search for: 750g

...der root user unix_convert called on file "logon.bat" unix_convert begin: name = logon.bat, dirpath = , start = logon.bat stat_cache_add: Added entry (21f694e0:size 9) LOGON.BAT -> logon.bat conversion of base_name finished logon.bat -> logon.bat check_reduced_name [logon.bat] [/mnt/750g/netlogon] check_reduced_name: logon.bat reduced to /mnt/750g/netlogon/logon.bat call_trans2qfilepathinfo logon.bat (fnum = -1) level=1004 call=5 total_data=0 Please help! parts from config and debug logs are below [global] workgroup = ATLANTA netbios name = ANCOR-SRV realm = ATLANTA.LOCAL s...

...ink there was just a thread 'bout this, and I didn't pay attention... and then I walked into our smallest server room to rebuild a server with CentOS... and that's what it is. The problem I'm having is this: there are two 1T SAS drives, raided, via the controller. There's also a 750G SATA drive. The Dell test suite sees it, and reports that SMART says it's fine. However, no matter what I do, the BIOS doesn't see it, and when I boot to linux text, fdisk only sees the raided 1t. Clues for the poor? I want to put the system on the SATA drive, leaving the raid for data....

Hi All, Sorry if this has been answered many times. But i have been going through a lot of pages (via google search). The more i search, the more its confusing me. I have a server with 6 (750G each) SATA disks with H/W Raid 5. I plan to allocate the space as follows swap 8G /boot 100M / 20G -- and remaining space to /data{1,2,3,N} (equal sizes) However after the installation and reboot, i got an error about bad partition for /data8 I had hit the 2T limit. Then i found this page at...

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12732 Bug ID: 12732 Summary: hard links can cause rsync to block or to silently skip files Product: rsync Version: 3.1.2 Hardware: x64 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core Assignee:

...- I ran rsync 3.1.1 for over a year to help generate snapshots. I can't say if it copied all the files or not, as it was backing up a large "/home" partition, BUT, it never hung. It did take 45min to a few hours to do the compare, but it was comparing a large amount of data (>750G) w/a snapshot (another 750G) to dump diffs to a third, and my /home partion has a *very* large number of hard links. So I know that hardlinks are handled 'fine' on comparing 'xfs' to 'xfs'. > Latest test on openSUSE 42.2 (x86_64) on ext4 + on nfs with > ----...

Has anything changed in updates that would affect md raid1 resync speed? I regularly swap a 750G drive and resync to keep an offsite copy and haven't paid enough attention to known when things changed but it seems to take much longer to sync than it did months ago, even if I unmount the partition and stop most other processes that might compete with it. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...

In the past I basically used 3 partitions for hard drives. partition 1: was all centos (typically 20G) partition 2: was swap (typically 2*RAM - 2G) partition 3: was everything else I wanted, needed or carded about, database files etc... Now with really big drives coming along 750G and 1T partition 3 is getting big. Except for time to format is there a problem with that??? I'm not really to fond of trying to break up partition 3 but I am just wondering if there is a major reason why I should not be partitioning my systems this way? My systems are really just running m...

....1.1 for over a year to help generate > snapshots. I can't say if it copied all the files or not, as > it was backing up a large "/home" partition, BUT, it never hung. > It did take 45min to a few hours to do the compare, but it > was comparing a large amount of data (>750G) w/a snapshot > (another 750G) to dump diffs to a third, and my /home partion > has a *very* large number of hard links. I've been using rsync for many years and it works fine most of the time. I'm not sure if all of the occasional hangs have the same reason, these are really hard to...

Hello, i have an 8 port sata-controller and i don''t want to spend the money for 8 x 750 GB Sata Disks right now. I''m thinking about an optimal way of building a growing raidz-pool without loosing any data. As far as i know there are two ways to achieve this: - Adding 750 GB Disks from time to time. But this would lead to multiple groups with multiple redundancy/parity disks. I

...ing I could shake out what the problem was; earlier when the system was unstable doing this pointed out a couple of MP3 files that were incorrect, and as they were easily replaced I just removed them and was able to get a clean filesystem. My most recent attempt to clear this involved removing the 750G drive and then trying to bring it online; this had no effect, but now the 750 is on c0 rather than c7 at the OS device level. I''ve googled for some guidance and found advice to export/import, and while this cleared the original insufficient replicas problem, it has not done anything for t...

