Ubuntu :: Is Grub2 Automatically Installed In All RAID Drives Using Alternate CD
Jun 27, 2010
I am going to setup a new Ubuntu 10.04 using RAID 1 soon. Installation will be via the alternate CD. Older distributions required manually installing Grub to the second drive, to boot if the first drive fails. I found different statements about how this is handled since 9.10.e.g.
Quote:
Install GRUB boot-loader on second drive (this step is not need if you use Ubuntu 9.10)
or
Quote:
installing GRUB to second hard drive depending on your distribution
> grub-install /dev/md0
or
> grub-install /dev/sda
> grub-install /dev/sdb
is Grub2 automatically installed in all RAID drives using alternate CD 10.04 like executing sort of "grub-nstall /dev/md0" during the installation ?
View 2 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Aug 10, 2010
I have a Centos 5.5 system with 2* 250 gig sata physical drives, sda and sdb. Each drive has a linux raid boot partition and a Linux raid LVM partition. Both pairs of partitions are set up with raid 1 mirroring. I want to add more data capacity - and I propose to add a second pair of physical drives - this time 1.5 terabyte drives presumably sdc and sdd. I assume I can just plug in the new hardware - reboot the system and set up the new partitions, raid arrays and LVMs on the live system. My first question:
1) Is there any danger - that adding these drives to arbitrary sata ports on the motherboard will cause the re-enumeration of the "sdx" series in such a way that the system will get confused about where to find the existing raid components and/or the boot or root file-systems? If anyone can point me to a tutorial on how the enumeration of the "sdx" sequence works and how the system finds the raid arrays and root file-system at boot time
2) I intend to use the majority of the new raid array as an LVM "Data Volume" to isolate "data" from "system" files for backup and maintenance purposes. Is there any merit in creating "alternate" boot partitions and "alternate" root file-systems on the new drives so that the system can be backed up there periodically? The intent here is to boot from the newer partition in the event of a corruption or other failure of the current boot or root file-system. If this is a good idea - how would the system know where to find the root file-system if the original one gets corrupted. i.e. At boot time - how does the system know what root file-system to use and where to find it?
3) If I create new LVM /raid partitions on the new drives - should the new LVM be part of the same "volgroup" - or would it be better to make it a separate "volgroup"? What are the issues to consider in making that decision?
View 6 Replies
View Related
Apr 8, 2010
i have cretaed RAID on one of my server RAID health is ok but its shows warning. so what could be the problem. WARNING: 0:0:RAID-1:2 drives:153GB:Optimal Drives:2 (11528 Errors)
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 18, 2010
I'm breaking into the OS drive side with RAID-1 now. I have my server set up with a pair of 80 GB drives, mirrored (RAID-1) and have been testing the fail-over and rebuild process. Works great physically failing out either drive. Great! My next quest is setting up a backup procedure for the OS drives, and I want to know how others are doing this.
Here's what I was thinking, and I'd love some feedback: Fail one of the disks out of the RAID-1, then image it to a file, saved on an external disk, using the dd command (if memory serves, it would be something like "sudo dd if=/dev/sda of=backupfilename.img") Then, re-add the failed disk back into the array. In the event I needed to roll back to one of those snapshots, I would just use the "dd" command to dump the image back on to an appropriate hard disk, boot to it, and rebuild the RAID-1 from that.
Does that sound like a good practice, or is there a better way? A couple notes: I do not have the luxury of a stack of extra disks, so I cannot just do the standard mirror breaks and keep the disks on-hand, and using something like a tape drive is also not an option.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jun 9, 2011
so I setup a raid ten system and I was wondering what that difference between the active and spare drives is ? if I have 4 active drives then 2 the two stripes are then mirrored right?
root@wolfden:~# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid0] [raid10]
md1 : active raid10 sda2[0] sdd2[3] sdc2[2] sdb2[1]
[code]....
