similar to: Replacing failed software RAID drive

I?ve posted this on the forums at https://www.centos.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=57926&p=244614#p244614 - posting to the list in the hopes of getting more eyeballs on it. We have a cluster of 23 HP DL380p Gen8 hosts running Kafka. Basic specs: 2x E5-2650 128 GB RAM 12 x 4 TB 7200 RPM SATA drives connected to an HP H220 HBA Dual port 10 GB NIC The drives are configured as one large

All of our Kafka clusters are fairly write-heavy. The cluster in question is our second-heaviest ? we haven?t yet upgraded the heaviest, due to the issues we?ve been experiencing in this one. Here is an iostat example from a host within the same cluster, but without the RAID check running: [root at r2k1 ~] # iostat -xdmc 1 10 Linux 3.10.0-327.13.1.el7.x86_64 (r2k1) 05/27/16 _x86_64_ (32 CPU)

I'm using Centos 4.5 right now, and I had a RAID 5 array stop because two drives became unavailable. After adjusting the cables on several occasions and shutting down and restarting, I was able to see the drives again. This is when I snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Please, someone with vast knowledge of how RAID 5 with mdadm works, tell me if I have any chance at all

>-----Original Message----- >From: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com >[mailto:xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Liang Yang >Sent: 2006年9月12日 8:57 >To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com >Subject: [Xen-users] Help: Xen HVM Domain can ONLY support four hard >drivesat most??? > >Hi, > >I have 5 SATA hard drives and I want to expose all these five

On 2016-05-25 19:13, Kelly Lesperance wrote: > Hdparm didn?t get far: > > [root at r1k1 ~] # hdparm -tT /dev/sda > > /dev/sda: > Timing cached reads: Alarm clock > [root at r1k1 ~] # Hi Kelly, Try running 'iostat -xdmc 1'. Look for a single drive that has substantially greater await than ~10msec. If all the drives except one are taking 6-8msec, but one is very

I did some additional testing - I stopped Kafka on the host, and kicked off a disk check, and it ran at the expected speed overnight. I started kafka this morning, and the raid check's speed immediately dropped down to ~2000K/Sec. I then enabled the write-back cache on the drives (hdparm -W1 /dev/sd*). The raid check is now running between 100000K/Sec and 200000K/Sec, and has been for several

CentOS 4.6 Hi All: I am now officially stumped. I have tried everything that can think of and I have googled until I am blue in the face and tried just about everything that I could find that looked the least bit like it might apply and still no (or at least partial) joy. I am going to cram as much information into this email as I can and hope that someone out there can either tell me what I am

Hi, I''m running OpenSuse 12.2 with kernel 3.5.3 HBA= LSI 1068e using the MPTSAS driver (patched) (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1379181/) SANOS1:/media # uname -a Linux SANOS1 3.5.3 #3 SMP Sun Sep 2 18:44:37 CEST 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux I''ve tried to simulate a disk replacement but it seems that now /dev/sdg is stuck in the btrfs pool (RAID10) SANOS1:/media #

>>>>> "Miloslav" == Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> writes: Miloslav> Hello, Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: Miloslav> "RAID-1 would be preferable" Miloslav> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). Miloslav> May I ask you

Hi, thank you for your reply. I'll continue inline... Dne 09.09.2020 v 3:15 John Stoffel napsal(a): > Miloslav> Hello, > Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: > Miloslav> "RAID-1 would be preferable" > Miloslav> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). >

The 9361-8i does support passthrough ( JBOD mode ). Make sure you have the latest firmware. On Wednesday, 09/09/2020 at 03:55 Miloslav H?la wrote: Hi, thank you for your reply. I'll continue inline... Dne 09.09.2020 v 3:15 John Stoffel napsal(a): > Miloslav> Hello, > Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: > Miloslav> "RAID-1

Hi All Currently i'm setting up a 5.4 server and try to create a 3rd raid device, when i run: $mdadm --create /dev/md2 -v --raid-devices=15 --chunk=32 --level=raid6 /dev/sdc /dev/sdd /dev/sde /dev/sdf /dev/sdg /dev/sdh /dev/sdi /dev/sdj /dev/sdk /dev/sdl /dev/sdm /dev/sdn /dev/sdo /dev/sdp /dev/sdq the device file "md2" is created and the raid is being configured. but somehow

>>>>> "Miloslav" == Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> writes: Miloslav> Hi, thank you for your reply. I'll continue inline... Me too... please look for further comments. Esp about 'fio' and Netapp useage. Miloslav> Dne 09.09.2020 v 3:15 John Stoffel napsal(a): Miloslav> Hello, Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs

Hi, folks, testing zfs. I'd created a zpoolz2, ran a large backup onto it. Then I pulled one drive (11-drive, one hot spare pool), and it resilvered with the hot spare. zpool status -x shows me state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices could not be used because the label is missing or invalid. Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state.

Hello, I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: "RAID-1 would be preferable" (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). May I ask you for the comments as from people around the Dovecot? We are using btrfs RAID-10 (/data, 4.7TB) on a physical Supermicro server with Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @

Hi there. I have 2 servers with this number of disks in each side: pve01:~# df | grep disco /dev/sdd 1.0T 9.4G 1015G 1% /disco1TB-0 /dev/sdh 1.0T 9.3G 1015G 1% /disco1TB-3 /dev/sde 1.0T 9.5G 1015G 1% /disco1TB-1 /dev/sdf 1.0T 9.4G 1015G 1% /disco1TB-2 /dev/sdg 2.0T 19G 2.0T 1% /disco2TB-1 /dev/sdc 2.0T 19G 2.0T 1%

Hello, I have installed ocfs2 without problem and use it for a RAC10gR2. Only Clusterware files are ocfs2 type. multipath is also used. When I issue : mounted.ocfs2 -f I have a strange result: Device FS Nodes /dev/sda ocfs2 Unknown: Bad magic number in inode /dev/sda1 ocfs2 pocrhel2, pocrhel1 /dev/sdb ocfs2 Not mounted /dev/sdf

I am running zfs-fuse on an Ubuntu 10.04 box. I have a dual mirrored pool: mirror sdd sde mirror sdf sdg Recently the device names shifted on my box and the devices are now sdc sdd sde and sdf. The pool is of course very unhappy about the mirrors are no longer matched up and one device is "missing". What is the proper procedure to deal with this? -brian -- This message posted from

Output df -i ------------------ Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on / /dev/sde 348548 348195 353 100% /ocfsa01 /dev/sdf 348548 348195 353 100% /ocfsa02 /dev/sdg 348548 348195 353 100% /ocfsa03 /dev/sdk 139410 138073 1337 100% /ocfsq01 Output df -kP ----------------------- Filesystem

> > Well, i''m using here the qla2340 on several boxes. It works > > with Xen 2.0 but noch with Xen 3.0. as part of SUSE Linux 10.0: > > Interesting. If the driver really doews work flawlessly in > Xen 2, then I think the culprit has to be interrupt routeing. > > Under Xen 3, does /proc/interrupts show you''re receiving interrupts? I cannot boot with