Server :: Can't Assemble RAID5 With Mdadm
Jun 14, 2011
I cant seem to get my RAID 5 (consisting of 8 1tb hard drives) assembled for some reason and I have no idea why and cant find any solutions online. Ill go ahead and show what my problem is:
here is all my hard drives:
Code:
server:~$ sudo fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sda: 10.2 GB, 10242892800 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 1245 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x0004f041
[Code]....
So as you can see the array for those last four look fine however for the first four it marks the last four drives as faulty for some reason. I am kind of clueless to do from this point on honestly, I have data on this array that I'd really like to save.
View 3 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Aug 6, 2010
I'm trying to get mdadm to assemble all my drives with help of uuid.
When I use
$ sudo mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sdd
mdadm: /dev/md0 has been started with 3 drives.
So the setup works. But I want to do it the proper way with UUID.
$ sudo blkid
[Code]...
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 21, 2011
trying to troubleshoot an issue i'm having with MDADM I have a raid 5 array consisting of 5 2tb Western Digital Green drives. It has been working fine for the last 6-7 months but recently has stopped working. After rebooting i get an error something like "unable to mount /mnt/storage" which is the filesystem on the raid array the raid array is /dev/md0 when i do a " sudo mdadm --assemble --scan" i get the error mdadm: /dev/md0 assembled from 3 drives - not enough to start the array all the drives are there and i can see the correct partition information if i load them up in parted.
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 21, 2011
trying to troubleshoot an issue i'm having with MDADM.I have a raid 5 array consisting of 5 2tb Western Digital Green drives.It has been working fine for the last 6-7 months but recently has stopped working.After rebooting i get an error something like "unable to mount /mnt/storage" which is the filesystem on the raid array the raid array is /dev/md0.when i do a " sudo mdadm --assemble --scan" i get the error mdadm: /dev/md0 assembled from 3 drives - not enough to start the array.all the drives are there and i can see the correct partition information if i load them up in parted.i didnt get an emails or notification on if the drives failed, so i'm running a smart check on them now
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 18, 2010
I have an mdadm/lvm2 volume with 4 HDs that I created in Ubuntu 10.04. I just upgraded the computer to Ubuntu 10.10.
I redid the mdadm commands to get volume up and running, did mdadm --detail --scan > /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf to get the configuration file.
But now, every time I reboot, it tells me that the volume is not ready. /proc/mdstat says that I always have one disk of the volume "inactive" as md_d127. I need to stop this volume and reassemble the whole thing to get it working.
This is what I get out of mdadm --detail --scan and put inside /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf:
And this is my /proc/mdstat on boot:
I need to do mdadm -S /dev/md_d127, mdadm -S /dev/md127, mdadm -A --scan to get this volume working again.
This did not happen with Ubuntu 10.04. I'm really fearing the loss of my raid5 data now.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jun 30, 2011
I know you can fail and then remove a drive from a RAID5 array. This leaves the array in a degraded state.
How can you remove a drive and convert the array to just a regular, clean array?
View 9 Replies
View Related
May 3, 2010
Created my own file server/nas, but get stuck in a problem after couple of months. I have a server with 4x 1,5tb disks, all connected to sata ports and 1 40gb ata133 disk running ubuntu 9.10 x64 amd. I've created a raid5 array using mdadm. It all worked great for couple of months but lately the raid5 array is degraded. disk sdd1 is faulting every few days. I have checked the drive but it is fine. If I re-add the disk and wait for 6 hours my raid5 array is all fine again, but after a few shutdowns, it is degraded.
my mdadm detail:
Quote:
root@ubuntu: sudo mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 00.90
Creation Time : Mon Dec 14 13:00:43 2009
Raid Level : raid5
[Code].....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Nov 2, 2010
I have ubuntu server 10.04 on a server with 2.8ghz 1gb ddr2 with the os on a 2gb cf card attached to the IDE channel and a software raid5 with 4 x 750gb drives. On a samba share using these drives I am only getting around 5 MB/s connected via wireless N at 216mbps and my router and server both having gigabit ports. Is a raid 5 supposed to be that slow? I was seeing speeds of anywhere from 20-50MB/s from other people and am just wondering what i am doing wrong to be so far below that.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Mar 6, 2010
i was adding another disk to my raid 5, all was going well it started the reshape, got past the critical zone, worked for 20mins, but now it seems to have crashed.When i cat /proc/mdstat, or mdadm -D /dev/md0, those programes hang and dont print anything or return.from my kern.log i can see that there was an error on a disk, the raid array removed it, was going to continue the reshape but finished immediately. Anyone know what i should do?
