I had Ubuntu 10.04 on a machine with SilImage and 3Ware raid controllers (Fakeraid) working in it just fine. Built a new machine with 10.04 as well then moved the whole array across (Cable for cable etc. - NO changes). The new machine 'sees' the controller and 2 drives per card in Disk Utility - all looks good, BUT the array does not seem to work as an array. Obviously the drives are full.
View 7 RepliesI have a NETGEAR ReadyNAS NV+ with four 1TB drives in a RAID-5 array. This is our primary file storage. This has previously been backed up to a hardware RAID-0 array directly attached to our Windows server. The capacity of this backup array is no longer sufficient. So the plan was, take a bunch of 200GB to 320GB drives (And a 750) I had kicking around, chuck them in a couple of old SCSI drive enclosures I have collecting dust, attach them via IDA/SATA-to-USB adaptors to a USB hub, attach that to the server, create a JBOD array spanning the disks, and back up the NAS to that. Performance is not an issue as this is just to be used for backup, with the idea being as near to zero cost as possible (Spend so far = NZ$100�ish).
The first hurdle I struck was Windows not supporting Dynamic Disks on USB drives (Required to create a spanned volume). At first I resisted using another machine (i.e. a machine running Ubuntu) as I didn't want to dedicate a piece of hardware to backing up the NAS. I then decided it would be acceptable to do this via a VM, which is what I've done.So I have 10.04 running under VMWare Server 2.0.2 under Windows Server 2008 R2. The disks are all presented to the VM. I wasn't sure if I was going to end up creating the array under LVM or something else, but I noticed Disk Utility has an option to create an array, so I tried that. When I add two 250GB drives, the array size is 500GB. When I then add a 160GB drive, the array size drops to 480GB. Huh? If I keep adding disks (Regardless of order) the final array size comes out at 1.8 TB, as per the attached screenshot. Now with the following drives, I expected something more like:
160 + 250 + 250+ 750 + 250 +200 + 200 + 250 + 320 + 250 + 320 = 3.2TB
Am I missing something or making a false assumption somewhere?
I've tried to install Fedora 11, both 32 and 64 on my main machine.It could not install as it stops on the first install window. I've already filed a bug but really haven't seen any feed back yet.The bug has something to do with Anaconda and the Raid array but I really can't tell.
I have an Intel Board (see signature). I am running intel raid software under W7 currently.It works fine. But, I'm wondering, when I attempt to install F!!, is my current raid set-up causing problems? Do I need to get rid of the intel raid software and use a Fedor/Linux raid program to manage the raid array??
Consider the following setup: Ubuntu system installed on a separate SSD for speed. An ubuntu software RAID array consisting of X number of physical HDD's for storage (RAID6 or RAID10). RAID setup is done during system install. If I suffer a total crash of the SSD and loose my system, will I be able to, using a new system disk, "reconnect" to the RAID array even if the "mothersystem" of the software RAID is lost? If yes, are there any particular config- or system files I need to backup to be able to rescue the array or will it just be recognized "out-of-the-box" when reinstalling ubuntu?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI am using Ubuntu 10.04 x64. I am not trying to install Ubuntu on a RAID 1 drive like all of the guides are for. I have a RAID 1 array that I am using for data storage. In windows it shows as a single array just fine. In linux it shows as 2 separate drives. I don't care how they show up to be honest I just have to data written to one drive written to the other automatically as well so my RAID isn't screwed up. Looking through different articles and forums I find a lot of stuff saying that it should show up under /dev/mapper/dxxx or something under /dev/mapper. All that shows up there for me is a device called control which doesn't seem to do something.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI just installed Ubuntu 10.10 64bit and wanted to get access to my nvidia RAID array. This array is working, and is NTFS formatted. But wasn't showing up through normal means in Ubuntu. (for example the NTFS Configuration Tool didn't display it) Here's what the system showed.
Code:
root@hermes:~# ls -l /dev/mapper/
total 0
crw------- 1 root root 10, 59 2010-11-03 22:39 control
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 2010-11-03 22:42 nvidia_dadijiag -> ../dm-0
[code]....
Is my mirror still in effect, or did i just mount one of the specific drives from the mirror?
I'm going a little bit crazy. I can't seem to remove my RAID 1 arrays. Any suggestions? I don't need to save data. The drives are empty. I'm upgrading to 4 2TB drives.Running Lucid Lynx server
Code:
jessica@nas:~$ cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10]
md2 : active raid1 sdb1[1]
976759936 blocks [2/1] [_U]
md0 : active raid1 sdd1[0]
[Code]...
i am trying to increase raid1 arraysize whcih is predefind,what i did i add two more drive in the raid but i could not increase raid array
exp:-
Creation Time : Wed Feb 2 18:14:56 2011
Raid Level : raid1
[code]....