View 2 Replies
View Related
Apr 8, 2011
I am trying to install ubuntu 10.04.2 onto a computer (alternate for RAID support). This is a fresh install - I am formatting all drives. Partitioning, setting up RAID, and the beginnings of the instilation appears to go fine. But part way through it "sticks" at a screen asking for a "media change" to the CD which is already in the CD tray. Nothing I do appears to stop this (i.e. clicking 'go back', removing/inserting the CD, etc). I've even tried unplugging the network connection.
The specific error reads:
Code:
[!!] Install the base system
Please insert the disk labeled: 'Ubuntu 10.04.2 LTS _Lucid Lynx_ -
release amd64 (20110211.3) in the drive '/cdrom/' and press enter.
Media change
<Go Back> <Continue>
How do I get past this point? (and yes, the red text is in red).
View 1 Replies
View Related
Aug 27, 2010
UPDATE: decided to reinstall and run the partitioner to get rid of the raid. Not worth dealing with this since seems to be lower level as /dev/mapper was not listing any devices. Error 15 at grub points to legacy grub. So avoiding the problem by getting rid of raid for now. So ignore this post. Found a nice grub2 explanation on the wiki but didn't help this situation since probably isn't a grub problem. Probably is a installer failure to map devices properly when it only used what was already available and didn't create them during the install. I don't know, just guessing. Had OpenSuSE 10.3 64bit installed with software raid mirrored swap, boot, root. Used the alternate 64bit Ubuntu iso for installation. Since partitioning was already correctly setup and the raid devices /dev/md0,1,2 were recognized by the installer, I chose to format the partitions with ext3 and accept the configuration:
/dev/md0 = swap = /dev/sda1, /dev/sdb1 = 2Gb
/dev/md1 = boot = /dev/sda2, /dev/sdb2 = 256Mb
/dev/md2 = root = /dev/sda3, /dev/sda3 = 20Gb
Installation process failed at the point of installing grub. It had attempted to install the bootloader on /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb2. I moved on since it would not let me fiddle with the settings and I got the machine rebooted with the rescue option on the iso used for installing. Now, I can see the root partition is populated with files as expected. dpkg will list that linux-image-generic, headers, and linux-generic are installed with other supporting kernel packages. grub-pc is installed as well. However, the /boot partition or /dev/md1 was empty initially after the reboot. What is the procedure to get grub to install the bootloader on /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb2, which represent /dev/md1 or /boot?
Running apt-get update and apt-get upgrade installed a newer kernel and this populated the /boot partition. Running update-grub results in a "/usr/sbin/grub-probe: error: no mapping exists for 'md2'". grub-install /dev/md2 or grub-install /dev/sda2 gives the same error as well. Both commands indicate that "Autodetection of a filesystem module failed, Please specify the module with the option '--modules' explicitly". What is the right modules that need to be loaded for a raid partition in initrd? Should I be telling grub to use the a raid module?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jul 11, 2011
I installed Fedora 15, which was my first real departure from Debian based Linux OSs. I absolutely love the new Gnome 3, and was able to configure F15 to work as I wanted it to. On rebooting I realized that there was no boot loader screen, that F15 just booted and didn't give me a choice as to which OS I wanted to use. Eventually I was able to configure grub to let me see the boot loader and added my old boot loader as a choice. This worked well, maybe not a perfect solution, but it worked. This weekend I installed LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition) to another HDD. LMDE uses grub2 and after the install F15 was not recognized.
Two questions: Is there a way for grub2 to see F15? or Can F15 be installed using grub2? I really don't mind re-installing from scratch.
View 10 Replies
View Related
Feb 5, 2011
UBUNTU 10.04.1 LTS
AMD64
Is there any way I can prevent OpenOffice automatically installing when using the Alternate disc? I want to install a different package (LibreOffice 3.3) without having to uninstall Ubuntu's OpenOffice.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Feb 16, 2011
I have a Windows XP system, and wanted to install Ubuntu to a 100 GB XT3 partition on the same drive. I was told I could chainload Ubuntu from the NT Loader menu. I booted from a Ubuntu 10.04 CD and ran the installer. It didn't find any hard drives. On a hunch, I tried the 10.04 alternate installer CD. That DID find the hard drive and partitions. I had the installer make /dev/sda7 (the XT3 partition) the root. Installation proceeded smoothly, but then the installer told me it did not see any other OS's on my drive! Why? I directed the installer to place grub on /dev/sda7 instead of the MBR.
