GB Fault Tolerance: RAID 1 Heads: 255 Sectors Per Track: 32 Cylinders: 17594 Strip Size: 128 KB Full Stripe Size: 128 KB Status: Interim Recovery Mode Caching: Enabled Unique Identifier: 600508B10010503956574F305551 Disk Name: \\.\PhysicalDrive0 Mount Points: C:\ 68.5 GB Logical Drive Label: A0100539PAFGK0P9VWO0UQ0E93 Mirror Group 0: physicaldrive 2I:1:2 (port 2I:box 1:bay 2, S Mirror Group 1: physicaldrive 2I:1:1 (port 2I:box 1:bay 1, S Drive Type: Data physicaldrive 2I:1:1 Port: 2I Box: 1 Bay: 1 Status: OK Drive Type: Data Drive Interface Type: SAS Size: 73.5 GB Rotational Speed: 10000 Firmware Revision: 0103 Serial Number: B379P8C006RK Model: HP DG072A9B7 PHY Count: 2 PHY Transfer Rate: Unknown, Unknown physicaldrive 2I:1:2 Port: 2I Box: 1 Bay: 2 Status: Failed Drive Type: Data Drive Interface Type: SAS Size: 72 GB Rotational Speed: 15000 Firmware Revision: HPD9 Serial Number: D5A1PCA04SL01244 Model: HP EH0072FARUA PHY Count: 2 PHY Transfer Rate: Unknown, Unknown Array: B Interface Type: SAS Unused Space: 0 MB Status: OK Array Type: Data Logical Drive: 2 Size: 558.7 GB Fault Tolerance: RAID 5 Heads: 255 Sectors Per Track: 32 Cylinders: 65535 Strip Size: 64 KB Full Stripe Size: 128 KB Status: OK Caching: Enabled Parity Initialization Status: Initialization Co Unique Identifier: 600508B10010503956574F305551 Disk Name: \\.\PhysicalDrive1 Mount Points: E:\ 558.7 GB Logical Drive Label: AF14FD12PAFGK0P9VWO0UQD007 Drive Type: Data physicaldrive 1I:1:5 Port: 1I Box: 1 Bay: 5 Status: OK Drive Type: Data Drive Interface Type: SAS Size: 300 GB Rotational Speed: 10000 Firmware Revision: HPD4 Serial Number: 3SE07QH300009923X1X3 Model: HP DG0300BALVP Current Temperature (C): 32 Maximum Temperature (C): 45 PHY Count: 2 PHY Transfer Rate: Unknown, Unknown physicaldrive 2I:1:3 Port: 2I Box: 1 Bay: 3 Status: OK Drive Type: Data Drive Interface Type: SAS Size: 300 GB Rotational Speed: 10000 Firmware Revision: HPD4 Serial Number: 3SE0AHVH00009924P8F3 Model: HP DG0300BALVP Current Temperature (C): 34 Maximum Temperature (C): 47 PHY Count: 2 PHY Transfer Rate: Unknown, Unknown physicaldrive 2I:1:4 Port: 2I Box: 1 Bay: 4 Status: OK Drive Type: Data Drive Interface Type: SAS Size: 300 GB Rotational Speed: 10000 Firmware Revision: HPD4 Serial Number: 3SE08NAK00009924KWD6 Model: HP DG0300BALVP Current Temperature (C): 35 Maximum Temperature (C): 47 PHY Count: 2 PHY Transfer Rate: Unknown, Unknown

    Read the article

  • How much does HDD cache matter with Linux softraid?

    - by Jawa
    I'm in a process of renewing/expanding my disk sets, but not quite sure what kind of disks to get, cache-wise. What difference does disk cache amount of 16/32/64MB do, in capacities of, say, 1/1.5/2TB SATA disks? The disks will be used in a webapp server and in a media workstation, with Linux's softraid in raid-1/raid-5 configurations. Note, that as both purposes are purely for a hobby, the pricetag for a dozen of disks is a big issue.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >