similar to: disk partitioning - I'm missing something simple, I think

Hi all, Please pardon my newbie-ness on this issue....I've a / partition which is full (quite suddenly, actually) and I'm not sure how to fix this. I've searched for uneeded logs, etc in /var/log and /tmp to no avail. The system is CentOS 5.2 and is not connected to the internet, serves as a local LAN server running stock stuff...sendmail, dovecot, apache..nothing strange or

Hi All, I just saw this in output from df -h: # df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00 131G 4.6G 120G 4% / /dev/sdc1 271G 141G 117G 55% /home /dev/sdd1 271G 3.9G 253G 2% /home/admin /dev/sda1 99M 20M 74M 22% /boot tmpfs 442M 0 442M 0% /dev/shm

I've recently setup a distributed/replicated cluster and have had an issue with seeing the directories on the cluster. Also, a df -h only shows data from one of the three bricks. The strange behavior doesn't end there. If I log into the 'primary' server as root, then do an ls on the client, the directories appear. However, df -h is still incorrect. I'm not sure exactly

Hi, This is my current config: /dev/md0 -> 200 MB -> sda1 + sdd1 -> /boot /dev/md1 -> 36 GB -> sda2 + sdd2 -> form VolGroup00 with md2 /dev/md2 -> 18 GB -> sdb1 + sde1 -> form VolGroup00 with md1 sda,sdd -> 36 GB 10k SCSI HDDs sdb,sde -> 18 GB 10k SCSI HDDs I have added 2 36 GB 10K SCSI drives in it, they are detected as sdc and sdf. What should I do if I

Hi, When I upgraded my cluster, df started returning some odd numbers for my legacy volumes. Newly created volumes after the upgrade, df works just fine. I have been researching since Monday and have not found any reference to this symptom. "vm-images" is the old legacy volume, "test" is the new one. [root at st-srv-03 ~]# (df -h|grep bricks;ssh st-srv-02 'df -h|grep

Are there any ways to improve/manage the speed of pvmove? Man doesn't show any documented switches for priority scheduling. Iostat shows the system way underutilized even though the lv whose pe's are being migrated is continuously being written (slowly) to. Thanks! jlc

Alessandro Baggi wrote: > Il 29/01/19 15:03, mark ha scritto: > >> I've no idea what happened, but the box I was working on last week has >> a *second* bad drive. Actually, I'm starting to wonder about that >> particulare hot-swap bay. >> >> Anyway, mdadm --detail shows /dev/sdb1 remove. I've added /dev/sdi1... >> but see both /dev/sdh1 and

Hello! I''m using ArchLinux with kernel Linux horus 3.10.5-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT. Mounting and unmounting takes a long time: # time mount -v /mnt/Archiv mount: /dev/sde1 mounted on /mnt/Archiv. mount -v /mnt/Archiv 0,00s user 0,16s system 1% cpu 9,493 total # sync && time umount -v /mnt/Archiv umount: /mnt/Archiv (/dev/sdd1) unmounted umount -v /mnt/Archiv 0,00s user

Ok guys & gals here is the scenario: 1.) Host RHEL 4 U3 2.6.9-34.0.2.EL 2.) OCFS2 latest version 3.) Successfully formatted & mounted OCFS2 filesystems on 2 nodes /dev/sdb1 /u02/oradata/usdev/voting /dev/sdc1 /u02/oradata/usdev/data01 /dev/sdd1 /u02/oradata/usdev/data02 /dev/sde1 /u02/oradata/usdev/data03 4.) Downloaded & installed ASMLib 2.0 on both nodes 5.) Ran

Alessandro Baggi wrote: > Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>> Il 29/01/19 15:03, mark ha scritto: >>> >>>> I've no idea what happened, but the box I was working on last week >>>> has a *second* bad drive. Actually, I'm starting to wonder about >>>> that particulare hot-swap bay. >>>>

On 01/30/19 03:45, Alessandro Baggi wrote: > Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: >> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>> Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>> Il 29/01/19 15:03, mark ha scritto: >>>>> >>>>>> I've no idea what happened, but the box I was working on last week

Hallo, linux-btrfs, First I create an array of 2 disks with mkfs.btrfs -d raid0 -m raid1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdd1 and mount it at /srv/MM. Then I fill it with about 1,6 TByte. And then I add /dev/sde1 via btrfs device add /dev/sde1 /srv/MM btrfs filesystem balance /srv/MM (it run about 20 hours) Then I work on it, copy some new files, delete some old files - all works well. Only df

Hello, I am on Ubuntu Server 13.04 with Linux 3.8. I''ve created a "single-raid" using /dev/sd{a,b,c,d}{1,3}. One of my hard drives has failed, I mean it''s materially dead. :~$ sudo btrfs filesystem show Label: none uuid: 40886f51-8c9b-4be1-8721-83bf5653d2a0 Total devices 5 FS bytes used 226.90GB devid 4 size 37.27GB used 31.01GB path /dev/sdd1

Alessandro Baggi wrote: > Il 30/01/19 14:02, mark ha scritto: >> On 01/30/19 03:45, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>> Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: >>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>> Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >>>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>>>> Il 29/01/19 15:03, mark ha scritto:

A user's system had a hard drive failure over the weekend. Linux RAID 6. I identified the drive, brought the system down (8 drives, and I didn't know the s/n of the bad one. why it was there in the box, rather than where I started looking...) Brought it up, RAID not working. I finally found that I had to do an mdadm --stop /dev/md0, then I could do an assemble, then I could add the new

Hi Guys, I'm fairly new to Linux and I'm trying to un install a hard drive from my Centos 5.1 box running KDE. When I built the PC, I installed two 500 gig maxtors in the tower, then I installed Centos. Now I've decided that I want to remove the slave drive and use it as an external backup drive - I am mounting it into one of those external drive cases with a built in fan. When I

On 06/25/2015 01:20 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > ...It's basically a way to assemble one arbitrary set of block devices > and then divide them into another arbitrary set of block devices, but > now separate from the underlying physical structure. > Regular partitions have various limitations (one big one on Linux > being that modifying the partition table of a disk with in-use

I've no idea what happened, but the box I was working on last week has a *second* bad drive. Actually, I'm starting to wonder about that particulare hot-swap bay. Anyway, mdadm --detail shows /dev/sdb1 remove. I've added /dev/sdi1... but see both /dev/sdh1 and /dev/sdi1 as spare, and have yet to find a reliable way to make either one active. Actually, I would have expected the linux

Alessandro Baggi wrote: > Il 30/01/19 16:33, mark ha scritto: > >> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >> >>> Il 30/01/19 14:02, mark ha scritto: >>> >>>> On 01/30/19 03:45, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>> >>>>> Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: >>>>> >>>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote:

Hi Folks, I've inherited an old RH7 system that I'd like to upgrade to CentOS6.1 by means of wiping it clean and doing a fresh install. However, the system has a software raid setup that I wish to keep untouched as it has data on that I must keep. Or at the very least, TRY to keep. If all else fails, then so be it and I'll just recreate the thing. I do plan on backing up