similar to: Strange problem with... ZFS? Disk? Controller?

After having massive problems with a supermicro X7DBE box using AOC-SAT2-MV8 Marvell controllers and opensolaris snv79 (same as described here: http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-66-233341-1) we just start over using new hardware and opensolaris 2008.05 upgraded to snv94. We used again a supermicro X7DBE but now with two LSI SAS3081E SAS controllers. And guess what? Now we get

Two days ago I installed a brand new SSDNow E50 series (Enterprise) disk on a server. I intend to move the OS there. I just did the physical install and copied a few files to and from it just to see if it was OK. I left it there, waiting for an opportunity to configure it to do real work. Now I have looked at it with smartctl -a and it gives me the following info: 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate

On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 11:25, Alessandro Baggi wrote: > Il 24/10/2016 14:05, Leonard den Ottolander ha scritto: >> On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 12:07 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >> > === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === >> > SMART Error Log not supported >> >> I reckon there's a <snip> between those lines. The line right after the >> first

I've got a 1Tb USB disc that appears to be dying - eg it took about 10 days (!) to run 'badblocks -nsv /dev/sdc' and it only did less than 2% in that time. Read access became _really_ slow. So there's definitely something amiss and I've got it offline. There's no drama about the content as I have other backups and I'm resigned to junking the thing, but I'm curious

Hi All, I am fairly certain that this disk is failing in my server, and I am replacing it straight away anyway. However, I'd appreciate the views of the list just to be sure as I value your opinion(s). I got these errors, once only so far, in /var/log/messages. This disk has / on it. Oct 5 08:34:47 server1 kernel: ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x7 SErr 0x0 action 0x0 Oct 5 08:34:47

> -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Pyeron > Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2015 22:54 > > NOTE: this is happening on Centos 6 x86_64, > 2.6.32-504.3.3.el6.x86_64 not Centos 5 > > Dell PowerEdge 2970, Seagate SATA drive, non-raid. > > I have this server which has been dying randomly, with no logs. Here is a console picture. http://i.imgur.com/ZYHlB82.jpg

hi All, I''m new on the list. System: Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 13.04 Release: 13.04 Codename: raring Linux ctu 3.8.0-19-generic #30-Ubuntu SMP Wed May 1 16:35:23 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux The symptom is the same with Saucy 3.9 kernel. ii btrfs-tools 0.20~git20130524~650e656-0daily13~raring1 amd64 Checksumming Copy on

Hi All, I know many of us here manage RAID on our Centos based servers so this may be of interest to us all. I ordered three new "Enterprise hard drives" this month from a well known UK online retailer. The drives arrived as new in their anti-static packaging. Before using one of the drives in a mission critical hardware raid I checked the SMART attributes and was amazed at what I

Il 17/01/2016 19:36, Alessandro Baggi ha scritto: > Il 17/01/2016 18:46, Brandon Vincent ha scritto: >> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Matt Garman >> <matthew.garman at gmail.com> wrote: >>> I'm not sure what's going on with your drive. But if it were mine, >>> I'd want >>> to replace it. If there are issues, that long smart check

I finally fixed my drive error problem. This has been going on quite a while. I've posted before with no success on getting this fixed. I was getting these errors. Dec 4 04:03:10 bikesn4x4s kernel: hda: dma_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error } Dec 4 04:03:10 bikesn4x4s kernel: hda: dma_intr: error=0x84 { DriveStatusError BadCRC } And now for the amazing smartctl -a

NOTE: this is happening on Centos 6 x86_64, 2.6.32-504.3.3.el6.x86_64 not Centos 5 Dell PowerEdge 2970, Seagate SATA drive, non-raid. I have this server which has been dying randomly, with no logs. I had a tail -f over ssh for a week, when this just happened. Feb 8 00:10:21 thirteen-230 kernel: mptscsih: ioc0: attempting task abort! (sc=ffff880057a0a080) Feb 8 00:10:21 thirteen-230 kernel:

In a server with raid1 a first smart error was reported. Smart attributes: SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16 Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 200 200 051 Pre-fail Always - 0 3 Spin_Up_Time

On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Matt Garman <matthew.garman at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure what's going on with your drive. But if it were mine, I'd want > to replace it. If there are issues, that long smart check ought to turn up > something, and in my experience, that's enough for a manufacturer to do a > warranty replacement. I agree with Matt. Go

I'm not used to using smartd, but have a new set of systems that don't have any sort of RAID on them, so I enabled smartd (18 systems 4 SATA drives each). Running CentOS 5.4 64-bit .. One of them has emailed me twice(despite it saying it would only email me once) saying it has 1 Offline uncorrectable sectors But when I try to find more information, smartctl seems to think everything is

Hi, On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 12:07 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote: > === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === > SMART Error Log not supported I reckon there's a <snip> between those lines. The line right after the first should read something like: SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED or "FAILED" for that matter. If not try running smartctl -t short

Hi all. I have one server with problem in maillog: Feb 6 06:46:26 host1 postfix/qmgr[24296]: fatal: qmgr_move: update active/4DE015AC536 time stamps: Stale NFS file handle Feb 6 06:46:27 host1 postfix/master[4487]: warning: process /usr/libexec/postfix/qmgr pid 24296 exit status 1 Feb 6 06:46:27 host1 postfix/master[4487]: warning: /usr/libexec/postfix/qmgr: bad command startup -- throttling

I've seen similar cases where a USB drive appears to fail but the SMART reports success. The most recent was a 500 GB disk which had internally a Seagate Barracuda SATA drive. It appeared to work well until I sent it a largish (7GB) tarball. As well as SMART I ran a surface check and exercise, all passed. The tar kept failing. I can't test further, the disk has been broken up for

On 19/03/18 14:01, Morgan Read wrote: > Hello list > > I've been running the following command, first in fc20 and then now > (since the beginning of March) in fc26: > now=$(date +"%Y%m%d-%H%M"); sudo rsync -ahuAESX -vi /home/ > /run/media/readlegal/Backup/home > > /run/media/readlegal/Backup/rsync-changes_$now > > Since the move to fc26, this

Hi, Recently I've decided to play with gjournal. Main reason was a promise of avoiding full fsck check after unclean shutdown. I've successfuly configured gjournal on existing filesystems (all UFS). And then it happened - my system had a power failure. After boot, it forced me to run fsck manualy. Nothing special, I did it before... But this time it failed on gjournaled disks.

Il 24/10/2016 14:05, Leonard den Ottolander ha scritto: > Hi, > > On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 12:07 +0200, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >> === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === >> SMART Error Log not supported > > I reckon there's a <snip> between those lines. The line right after the > first should read something like: > > SMART overall-health self-assessment