Mar 6 16:20:26 Aries kernel: [1931119.599107] md: reshape of RAID array md0
Mar 6 16:20:26 Aries kernel: [1931119.599107] md: minimum _guaranteed_ speed: 1000 KB/sec/disk.
Mar 6 16:20:26 Aries kernel: [1931119.599107] md: using maximum available idle IO bandwidth (but not more
[code]....
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jul 27, 2010
after a failed upgrade from 9.10 to 10.04 I had to format my computer and do a clean install of 10.04, and now my mdadm raid5 array wont start.my array is called "The Library", and i believe the space between "The" and "Library" is causing the command disk utility uses to start the array to fail.The exact error isAn error occurred while performing an operation on "The Library" (RAID-5 Array): The operation failed
Error assembling array: mdadm exited with exit code 1: mdadm: unrecognised word on ARRAY line: Library
mdadm: unrecognised word on ARRAY line: Library
[code]....
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 13, 2011
My fileserver initially had 3 1TB drives in RAID 5 configured with mdadm as /dev/md1. (System root is a mirrored raid on /dev/md0) I went to go add a 4th 1TB drive to /dev/md1 and grow the raid 5 accordingly. I was initially following this guide: [URL] but ran into issues on the 3rd and 4th commands. I've been trying a few things to remedy the issue since, but no luck. The drive seems to have been added to /dev/md1 properly, but I can't get the filesystem to resize to 3TB. I also am not entirely sure how /dev/md1p1 got created, but it appears to be the primary partition on the logical device /dev/md1.
Relevent information:
Code:
fdisk -l /dev/md1
Disk /dev/md1: 3000.6 GB, 3000606523392 bytes
2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 732569952 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 65536 bytes / 196608 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xda4939fa .....
The filesystem originated as ext3, I believe its showing up as ext2 in some of these results because I disabled the journal when doing some initial troubleshooting. Not sure what the issue is, but I didn't want to blindly perform operations on the filesystem and risk losing my data.
View 9 Replies
View Related
Jul 19, 2011
This is the error message I'm getting when trying to Format the mdadm RAID5 created with 4 drives
Code:
Error creating partition: helper exited with exit code 1: In part_add_partition: device_file=/dev/md1, start=0, size=6001196531712, type=
Entering MS-DOS parser (offset=0, size=6001196531712)
MSDOS_MAGIC found
found partition type 0xee => protective MBR for GPT
Exiting MS-DOS parser
[Code]...
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jun 21, 2011
I've been playing with this for hours, and have been unable to figure it out. I tried to convert my RAID5 array of 4 active disks and 1 spare to a RAID6 with 5 active disks.
I did this:
Code:
mdadm --grow /dev/md4 --raid-devices 5 --level 6
Here is what I have on /dev/md4:
Code:
/dev/sde1 active
/dev/sdg1 active
/dev/sdj1 active
/dev/sdf1 active
removed
/dev/sdh5 spare
code....
but it tells me that /dev/sde is busy, and then that it has a bad superblock (From what I've read, I'm sure the bad superblock is just because of the "busy" message). I've tried this with the -f option, too, with no luck.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Feb 15, 2010
I have a problem with my mdadm RAID. I wanted to know if anyone had any experience with shrinking RAID5 arrays. I was growing the array from 5 to 6 devices however the grow got interrupted and it has recovered to 5 drives. The 6th drive is toast and I am unable to re add it to the system. I would like to drive the device listed as "removed". I have tried mdadm /dev/md0 --remove detached and failed with no success. I am running Ubuntu kernel 2.6.28-11 and mdadm is v3.1.1.
