I''ve somehow got the geometry of the new disks set wrong, even though one of them works. The geometry of the two is set the same. One of them has suitable partitions, and works. One can''t be set for suitable partitions since they don''t fit (even though the other one has them). It can''t be attached to the mirror because it''s too small. Anybody know what the proper geometry is for a WD1600BEKT-6-1A13? It''s not even in the data sheets any more! And why doesn''t using "type" in "format" come up with the right data? I select SCSI data, and it comes up with this wrong (1/8 the right size) geometry. This is the second disk, the one with the wrong geometry but the right (impossible) partitions. As you see, cylinder numbers in use exceed claimed physical cylinders: Volume name = < > ascii name = <ATA-WDCWD1600BEKT-6-1A13 cyl 152615 alt 2 hd 16 sec 128> pcyl = 21545 ncyl = 21543 acyl = 2 bcyl = 0 nhead = 16 nsect = 128 Part Tag Flag Cylinders Size Blocks 0 root wm 1 - 152614 149.04GB (152614/0/0) 312553472 1 swap wu 0 0 (0/0/0) 0 2 backup wu 0 - 152616 149.04GB (152617/0/0) 312559616 3 unassigned wm 0 0 (0/0/0) 0 4 unassigned wm 0 0 (0/0/0) 0 5 unassigned wm 0 0 (0/0/0) 0 6 usr wm 1 - 152614 149.04GB (152614/0/0) 312553472 7 unassigned wm 0 0 (0/0/0) 0 8 boot wu 0 - 0 1.00MB (1/0/0) 2048 9 alternates wm 0 0 (0/0/0) 0 -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b at dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
On Fri, February 19, 2010 13:09, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:> Anybody know what the proper geometry is for a WD1600BEKT-6-1A13? It''s > not even in the data sheets any more!One further point -- I can''t seem to enter the geometry the second disk has manually for the first; when I enter 152615 for number of sectors, it says this is out of range. -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b at dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 01:15:17PM -0600, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:> > On Fri, February 19, 2010 13:09, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: > > > Anybody know what the proper geometry is for a WD1600BEKT-6-1A13? It''s > > not even in the data sheets any more!any such geometry has been entirely fictitious since ZBR disks emerged in, oh, about 1990.> One further point -- I can''t seem to enter the geometry the second disk > has manually for the first; when I enter 152615 for number of sectors, it > says this is out of range.It''s probably reading some garbage as a label. dd 0''s over the start of it and try again, perhaps with a hotplug or reboot in between if necessary. -- Dan. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 194 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20100220/ed28df17/attachment.bin>
On Fri, February 19, 2010 16:21, Daniel Carosone wrote:> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 01:15:17PM -0600, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: >> >> On Fri, February 19, 2010 13:09, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: >> >> > Anybody know what the proper geometry is for a WD1600BEKT-6-1A13? >> It''s >> > not even in the data sheets any more! > > any such geometry has been entirely fictitious since ZBR disks emerged > in, oh, about 1990.Sure, but there still have to be values put into format to satisfy it! Had to look up "ZBR", but indeed I guessed correctly that it was the transition to variable numbers of sector per track (to give much more uniform linear size to each sector) that you were referring to. Yep, totally and utterly fictitious.>> One further point -- I can''t seem to enter the geometry the second disk >> has manually for the first; when I enter 152615 for number of sectors, >> it >> says this is out of range. > > It''s probably reading some garbage as a label. dd 0''s over the start > of it and try again, perhaps with a hotplug or reboot in between if > necessary.The details of interaction between what''s already written there, and what can be written there by the tools, are driving me quite insane (as Cindy said the other day!). I found some of my earlier tests weren''t valid since I apparently omitted writing out the labels in a couple of key cases. Now I''ve got two slightly different geometries going again, but they''re working in the mirror (the old disks in the mirror are much smaller, so anything that works and gives access to over 50% of the new disk will attach to the mirror; but I want to get it "right" before detaching the old disks) . -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b at dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info