similar to: C7 and mdadm

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "C7 and mdadm"

2019 Jan 29
2
C7, mdadm issues
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
2017 Sep 28
1
upgrade to 3.12.1 from 3.10: df returns wrong numbers
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
2019 Jan 29
2
C7, mdadm issues
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. >>>>
2019 Jan 30
4
C7, mdadm issues
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
2019 Jan 30
2
C7, mdadm issues
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:
2019 Jan 29
2
C7, mdadm issues
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
2019 Jan 30
1
C7, mdadm issues
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:
2019 Jan 30
3
C7, mdadm issues
Il 30/01/19 16:49, Simon Matter 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: >>>>>>>
2023 Mar 30
1
Performance: lots of small files, hdd, nvme etc.
Well, you have *way* more files than we do... :) Il 30/03/2023 11:26, Hu Bert ha scritto: > Just an observation: is there a performance difference between a sw > raid10 (10 disks -> one brick) or 5x raid1 (each raid1 a brick) Err... RAID10 is not 10 disks unless you stripe 5 mirrors of 2 disks. > with > the same disks (10TB hdd)? The heal processes on the 5xraid1-scenario >
2007 Aug 23
1
Transport endpoint not connected after crash of one node
Hi, I am on SLES 10, SP1, x86_64, running the distribution rpm's of ocfs: ocfs2console-1.2.3-0.7 ocfs2-tools-1.2.3-0.7 I have a two node ocfs2 cluster configured. One node died (manual reset), and the second started immediately to have problems on accessing the file system for the following reason from the logs: Transport endpoint not connected. a mounted.ocfs2 on the still living
2012 Nov 13
1
mdX and mismatch_cnt when building an array
CentOS 6.3, x86_64. I have noticed when building a new software RAID-6 array on CentOS 6.3 that the mismatch_cnt grows monotonically while the array is building: # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] md11 : active raid6 sdg[5] sdf[4] sde[3] sdd[2] sdc[1] sdb[0] 3904890880 blocks super 1.2 level 6, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [6/6] [UUUUUU]
2020 Sep 18
4
Drive failed in 4-drive md RAID 10
I got the email that a drive in my 4-drive RAID10 setup failed. What are my options? Drives are WD1000FYPS (Western Digital 1 TB 3.5" SATA). mdadm.conf: # mdadm.conf written out by anaconda MAILADDR root AUTO +imsm +1.x -all ARRAY /dev/md/root level=raid10 num-devices=4 UUID=942f512e:2db8dc6c:71667abc:daf408c3 /proc/mdstat: Personalities : [raid10] md127 : active raid10 sdf1[2](F)
2019 Jan 29
0
C7, mdadm issues
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. >>> >>> Anyway, mdadm --detail shows /dev/sdb1
2019 Jan 30
0
C7, mdadm issues
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 >>>>> has a *second* bad drive. Actually, I'm starting to wonder about
2019 Jan 30
0
C7, mdadm issues
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: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've no idea what
2019 Jan 30
0
C7, mdadm issues
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: >>>>>> Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >>>>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote:
2019 Jan 30
0
C7, mdadm issues
> 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
2019 Jan 31
0
C7, mdadm issues
> Il 30/01/19 16:49, Simon Matter 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:
2015 Aug 25
0
CentOS 6.6 - reshape of RAID 6 is stucked
Hello I have a CentOS 6.6 Server with 13 disks in a RAID 6. Some weeks ago, i upgraded it to 17 disks, two of them configured as spare. The reshape worked like normal in the beginning. But at 69% it stopped. md2 : active raid6 sdj1[0] sdg1[18](S) sdh1[2] sdi1[5] sdm1[15] sds1[12] sdr1[14] sdk1[9] sdo1[6] sdn1[13] sdl1[8] sdd1[20] sdf1[19] sdq1[16] sdb1[10] sde1[17](S) sdc1[21] 19533803520
2010 Mar 25
3
RAID 5 setup?
Can anyone provide a tutorial or advice on how to configure a software RAID 5 from the command-line (since I did not install Gnome)? I have 8 x 1.5tb Drives. -Jason