Round two:I am trying to install a RAID 1 array on my system. I already have another RAID 1 array in there. I am using the BIOS RAID option to set up the array.Here's what dmraid -r tells me:
# dmraid -r
/dev/sda: pdc, "pdc_bajfedfacg", mirror, ok, 3906249984 sectors, data@ 0
/dev/sdb: pdc, "pdc_bajfedfacg", mirror, ok, 3906249984 sectors, data@ 0
[code]....
I have run Ubuntu in the past and then switched to OpenSUSE several months ago and set up raid 0 on a 500gb hard drive and 700gb hard drive (I went with openSUSE because of the graphical raid setup.)
My whole partition setup looks like this:
500gb Hard Drive:
750gb Hard Drive:
md0 is the two 400gb partitions on each drive for a total of 800gb space on my /home partition ext4 filesystem ( 380gb space used ) md1 is 100gb ext4 / partition.
all raid 0
Now I was wondering if I downloaded the alternate install cd for ubuntu ( as OpenSUSE has crashed for the second time because of bad updates ( starts, but gets to terminal only ) ) would I be able to keep my raid 0 home partition and wipe the rest of the each drive and setting up Ubuntu keeping all of my files and settings intact, just to install my programs I need all while keeping my old settings ( such as firefox bookmarks, virtual box utilities etc. ) intact.
From what I know it's possible, but I don't know much about the Ubuntu Alternate install disk ( as I have been dealing with dependancy hell on OpenSUSE ) but in OpenSUSE it wont let me keep the old raid setup ( md0 ) Im guessing it is possible to set up the home directory on a different hard drive and then going back into the live cd, editing the fstab, and switching it to md0, if this is even possible, or would I need to configure the driver on that system before I did that Oh and I forgot to mention that I've only been running 64bit operating systems.
System Specs: AMD Dual core at 2.8ghz ( overclocked, stable, cpu ran at full bore for a day. only reaching 120f) Nvidia 9600 gso 368mb ram, 4gb ram at 800mhz
I installed Debian 5.0.3 (Backport with .34 Kernel), because my server hardware (Dell PowerEdge R210) needs special firmware and drivers.However, the installation went quite smooth.I put the system on a RAID 1 Array with about 500 GB space.s I said the installation went well, however, it doesn't boot! No GRUB, nothing
View 4 Replies View RelatedJust setup with Debian 8 (LXDE) a few weeks ago. Raid10 array was preexisting.
Was working well. After booting I would need to go to the save as then would need to enter the root password and everything would be good.
Can't access the array.
Used to use the command $ mount /dev/dm-o /home/myspace/folder under Debian 7.6 to mount the array (no longer works).
blkd lists a /dev/md0 but instead of UUID it is PTUUID
[Code] .....
I installed RC1, and never touched the disks that were raided previously, and the attached image is what i see for my raid array that was previously working fine.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI want to make a RAID5 array with 4 2TB hard drives. One of the drives is full of data so I will need to start with a 3 disks and then once I copy the data from the 4th onto the array, I will then add the 4th drive. This will be my first experience with RAID. I've spent a few hours searching for info but most of what I have found is a bit over my head.
View 9 Replies View RelatedI'm just about to be given a Power Mac G5 (Late 2005) Dual 2.0GHz. I think this was the last G5 produced.I plan on using it as file server/NAS and will probably run 10.04 LTS (or maybe 8.04 LTS). I would install a SATA RAID controller and run 4 1TB drives in a RAID 5 configuration. The only thing I'm unsure about is choosing a compatible RAID controller. I need to find a RAID controller that
- Is PCIe
- Is compatible with both the Power Mac and Ubuntu PPC
- Does true hardware RAID
- Doesn't cost a fortune!
Am I right in thinking that the card might need to be open firmware compatible? If it makes any difference, I plan on running the OS from a separate 5th drive. I've found this on eBay. I asked the seller and he claims it supports true hardware RAID and says the chipset is a Silicon Image SIL3124. I does seem suspiciously cheap though...