Here is output of a "mdadm -D dev/md0"
/dev/md0:
Version : 0.90
Creation Time : Wed Jan 12 00:46:41 2009
Raid Level : raid5
Array Size : 4883812480 (4657.57 GiB 5001.02 GB)
Used Dev Size : 976762496 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB)
Raid Devices : 6
Total Devices : 5
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Update Time : Mon Feb 15 20:25:07 2010
State : active, degraded
Active Devices : 5
Working Devices : 5
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 64K
UUID : 74fa5199:84b88e81:4ae0fbae:92643084
Events : 0.1331010
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 16 0 active sync /dev/sdb
1 8 32 1 active sync /dev/sdc
2 8 48 2 active sync /dev/sdd
3 8 0 3 active sync /dev/sda
4 8 64 4 active sync /dev/sde
5 0 0 5 removed
cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md0 : active raid5 sdb[0] sde[4] sda[3] sdd[2] sdc[1]
4883812480 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [6/5] [UUUUU_]
unused devices: <none>
View 4 Replies
View Related
Feb 18, 2011
I am getting really frustrated with trying to get my RAID5 working again. I had a RAID5 array built with 4 of the Western Digital 1.5tb "Advanced Format" drives, WD15EARS. However, when copying 1.5gb dvd encoded files to the drive, I was getting speeds of ~2mb/s. When researching how to make this faster, I came across all the posts about the Advanced Format drives and how that was causing a lot of issues for a lot of people. It looked like the solution was simple enough: partition starting at sector 64 or 2048 or whatever and then recreate the RAID. However, this is not working for me.
Here are my computer specs:
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-EP43-DS3L LGA 775 Intel P43 ATX
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Wolfdale 3.0GHz 6MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W
RAM: 4gb DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500)
Video card: ASUS GeForce 9600GT 512MB 256-bit
Linux: 10.04
[Code].....
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 25, 2010
I have an old Athlon XP 3000 machine that I keep around as a file server.It's currently got three 1TB drives which I had setup as mdadm raid 5 on FC10. The machine's original drive held the superblock for the raid array and it just had a massive heart attack. I've searched, my biggest source being URL...I can't tell if I can reassemble the superblock info lost with the original hard drive or if I've lost it all...
View 9 Replies
View Related
Feb 2, 2010
Something weird happened last night and my raid5 failed. I am trying to re activate it and see if my data is dead or what. When I run mdadm -Asv /dev/md0 I get
Code:
mdadm: looking for devices for /dev/md0
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/dm-1: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/dm-1 has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/dm-0: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/dm-0 has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sde2: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sde2 has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sde1: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sde1 has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sde: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sde has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sdd: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sdd has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sdc: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sdc has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sdb: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sdb has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sda: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sda has wrong uuid.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jan 17, 2011
Relatively inexperienced user using Linux/ubuntu. Not too savvy I admit and like to use GUI as much as possible. Not a great fan of the Terminal window... I have installed a couple weeks ago Ubuntu 10.10 (Desktop Edition) using Alternative install disk (don't ask why!) on 4Gb usb stick. Working fine except one thing with the raid array. I have created a raid5 array made of 6 drives using GUI (Disk Utility). After an expansion of the array (or was it a reinstall of the OS, I can't remember exactly?) the array does not autostart anymore. Of course nor does it automount anymore.
THE WEIRD THING is that I can still start it MANUALLY from the "Disk Utility" GUI after two tries. And it works just fine thereafter!!! The first time i try to start it gives an error (something about /dev/md0_127 being not ready or buisy). THE SECOND TRY ALWAYS WORKS like a charm, the array starts and i can mount it just fine. Here is a screenshot: I have also noticed that there is no entry in fstab for /dev/md0 although I can manually mount it using the same Disk Utility GUI. That is strange to me. Is it normal? i could easily add it manually but Ubuntu it won't boot anymore (i tried and failed, hence the reinstall). I tried for two weeks to find a solution browsing on different forums but the problem is beyond my expertise...
BELOW are further details about my configuration mdadm.conf, fstab, fdisk -l result and other info. I don=t want to loose my data but it would be nice to make this thing work and be able to access my fileserver via vnc instead of having to keep it connected to a lcd monitor as now. This is the blkid result:
[Code]...