Per the instructions I was given, I used DD to copy the first 512 bytes of /dev/sda7 to the Windows primary partition (sda1) as bootloader.lnx. But the resulting file is empty, and it won't boot. I repeated the whole process - formatting, installing FOUR times, and same results. I have no idea where GRUB was installed. It is apparently not in the MBR, because I still have my normal Windows boot. I downloaded the 10.10 alternate installer and got the same exact results. Even switched from XT3 to XT4. After two weeks of this nonsense, I still have yet to see Linux boot.
View 9 Replies
View Related
Jun 29, 2011
migrate an installed Ubuntu system from a software raid to a hardware raid on the same machine? how would you go about doing so?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 13, 2010
I am trying to install Ubuntu on a nvidia board which, based on the forums I have perused, is a FAKERaid chipset. Originally I tried to install according to https://help.ubuntu.com/community/FakeRaidHowto to no avail. I gave up and am resorting to breaking down my raid setup (thus losing my Windows XP installation) and using Linux's software raid (which seems to be the recommended method) with the Alternate CD install.
I went in to the bios and completely disabled my board's RAID function. I then followed the instructions here: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/In...n/SoftwareRAID , except it popped up with a window advising me "one or more serial ATA RAID configurations have been found. Do you wish to activate these RAID devices?" which that page didn't mention. I believe I selected "Yes". Setting up the partitions I made (from beginning of disk to end of disk) a RAID1 200MB /boot partition, a RAID0 / partition (90GB?), free space not set up in RAID (approx 20GB for each SATA drive to later install Windows on [if that's even possible]) & then the SWAP partition 2GB at the end of one of the disks (is it OK that this one wasn't in RAID?).
The installation completed, as far as I can tell, without a hitch. Except also of note: my network card doesn't work in the installer (gives an error message about unable to configure dhcp) so i'm not connected to the internet. Then I restart and the following appears: grub loading: error: biosdisk read error. Followed by what appears to be the Ubuntu loading splash (just a small white shape in the middle of the screen), and then:
[Code]....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Dec 15, 2010
So I have Windows 7 and Ubuntu dual booted on my computer, and the default is Ubuntu. I was wondering if it was possible to make it such that the default is the last booted system? As in, if I was in Windows, and restarted, then GRUB would highlight Windows.The mainmotivation is to for when the computer restarts automatically (say after an update). I may not be around during the 10 seconds before it boots into Ubuntu.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jul 28, 2010
I have been trying to move away from Windows2000 on Ubuntu for months. I have a few applications that I run on Windows that I have been unable to find usuable equivalents on Ubuntu eg Outlook/Mobile sync application required for my job and a DVB TV card application for home. So it looks like I am stuck ruuning W2K and Linux for at least a while and indeed I have been using GRUB2 to select between W2K and Ubuntu.
I need some basic advice about setting up GRUB2. My philosphy when it comes to PC data is you can never have enough backups and I avoid any single point of failure. So I have always used two hard drives which I keep in sync almost daily with FreeFileSync. I also swap my most critical encrypted data between a laptop and desktop. Then I also alternate external USB drives stored away from my home.
My current partions are
When I installed on the Ubuntu 500GB I let it & GRUB2 take the default options so it boots from Hd1 and I assume certain executables are stored at the begining of the Ubuntu partition as well as configuration files in its file system.
Now I'm replacing the 500GB with a 1.5TB and the old 500Gb will become my backup drive. I want to keep the backup drive bootable in its onw right. If either hard drive fails I want a bootable system and acccess to my data.
So my plan is to use the following partitions.
I can install W2K on the 1.5Tb from scratch or use Acronis to restore an image file. Then I can install Ubuntu from scratch.
OK now for my questions.