After upgrading my ubuntu install my raid array is gone. The drives appear in blkid as "Linux raid member" and both have the same uuid. If I try to mount the drive via fstab I get a message that the drive is not ready or present. If I try to mount each of the two drives, one mounts successfully the other reports serious errors. Issuing a cat /proc/mdstat shows md_d0 as inactive.How can I re-establish my raid array? I have the data backed up so if I have to wipe out the disks to start over that's an option.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI currently have a nice HTPC setup that has been upgraded from distribution to distribution since 8.xx all the way up to 9.10 now. I just moved to a new place and it feels like the right time to do a fresh install of 10.04 into the HTPC. The problem is that I have a RAID 5 array in the system that has all my pictures, videos, music, etc. This OS is installed in a separate drive that is not part of the RAID array (I have 4 drives in the system, 3 in the array, 1 for the OS). what is the general process I should follow to do:
1. a fresh install of 10.04
2. do #1 while at the same time not losing my array (don't think I would anyway).
3. what to do after install to get the array back up and running and mounted.
I am using the 10.04.1 x64 Kubuntu live CD to install Kubuntu on my FakeRAID 0 array, I tell it not to install grub as i know it is still currently broken. the install goes flawlessly. However on first boot using my live grub CD unless i tell my computer to point to the CD it will hang (which it is told to boot from CD first so i'm not sure why it does.) When i tell it to boot to Linux, it will not boot saying the kernel is missing files (to much to sadly list, all i do not understand) then offers me a terminal to input "help" into for a list of Linux commands. Windows 7 pro x64 works just fine CD was downloaded VIA P2P if it matters
View 6 Replies View Relatedrepairing the MBR on my raid array. I have three disks, each with three paritions:root (sda1 sdb1 sdc1) 59GB swap (sda2 sdb2 sdc2) 1.12GB grub/boot (sda3 sdb3 sdc3) 298MB I have been able to get this running and it has been working fine for several months. A few days ago, I installed 10.04 to a USB stick but did not disable the hard drives at that point and so the MBR was overwritten. If I leave the USB stick in, it boots fine from that stick. However now I can't get the boot from the raid array to work correctly. I can do the following:Load 10.04 from the Live CD install mdadm recreate the root partition using
Code:
mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
I can mount and view the files on md0 with no problems. It's not corrupted in any way. When I installed, I followed the directions to make each of the grub drives bootable. However I don't know for sure whether grub was installed on each partition separately or if it was installed on the assembled partition only. I have tried using
Code:
sudo grub-install /dev/sda3
and got warnings, something to the effect
Code:
Cannot find a device for /boot/grub
no path or device specified
Auto-detection of a filesystem module failed
specify the module with option '--module' explicitly
I have also been able to get to the grub rescue prompt but my keyboard (wireless USB) is not recognized and so I can't type anything in at that point.
I've created a soft raid w/ 2x 1TB drives by using Disk Utility. (used for mythtv storage, not system, swap or anything else)
If I start the raid array in the Disk Utility mount and everything works as it should, but on reboot the raid array isn't started so I have to go into Disk Utility, start it, then run the mount.
How can I get it to start automatically?
I have acquired a dell 2850 poweredge server and installed ubuntu server onto only to find out we cant use linux for its intended use and need to uninstall remove ubuntu and it has a raid 5 array on the server.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have an Areca hardware RAID array that I'm trying to format & partition on a fresh Ubuntu 10.04 LTS installation. The OS drive is not on the RAID card, it's entirely separate. The RAID is a 6TB volume so I realize I have to use parted to format it, not fdisk (which I've always relied on).
My problem is that I can't figure out how to get parted to like my settings. It seems like everything I try gives me the warning "Warning: The resulting partition is not properly aligned for best performance." Here's what I'm doing:
Code:
(parted) p
Model: Areca ARC-1280-VOL#00 (scsi)[code].....
What start/end settings should I use to get a properly aligned partition? How do I know?I have tried a mix and match of 0, 0s, 1, 1s, -0, -0s, -1, -1s, 100% for my start/end with no success.
I had some issues with my RAID6 array (with 15 disks), where 5 disks got disconnected (each five disks is connected to the motherboard via 1 SATA cable), which brought down the RAID array. I fixed this problem via readding the disks and running the array:
Code:
mdadm -R /dev/md1
However, after rebooting, the array appears inactive, and I have to go through the same motions to fix this and make it active.
The array is present in the /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf, though also 2 other raid arrays (3 arrays total):
Code:
DEVICE partitions
# auto-create devices with Debian standard permissions
CREATE owner=root group=disk mode=0660 auto=yes
[code]...
