search for: 45tb

Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 or 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said background, and rebooted the system. And the stupid annoying alarm started up as the system came up. This time, having *finally* figured out how to set up hot spares from the WebBIOS, I suspended the fast initialization, and brought the system up. Googling,...

Hi All, I am about to embark on a project that deals with allowing information archival, over time and seeing change over time as well. I can explain it a lot better, but I would certainly talk your ear off. I really don't have a lot of money to throw at the initial concept, but I have some. This device will host all of the operations for the first few months until I can afford to build a

Valeri Galtsev wrote: > > On Fri, May 6, 2016 1:36 pm, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the >> firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 >> or 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said background, and >> rebooted the system. >> >> And the stupid annoying alarm started up as the system came up. >> >> This time, having *finally* figured out how to set up hot spares from >> the WebBIOS, I suspended the fast in...

Nothing like a "heart in mouth moment" to shave tears from your life. I rebooted a snv_132 box in perfect heath, and it came back up with two FAULTED disks in the same vdisk group. Everything an hour on Google I found basically said "your data is gone". All 45Tb of it. A postmortem of fmadm showed a single disk failed with smart predictive failure. No indication why the second failed. I don''t give up easily, and it is now back up and scrubbing - no errors so far. I checked both the drives were readable, so it didn''t seem to be a hardwa...

On 5/6/2016 11:36 AM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the > firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 or > 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said background, and rebooted the > system. > > And the stupid annoying alarm started up as the system came up. > > This time, having*finally* figured out how to set up hot spares from the > WebBIOS, I suspended the fast initialization, and brough...

On Fri, May 6, 2016 1:36 pm, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the > firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 or > 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said background, and rebooted the > system. > > And the stupid annoying alarm started up as the system came up. > > This time, having *finally* figured out how to set up hot spares from the > WebBIOS, I suspended the fast initialization, and brough...

...> Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> >> On Fri, May 6, 2016 1:36 pm, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >>> Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the >>> firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 >>> or 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said background, and >>> rebooted the system. >>> >>> And the stupid annoying alarm started up as the system came up. >>> >>> This time, having *finally* figured out how to set up hot spares from >>> the WebBIOS,...

Hi All, I am trying to determine whether a mail server cluster based on Dovecot will be capable of supporting 500,000+ mailboxes with about 50,000 IMAP and 5000 active POP3 connections. I have looked at the Dovecot clustering suggestions here: http://blog.dovecot.org/2012/02/dovecot-clustering-with-dsync-based.html and some other Dovecot mailing list threads but I am not sure how many