1) Can I get GRUB2 to put its executables and configuration files on a small partition of its own? I see no reason why they should be dependant on a specific Ubuntu partition. I have read posts mentioning this but not sure if this has to be a bootable Linux or just a file system with the config files.
2) Can I run update-grub on any Linux and store or copy the config files to the partition in 1?
3) I will use BIOS to determine which hard drive is first to boot. When I run update-grub (or when it runs during the new Ubuntu install on Hd1) I dont want GRUB2 to do anything with Hd2, not even know Hd2 exists, it that an option?
View 4 Replies
View Related
Oct 26, 2010
I'm trying to install GRUB2 on root partition under RAID 5. I tried using the alternate CD, but installation failed. Now I'm trying under the live CD and grub-install ... but I'm being told it can't find the device even though /dev/sda2 (root partition) and /dev/sda are mounted.I have 4 discs, each with a swap partition (/dev/sdX1) and a root partition (/dev/sdX2).
View 9 Replies
View Related
Apr 30, 2011
GRUB2 / RAID 10.10 to 11.04 Upgrade Fail.....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Jan 26, 2010
I have two drive on my Ubuntu server. I have a 40GB IDE 5400RPM and an 80GB SATA 7200RPM.
Is it at all possible to RAID 0 the two of these drive? I know it's pretty unorthodox, but it's what I've got without having to buy anything.
If so, what are the limits, cons, and/or potential pros of doing a RAID of these two?
View 9 Replies
View Related
Mar 31, 2010
After much struggling with the server (the one referenced in "shifty, shifty drive letters"), I realized that the problem has nothing to do with drive letters at all. The problem is GRUB2, or some way in which it is misconfigured.
To recap:
Ubuntu Server 9.10
/dev/sda solid-state Sandisk (swap)
/dev/sdb1, /dev/sdb2, /dev/sdb3 2 HW RAID0 SCSI (boot, /, tmp)
/dev/sdc - /dev/sdz 24 one-TB SATA drives
I kept getting "device not found" from GRUB2 when trying to boot. The SATA drives are disconnectable from the front of the chassis. So I disconnected each and every one of them and powered the machine up. To my shock, the machine booted into Linux and it was up and running! It seems that when the 24 SATA drives are plugged in, then GRUB2 can NOT see /dev/sdb. Instead, it sees /dev/sda and fifteen of the one-TB drives (and one floppy drive, whatever that is).
I tried deleting /dev/sdc through /dev/sdz from /boot/grub/device.map, but that didn't work. I also tried plugging in only HALF of of the SATA drives. When the system tried to boot in this state, then GRUB2 just hung. I noticed that the blue LEDs on the front of the (plugged-in) SATA drives blinked on and off in sequence, as if GRUB2 was scanning them. I watched this for about 3 minutes before I got impatient.Is there a maximum number of drives in GRUB2? Does GRUB2 hate SCSI if it detects a whiff of SATA? What's going on?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Apr 20, 2015
I have created a system using four 2Tb hdd. Three are members of a soft-raid mirrored (RAID1) with a hot spare and the fourth hdd is a lvm hard drive separate from the RAID setup. All hdd are gpt partitioned.
The RAID is setup as /dev/md0 for mirrored /boot partations (non-lvm) and the /dev/md1 is lvm with various logical volumes within for swap space, root, home, etc.
When grub installs, it says it installed to /dev/sda but it will not reboot and complains that "No boot loader . . ."
I have used the supergrubdisk image to get the machine started and it finds the kernel but "grub-install /dev/sda" reports success and yet, computer will not start with "No boot loader . . ." (Currently, because it is running, I cannot restart to get the complete complaint phrase as md1 is syncing. Thought I'd let it finish the sync operation while I search for answers.)
I have installed and re-installed several times trying various settings. My question has become, when setting up gpt and reserving the first gigabyte for grub, users cannot set the boot flag for the partition. As I have tried gparted and well as the normal Debian partitioner, both will NOT let you set the "boot flag" to that partition. So, as a novice (to Debian) I am assuming that "boot flag" does not matter.
