similar to: Hard disk activity will not die down

> ----- Original Message ----- > From: Chris Pemberton [mailto:pchris.bci at gmail.com] > To: centos at centos.org > Sent: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 13:28:27 -0600 > Subject: [CentOS] Hard disk activity will not die down > > I updated my backup server this weekend from CentOS 7 to CentOS 8. > OS disk is SSD, /dev/md0 are two 4TB WD mechanical drives. > No hardware was changed.

Hi, Ext4 is (slowly) initializing group blocks as far as I can remember. Patience should do the trick :) HTH, Le 3 f?vrier 2020 20:28:27 GMT+01:00, Chris Pemberton <pchris.bci at gmail.com> a ?crit : >I updated my backup server this weekend from CentOS 7 to CentOS 8. >OS disk is SSD, /dev/md0 are two 4TB WD mechanical drives. >No hardware was changed. > >1. wiped all drives

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

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

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:

Received the following message in mail to root: Message 257: >From root at desk4.localdomain Tue Oct 28 07:25:37 2014 Return-Path: <root at desk4.localdomain> X-Original-To: root Delivered-To: root at desk4.localdomain From: mdadm monitoring <root at desk4.localdomain> To: root at desk4.localdomain Subject: DegradedArray event on /dev/md0:desk4 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 07:25:27

Thanks for all the responses. A little more digging revealed: md0 is made up of two 250G disks on which the OS and a very large /var partions resides for a number of virtual machines. md1 is made up of two 2T disks on which /home resides. Challenge is that disk 0 of md0 is the problem and it has a 524M /boot partition outside of the raid partition. My plan is to back up /home (md1) and at a

dmesg is not reporting any issues. The /proc/mdstat looks fine. md0 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0] X blocks [2/2] [UU] however /var/log/messages says: smartd[3392] Device /dev/sda 20 offline uncorrectable sectors The machine is running fine.. raid array looks good - what is up with smartd? THanks, Jerry

Hello, i have a little problem. Our server has an broken RAID. # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] md0 : active raid1 sda1[2](F) sdb1[1] 2096064 blocks [2/1] [_U] md2 : active raid1 sda3[2](F) sdb3[1] 1462516672 blocks [2/1] [_U] md1 : active raid1 sda2[0] sdb2[1] 524224 blocks [2/2] [UU] unused devices: <none> I have remove the partition: # mdadm --remove

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:

Is there a reason why after a software raid install (from kickstart) that md1 is always unclean. md0 seems fine. boot screen says md1 is dirty and cat /proc/mdstat show md1 as being rebuilt. Any ideas? Jerry --------------- my kickstart -------------- echo "bootloader --location=mbr --driveorder=$HD1SHORT --append=\"rhgb quiet\" " >

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: >>>>>>>

I am setting up a Centos 6.5 box to host some Openvz containers. I have a 120gb SSD I am going to use for boot, / and swap. Should allow for fast boots. Have a 4TB drive I am going to mount as /backup and use to move container backups too etc. The remaining four 3TB drives I am putting in a software RAID 10 array and mount as /vz and all the containers will go there. It will have by far the

I have configured 2x 500G sata HDD as Software RAID1 with three partitions md0,md1 and md2 with md2 as 400+ gigs Now it is almost 36 hours the status is cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1] md0 : active raid1 hdb1[1] hda1[0] 104320 blocks [2/2] [UU] resync=DELAYED md1 : active raid1 hdb2[1] hda2[0] 4096448 blocks [2/2] [UU] resync=DELAYED md2 : active raid1

Hi List, What this means? md: syncing RAID array md0 md: minimum _guaranteed_ reconstruction speed: 1000 KB/sec/disc. md: using maximum available idle IO bandwidth (but not more than 200000 KB/sec) for reconstruction. md: using 128k window, over a total of 2096384 blocks. md: md0: sync done. RAID1 conf printout: --- wd:2 rd:2 disk 0, wo:0, o:1, dev:sda2 disk 1, wo:0, o:1, dev:sdb2 sd 0:0:0:0:

Hi list, I'm new with UEFI and GPT. For several years I've used MBR partition table. I've installed my system on software raid1 (mdadm) using md0(sda1,sdb1) for swap, md1(sda2, sdb2) for /, md2 (sda3,sdb3) for /home. From several how-to concerning raid1 installation, I must put each partition on a different md devices. I've asked times ago if it's more correct create the

hi all! back in Aug several of you assisted me in solving a problem where one of my drives had dropped out of (or been kicked out of) the raid1 array. something vaguely similar appears to have happened just a few mins ago, upon rebooting after a small update. I received four emails like this, one for /dev/md0, one for /dev/md1, one for /dev/md125 and one for /dev/md126: Subject: DegradedArray

On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 16:46 -0800, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 12/04/2014 05:45 AM, David McGuffey wrote: > In practice, however, there's a bunch of information you didn't provide, > so some of those steps are wrong. > > I'm not sure what dm-0, dm-2 and dm-3 are, but they're indicated in your > mdstat. I'm guessing that you made partitions, and then made

I am running software RAID1 on a somewhat critical server. Today I noticed one drive is giving errors. Good thing I had RAID. I planned on upgrading this server in next month or so. Just wandering if there was an easy way to fix this to avoid rushing the upgrade? Having a single drive is slowing down reads as well, I think. Thanks. Feb 7 15:28:28 server smartd[2980]: Device: /dev/sdb