View 3 Replies
View Related
Mar 12, 2011
I'm trying to find out which one is safer when it comes down to recovery process in case of a drive failure
A RAID5 created in mdadm
or
a Stripe RAID created on pure LVM
the RAID is purely for data storage for a SAMBA server, the OS will reside on its own drive.Ideally the RAID physical hard drives should be re-build on another machine in case of catastrophic server failure (mother board problem, or any other random problems as an example)I can't decide which of the 2 software RAID method is more convenient and safest, don't care about performance, it'll be a dedicated server for mass storage, it's going to mirror other 3 file servers on fakeRAIDs (dmraid), it's simply a redundant backup for the backups
The important goal here is portability.from what've read it appears that LVM might be more portable?but according to some dated (2009) info the mdadm seems to be a bit buggy when it comes to rebuilding the array, yet LVM doesn't appear that safe either which one would you pick for ease to rebuild on catastrophic failures?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 17, 2011
One of the disks in my RAID5 arrays started acting up, giving me some I/O buffer errors and making the RAID stop. disk info
Code:
=== START OF INFORMATION SECTION ===
Device Model: WDC WD10EARS-00Y5B1
Serial Number: WD-WMAV51466805
Firmware Version: 80.00A80
[Code]...
View 9 Replies
View Related
Jan 9, 2010
I have no drive failures but just need to recreate a raid5 set as the next free MD disk number. Originally I built a temp OS of debian on a single drive and had 4x2TB drives in a raid5 software array (MD0) this worked fine and allowed me to move all data to it, and remove our old fileserver. I have now pulled out the 4 x 2TB Raid 5 drives and created a new OS on two new 80GB drives, partioned as follows,
MD0 is now 250mb Raid1 as /boot
MD1 is 4GB Raid1 Swap
MD2 is 76GB Raid1 as /
If I turn off and push back in the 4x2TB drives I cannot see a MD3. I presume I would need to create a MD3 from these 4 drives but I dont want to mess things up as its live data. So im here asking for help, or a bit of hand holding to get it done right.
PS - Its a Debian Lenny 5.0.3 Raid1 fresh install replacing a Debian Lenny 5.0.3 on a single disk.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Oct 29, 2010
I've had software RAID 5 arrays for a while now, so they were set up before a RAID array could be partitioned. I had two separate RAID 5 arrays on the same set of drives. One was for / and the other for /home. I moved the / to an SSD and figured I'd expand the other RAID array by failing a drive, repartitioning it then adding it back in. After repeating for the remaining drives, I could then expand the RAID array to use the full size of the drives.
Partway through the second drive being added back in, the RAID array stopped with a kernel error. The drive I was adding and another drive both showed as failed. I couldn't restart the array so I copied the failed drive (Seagate's SeaTools did show it as faulty, but without SMART being tripped) to a new one and tried again. dd_rescue reported the drive copied correctly but I still couldn't restart the array.
So I tried the old standby of recreating the array. This allows me to start it but the ext3 file system won't mount. So I then tried my script (listed in another thread) to try every combination of drives to assemble the array and mount the file system. Still no luck.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jun 8, 2010
I broke down and spent some $$ on a new server for home use. I mostly do technical research and testing, plus store movies and music. My interests are mainly in the IET iscsitarget performance.
Server system consists of an AMD Phenom II 550, 8GB RAM, 1x 80GB system partition, and a LVM-vg0 software raid5, running Ubuntu 10.04 server x64.
The vg0 consists of 3 x 500GB 7200RPM SATA drives (mdadm) sliced up with 100GB for VBox VMs, one slice is an iscsitarget for a Windows 2k3 server, and another slice iscsitarget for a desktop.
With this setup, the win2k3 server is booted from a .vdi image stored on the ext4 lvm raid5 vg0. Here are the DiskTT stats.
Code:
However, with the Win2k3 server and the MS iscsi initiator I get using DiskTT:
Code:
The speeds are incredibly slow considering a non iscsi connection is screaming fast in comparison. Any ideas?
All nics are 1GB.
