search for: ssacli

Hi, is there a way to rebuild an array using ssacli with a P410? A failed disk has been replaced and now the array is not rebuilding like it should: Array A (SATA, Unused Space: 1 MB) logicaldrive 1 (14.55 TB, RAID 1+0, Ready for Rebuild) physicaldrive 1I:0:1 (port 1I:box 0:bay 1, SATA HDD, 4 TB, OK) physicaldrive 1I:0:2 (...

Am Fr., 6. Nov. 2020 um 00:52 Uhr schrieb hw <hw at gc-24.de>: > [...] > logicaldrive 1 (14.55 TB, RAID 1+0, Ready for Rebuild) > [...] Have you checked the rebuild priority: ? ssacli ctrl slot=0 show config detail | grep "Rebuild Priority" ~ Rebuild Priority: Medium ? Slot needs to be adjusted to your configuration. Kind regards Thomas -- Linux ... enjoy the ride!

...Fri, 2020-11-06 at 12:08 +0100, Thomas Bendler wrote: > Am Fr., 6. Nov. 2020 um 00:52 Uhr schrieb hw <hw at gc-24.de>: > > > [...] > > logicaldrive 1 (14.55 TB, RAID 1+0, Ready for Rebuild) > > [...] > > Have you checked the rebuild priority: > > ? ssacli ctrl slot=0 show config detail | grep "Rebuild Priority" > ~ > Rebuild Priority: Medium > ? > > Slot needs to be adjusted to your configuration. Yes, I've set it to high: ssacli ctrl slot=3 show config detail...

Am Fr., 6. Nov. 2020 um 20:38 Uhr schrieb hw <hw at gc-24.de>: > [...] > Some search results indicate that it's possible that other disks in the > array have read errors and might prevent rebuilding for RAID 5. I don't > know if there are read errors, and if it's read errors, I think it would > mean that these errors would have to affect just the disk which is

Am Mi., 11. Nov. 2020 um 07:28 Uhr schrieb hw <hw at gc-24.de>: > [...] > With this experience, these controllers are now deprecated. RAID > controllers > that can't rebuild an array after a disk has failed and has been replaced > are virtually useless. > [...] HW RAID is often delivered with quite limited functionality. Because of this I switched in most cases to

On Nov 11, 2020, at 2:01 PM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > > I have yet to see software RAID that doesn't kill the performance. When was the last time you tried it? Why would you expect that a modern 8-core Intel CPU would impede I/O in any measureable way as compared to the outdated single-core 32-bit RISC CPU typically found on hardware RAID cards? These are the same CPUs,

> On Nov 11, 2020, at 6:00 PM, John Pierce <jhn.pierce at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 3:38 PM Warren Young <warren at etr-usa.com> wrote: > >> On Nov 11, 2020, at 2:01 PM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: >>> >>> I have yet to see software RAID that doesn't kill the performance. >> >> When was the last time you

On Nov 11, 2020, at 6:37 PM, Valeri Galtsev <galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu> wrote: > > how do you map failed software RAID drive to physical port of, say, SAS-attached enclosure. With ZFS, you set a partition label on the whole-drive partition pool member, then mount the pool with something like ?zpool mount -d /dev/disk/by-partlabel?, which then shows the logical disk names in

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 5:47 PM Valeri Galtsev <galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu> wrote: > I?m sure you can reflash LSI card to make it SATA or SAS HBA, or MegaRAD > hardware RAID adapter. Is far as I recollect it is the same electronics > board. I reflashed a couple of HBAs to make them MegaRAID boards. > you can reflash SOME megaraid cards to put them in IT 'hba' mode,

On Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 4:57 AM hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 16:38 -0700, Warren Young wrote: > > > > And where > > > do you get cost-efficient cards that can do JBOD? > > > > $69, 8 SATA/SAS ports: https://www.newegg.com/p/0ZK-08UH-0GWZ1 > > That says it's for HP. So will you still get firmware updates once > the

> On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 16:38 -0700, Warren Young wrote: >> On Nov 11, 2020, at 2:01 PM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: >> > I have yet to see software RAID that doesn't kill the performance. >> >> When was the last time you tried it? > > I'm currently using it, and the performance sucks. Perhaps it's > not the software itself or the CPU but

On Sat, 2020-11-14 at 07:11 -0800, John Pierce wrote: > On Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 4:57 AM hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 16:38 -0700, Warren Young wrote: > > > > > > And where > > > > do you get cost-efficient cards that can do JBOD? > > > > > > $69, 8 SATA/SAS ports: https://www.newegg.com/p/0ZK-08UH-0GWZ1

> On Nov 11, 2020, at 5:38 PM, Warren Young <warren at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > On Nov 11, 2020, at 2:01 PM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: >> >> I have yet to see software RAID that doesn't kill the performance. > > When was the last time you tried it? > > Why would you expect that a modern 8-core Intel CPU would impede I/O in any measureable way as

On Mon, 2020-11-09 at 16:30 +0100, Thomas Bendler wrote: > Am Fr., 6. Nov. 2020 um 20:38 Uhr schrieb hw <hw at gc-24.de>: > > > [...] > > Some search results indicate that it's possible that other disks in the > > array have read errors and might prevent rebuilding for RAID 5. I don't > > know if there are read errors, and if it's read errors, I

On Nov 14, 2020, at 5:56 AM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 16:38 -0700, Warren Young wrote: >> On Nov 11, 2020, at 2:01 PM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: >>> I have yet to see software RAID that doesn't kill the performance. >> >> When was the last time you tried it? > > I'm currently using it, and the performance

in large raids, I label my disks with the last 4 or 6 digits of the drive serial number (or for SAS disks, the WWN). this is visible via smartctl, and I record it with the zpool documentation I keep on each server (typically a text file on a cloud drive). zpools don't actually care WHAT slot a given pool member is in, you can shut the box down, shuffle all the disks, boot back up and

On Sat, 2020-11-14 at 18:55 +0100, Simon Matter wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 16:38 -0700, Warren Young wrote: > > > On Nov 11, 2020, at 2:01 PM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > > > > I have yet to see software RAID that doesn't kill the performance. > > > > > > When was the last time you tried it? > > > > I'm currently using

On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 11:34 +0100, Thomas Bendler wrote: > Am Mi., 11. Nov. 2020 um 07:28 Uhr schrieb hw <hw at gc-24.de>: > > > [...] > > With this experience, these controllers are now deprecated. RAID > > controllers > > that can't rebuild an array after a disk has failed and has been replaced > > are virtually useless. > > [...] > >

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 3:38 PM Warren Young <warren at etr-usa.com> wrote: > On Nov 11, 2020, at 2:01 PM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > > > > I have yet to see software RAID that doesn't kill the performance. > > When was the last time you tried it? > > Why would you expect that a modern 8-core Intel CPU would impede I/O in > any measureable way as

On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 16:38 -0700, Warren Young wrote: > On Nov 11, 2020, at 2:01 PM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > > I have yet to see software RAID that doesn't kill the performance. > > When was the last time you tried it? I'm currently using it, and the performance sucks. Perhaps it's not the software itself or the CPU but the on-board controllers or other