similar to: Intermittent problem, likely disk IO related - mptscsih: ioc0: attempting task abort!

> -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Pyeron > Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2015 0:00 > > > -----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,

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

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Murphy > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 3:58 > > I think the panic is the consequence of drive write failure. > So the actual > problem is before the panic call trace. Most of the time it panics without any warning, but once there was: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jason Pyeron > > Sent: Sunday,

> -----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

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

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

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 command has caused the complete freeze/crash of the system. I tried it under multi-user

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.

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Murphy > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 20:48 > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Jason Pyeron wrote: > >> I'd post the entire dmesg somewhere > > > > http://client.pdinc.us/panic-341e97c30b5a4cb774942bae32d3f163.log > > At least part of the problem happens before this log starts. Feb 15 23:41:19

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''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

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

Hello, I'm running FreeBSD 9.0/amd64, pure ZFS setup, one Seagate disk ST2000NM0011 SN02 on LSI Logic (mpt) controller. Yes, I know that running one disk on RAID controller is a bit weird, I have to find yet if it is possible to connect disk to internal SATA controller. About two days ago, system became SLOW. Disk usage is constantly 100%, and sometimes I'm getting swap_pager:

Overnight I was running a zfs send | zfs receive (both within the same system / zpool). The system ran out of space, a drive went off line, and the system is degraded. This is a raidz2 array running on FreeBSD 8.1-STABLE #0: Sat Sep 18 23:43:48 EDT 2010. The following logs are also available at http://www.langille.org/tmp/zfs-space.txt <- no line wrapping This is what was running: #

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 Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Jason Pyeron <jpyeron at pdinc.us> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Chris Murphy >> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 20:48 >> >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Jason Pyeron wrote: >> >> I'd post the entire dmesg somewhere >> > >> >

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

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Murphy > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 23:38 > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Chris Murphy > >> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 20:48 > >> > >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Jason Pyeron wrote: > >> >>

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

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