I know this topic has been discussed many times... but what the hell makes zpool resilvering so slow? I''m running OpenSolaris 2009.06. I have had a large number of problematic disks due to a bad production batch, leading me to resilver quite a few times, progressively replacing each disk as it dies (and now preemptively removing disks.) My complaint is that resilvering ends up

...used for development VMs, but there is no way I would consider this for production with this kind of performance hit during a resliver. My hardware: Dell 2950 16G ram 16 disk SAS chassis LSI 3801 (I think) SAS card (1068e chip) Intel x25-e SLOG off of the internal PERC 5/i RAID controller Seagate 750G disks (7200.11) I am running Nexenta CE 3.0.3 (SunOS rawhide 5.11 NexentaOS_134f i86pc i386 i86pc Solaris) pool: data01 state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The pool will continue to function, possibly in a degraded state. action: Wait for the resilver t...

...dule to access the drive with the root fs on it. I'm using the 64-bit 2.6.18-92.1.18 centosplus kernel (for XFS support). The box is running an asus dsbf-de board, with 2x e5405 cpus and 16g of ram. There are six drives on the ahci, one 80g "system" drive (the boot drive), and five 750g storage drives. There is also a supermicro 8 port sata hba in the system, with five 250g drives on it. The supermicro uses the sata_mv module and is detected just fine. Thanks for any suggestions! Gordon

...ions are: --retry-errors=NUM, which retries the residue of a failed read NUM times --retry-delay=NUM, which sleeps after an error is encountered before retries are attempted. This helps some disks that go nuts when they encounter certain kinds of media error. For instance, a WD Elements 1023, a 750G 2.5" USB will lose its marbles on bad tracks sometimes, and will seek the heads all over the place very rapidly while slowing reads to a crawl. If there is a 10 second pause after an error is reported, the quiescent drive parks its heads, after which continued reading continues at a reasonabl...

Hi all, I'm running a pretty updated CentOS4 x86_64 server (Still on kernel 2.6.9-42.0.2, but appart from that fully up to date against the official repos) with a USB-disk attached (the USB-disk is a 750G Seagate disk in a Seagate enclosure) over a USB hub. I've noticed several times that after longish periods of activity, the disk drops out (log from last time, below). In this case, the disk activity was generated by running two bittorrent-clients (ie random access r/w patterns) fed by an...

We're just using Linux software RAID for the first time - RAID1, and the other day, a drive failed. We have a clone machine to play with, so it's not that critical, but.... I partitioned a replacement drive. On the clone, I marked the RAID partitions on /dev/sda failed, and remove, and pulled the drive. After several iterations, I waited a minute or two, until all messages had stopped,

Apologies for the blank message (if it came through). I have heard here and there that there might be in development a plan to make it such that a raid-z can grow its "raid-z''ness" to accommodate a new disk added to it. Example: I have 4Disks in a raid-z[12] configuration. I am uncomfortably low on space, and would like to add a 5th disk. The idea is to pop in disk 5 and have

I''m not sure if this is a problem with the iscsitarget or zfs. I''d greatly appreciate it if it gets moved to the proper list. Well I''m just about out of ideas on what might be wrong.. Quick history: I installed OS 2008.05 when it was SNV_86 to try out ZFS with VMWare. Found out that multilun''s were being treated as multipaths so waited till SNV_94 came out to

...did not work manual run is needed. On the first 500GB disk I did an fsck.ext2 -y /dev/sdd1 did did not fixed my disk it had still errors, I lost 35% of my data, but the partition was mountable again, and the files where in the lost+found directory. I don't want this to happen with the second 750GB harddisk, I would like all my data back. fsck.ext3 -n /dev/sdd1 > fsck-crash-info.txt 2>&1 http://filebin.ca/mczmks/fsck-crash-info.zip What should I do? What commands do you want me to run to provide more info? How can i restore my root inode? Thanks in advance, Jelle de Jong

My application always needs to sync file data after writing. I don't want anything handing around in the kernel buffers. I am wondering what is the best method to accomplish this. 1. Do I use EXT2 and use fdatasync() or fsync()? 2. Do I use EXT2 and mount with the "sync" option? 3. Do I use EXT2 and use the O_DIRECT flag on open()? 4. Do I use EXT3 in full journaled mode,