Here is my ietd.conf
Code:
View 1 Replies
View Related
Mar 26, 2010
So here it is, I have a fileserver setup on Ubuntu Server 9.10 AMD64. In this system is 4 1.5TB SATAII drives. They are configured in RAID5 using MD. Now everything is working beautify, except when you need to create a directory. When you do, the system hangs for about 30 seconds. The I/O wait in top jumps up as well. Then the directory is created and everything works once again.
The odd part is it is only Directory creation that does this. I can copy, move, download and stream files off the server perfectly. I am baffeled as to what is causing it. It might be related to the fact that I expanded the array from 3 to 4 drives, it was after that, that I first noticed the problem.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 10, 2010
For the troubleshooting of one server (having 73Gb 3HDD, Raid5 of 140Gb). When I check in the Array The Logical Vol Appears as One HDD not Online
0 HDD1
1 HDD2
2 HDD3
0 HDD not showing Online, When we set it for Oneline & save, After restarting it will go off.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Aug 11, 2010
how to recover A mounted RAID5 data???
View 5 Replies
View Related
Nov 22, 2009
Here's a brief description of my system:
120GB Sata HDD - Primary OS drive
3 x 1.0TB Sata HDD - Raid 5 array
This is on a C2D MSI P35 Platinum board. Anyway, did a fresh install of F12 on the 120GB, which I had problems with - Anaconda refused to see the drive. Fedora Live could see it fine, and it was listed as an 'nvidia_raid_member' - no idea why, but I completely erased the disc under the Live CD and proceeded to install F12.
Once F12 was installed, I loaded up mdadm to re-activate my Raid 5 array, using 'sudo mdadm --assemble --uuidthe uuid) - and it started with only 2 of the 3 drives. My /dev/sdb drive did not activate into the array, due to what mdadm said was a mismatched UUID. Ok, so I erased /dev/sdb, intending to rebuild the array. Erased /dev/sdb, and then attempted 'sudo mdadm --add /dev/md0 /dev/sdb' and I get this error: "mdadm: Cannot add disks to a 'member' array, perform this operation on the parent container" - I can find NO information on this error message.
[Code].....
I don't believe the hard drives are connected in the exact same order they were in before - I disconnected everything in the system and blew it out (it was pretty dusty)
View 1 Replies
View Related
Mar 11, 2010
I have a machine that supports 4 S-ATA drives. I have all identical drives in each slot. I am asking for someone to please tell me how I can create a RAID5 array on Linux and then also have the 4th drive (/dev/sdd) as a hot spare for any of the three drives in the array / volume?I did the following:
/device = type @ parition size
/dev/sda1 = fd @ 100 MB (bootable for /boot)
/dev/sda2 = fd @ 1 GB (Going to be used for Swap)
[code]....
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 31, 2011
I've 2 servers (xen1 and xen2 - their hostnames) with perversion configuration below: Each server have 4 SATA disks, 1 Tb each.
16 Gb ddr3
debian squeeze x64 installed:
root@xen2:~# uname -a
Linux xen2 2.6.32-5-xen-amd64 #1 SMP Wed Jan 12 05:46:49 UTC 2011 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Storage configuration: Former 256 Mb + 32 Gb of 2 of 4 disks are used as raid1 devices for /boot and swap respectively. The rest of space, 970 Gb on all 4 sata disks are used as raid10. There is LVM2 installed over that raid10. Volume group is named xenlvm (that servers are expected to use as xen 4.0.1 hosts, but the story is not about Xen troubles). / , /var, /home are located on logical volumes of small size (just found out I got mixed up with lv names and partitions, but that's not the problem, I think):
[Code]...
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jul 20, 2010
I've got a new Ubuntu 10.04 server install with a new 3 disk RAID 5. The boot disk is separate, not part of the RAID. I was trying to practice what I would do if a disk died to recover the RAID, so I unplugged one of the three disks. The machine now just hangs on startup. It shows fsck at the top of the screen but doesn't got anywhere from there. If you press a key it shows the Ubuntu splash screen. If I plug the disk back in, everything boots up normally. So, my question is, how do I get the machine to boot with one of the RAID members missing? I know I can recover it using the Live CD, but it would be nice to be able to get back into the machine without the CD.
View 9 Replies
View Related