I'm running a Debian homeserver, with a 3-disk (1GB each) raid 5 array using mdadm (the OS is on a separate disk).Now, smartmontools noticed some bad sectors on one of the disks, and I'm not sure what to do next (except for backup of valuable data).I found some articles on how to fix these sectors, but I'm unaware what the result on the whole array will be.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI had a raid 5 + lvm 2 array and lost a disk. While it was recovering the array, the power was down and recovery stopped. When I recovered the power and start the machine the array was unable to start, it was degraded and the states were different between disks. Every disk watched the array in a different way. I put you the states:
Quote:
/dev/sdd1
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
this 0 8 33 0 active sync /dev/sdc1
[code]....
The first part in /dev/sdc1 is the same for all the devices, I just post you the states. Another thing is tha all the devices say that there is no superblock It seems that 3 disks are "active sync" but the states of the others doesn't match between them. And /dev/sdd1 is spare, the disk I added manually at first to start the recovery process.
a server that was running a hardware isw raid on the system (root) disk. This was working just fine until I started getting sector errors on one of the disks. So, I shutdown the system and removed the failing drive and installed a new drive (same size). On reboot I went in to the intel raid setup and it did show the new drive and I was able to set it to rebuild the raid. So, continuing the reboot everything came up just fine except the raid 1 on the system disk. I have tried many times to get the system to rebuild the raid using dmraid, but to no avail it would not start a rebuild. In order to get the system back up and make sure that the disk was duplicated I was able to 'dd' the working disk to the new disk that was installed.At present when I look at the system it does not show up with a raid setup on the system disk ( this comprises the entire 1TB disk with w partitions sda1 as / and sda2 as swap).Problem:I have decided to forego the intel raid and just use mdadm. I have a test system setup to duplicate (not the software, but the disk partitions) the server setup.
Code:
[root@kilchis etc]# fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
I have an issue with a RAID array failing on boot. Seems like an issue with the file system. I get passed the RAID BIOS (and from what I can see, it looks alright there, all devices appear), but then the following error messages appear:
Code:
raid5: failed to run raid set md0
mdadm: failed to RUN_ARRAY /dev/md0 input/output error
mdadm: Not enough devices to start the array
and further down:
Code:
fsck.ext3: Invalid argument when trying to open /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
[code]....
I then login with root password to get a "Repair file system" prompt. Tried with fsck, but not working. It's 4x1TB in RAID5 on HighPoint RocketRAID 2300 4P SATA II/300, with Fedora 9. Not sure what other system info might be needed.
I have a 7-drive RAID array on my computer. Recently, my SATA PCI card died, and after going through multiple cards to find another one that worked with linux, I now can't assemble the array. The drives are no longer in the order they were in previously, and mdadm can't seem to reassemble the array. It says there are 2 drives and one spare, even though there were 7 drives and no spares. I know for a fact that none of the drives are corrupted, because one of the non-working RAID cards was still able to mount the array for a short period, but would loose the drives during resyncing (I later found out that the chipset on the card was had extremely limited linux support). I have tried running "mdadm --assemble --scan" and after the drive is partially assembled, I add the other drives with "mdadm --add /dev/md0 /dev/sdc1". These both return errors and will not complete on the new raid card.
Code:
aaron-desktop:~ aaron$ sudo mdadm --assemble /dev/md0
mdadm: /dev/md0 assembled from 2 drives and 1 spare - not enough to start the array.
[code]....
I have a raid array level 5 with metadata 1.2 made with mdadm. I put it on /etc/fstab to mount it on boot but it doesn't works because the raid is not detected on boot. I have a /etc/mdadm.conf like this:
Code:
ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid5 num-devices=3 metadata=1.2 name=0 UUID=afdfe00e:0d18a5eb:29aa54f9:8b422ee0
Just another thing... After the command
Code:
mdadm --detail --scan >> /etc/mdadm.conf
The mdadm.conf is like this:
Code:
ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid5 num-devices=3 metadata=1.02 name=0 UUID=afdfe00e:0d18a5eb:29aa54f9:8b422ee0
But I change manually the metadata version because the 1.02 give me a error. I don't know if it is a bug or what! Beside this. I have to put a line in /etc/rc.d/rc.local to assemble the array.
Code:
mdadm --assemble --scan --uuid=afdfe00e:0d18a5eb:29aa54f9:8b422ee0
And after that I already can mount it. Why the array is not detected on boot? Is because metadata type is prior to 1.00? Can I put the line I have on /etc/rc.d/rc.local to assemble the array in another file, that will be executed before /etc/fstab?
I'm not able to spin down my harddisks in raid array. I did hdparm -S 240 /dev/sdb and the same for the second hdd. Smaller values like 2 minutes work. I don't have log files on this disks. How can I determine, which processes are accessing these disks? I have apache and samba running. Nobody is accessing the server.
View 2 Replies View Related