Other readings indicate that yes, you do not need a "boot flag" partition. "Boot flag" is only for a Windows partition. This is a Debian only server, no windows OS.
View 5 Replies
View Related
Jan 11, 2010
I was recently given two hard drives that were used as a raid (maybe fakeraid) pair in a windows XP system. My plan was to split them up and install one as a second HD in my desktop, and load 9.10 x64 on it, and use the other for mythbuntu 9.10. As has been noted elsewhere, the drives aren't recognized by the 9.10 installer, but removing dmraid gets around this, and installation of both ubuntu and mythbuntu went fine. On both systems after installation however, the systems broke during update, giving an "read-only file system" error and no longer booting.
Running fsck from the live cd gives the error:
fsck: fsck.isw_raid_member: not found
fsck: Error 2 while executing fsck.isw_raid_member for /dev/sdb
and running fsck from 9.04 installed on the other hard drive gives an error like:
The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>
In both cases I setup the drives with the ext4 filesystem. There's probably more that I'm forgetting... it seems likely to me that this problem is due to some lingering issue with the RAID setup they were in. I doubt its a hardware issue since I get the same problem with the different drives in different boxes.
View 5 Replies
View Related
Mar 17, 2010
I 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 Related
Jun 27, 2010
I have recently installed a Asus M4A77TD Pro system board which supports raid.
I have 2 x 320gb sata drives I would like to setup raid-1 on. so far i have configured the bios to raid-1 for drives, but when installing Ubuntu 10.04 from the cd it detects the raid configuration but fails to format.
When I re-set all bios settings to standard sata drives ubuntu installs and works as normal but i have just 2 x drives without any raid options. I had this working in my previous setup but thats because i had the o/s on a sepreate drive from the raid and was able to do this within Ubuntu.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Oct 30, 2010
I'm using 4 hard drives (1 of which is a sata drive) and i need help installing raid drivers i cant get these hard drives to mount at all
View 3 Replies
View Related
Dec 14, 2010
I've got a 10.10 installation, which I am using as a media/download server. Currently everything is stored on a 1TB USB drive.With the costs of disks falling, and the hassle of trying to back 1TB up to DVD (no, it's not going to happen) I was wondering if there's some linux/Ubuntu utility, which can use multiple disks to provide failover/resilience ... Could I just buy another 1TB drive, and have it "shadowing" the main, so that if one goes, I buy another, and then restore from the copy ?
View 3 Replies
View Related
Feb 3, 2011
I have a motherboard with the following chipset Intel 945GM + Intel ICH7R Chipset
This board: http://emea.kontron.com/products/boa...6lcdmmitx.html
I have two 320GB HDDs setup in hardware raid as shown below. But in gparted they are showing as two seperate drives. Why is this?
Raid setup:
GParted
fdisk -l
What am i doing wrong here?
View 8 Replies
View Related
Jun 14, 2011
I have a RAID 6 built on 6x 250GB HDDs w/EXT4. I will be upgrading the RAID to 4 2TB HDDs.
How would one go about this? What commands would need to be ran? I'm thinking about replacing the drives 1 at a time and letting it do the rebuild, but I know that would take a lot of time (which is fine). I don't have enough SATA ports to setup the new RAID and copy things over.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Apr 24, 2010
I have Ubuntu 9.10 and when i plug in my usb drive it wont mount it automatically and is not shown in the nautilus browser also, but if i search in /dev its visible(its detected) and i can mount using mount /dev/sdc /mnt But if i do this i can only copy files from browser and for all other times i need to use terminal again
View 1 Replies
View Related
Sep 6, 2010
When I installed this system (Xubuntu 9.04 x64) several months ago, I had two identical SATA hard drives, but I didn't do a RAID1 mirror then because I didn't want to wipe out my old OS (FreeBSD) on the second drive in case I needed to retrieve something from it. So I installed Xubuntu on the first drive (sda) and for all that time, the second drive (sdb) has been running but unused, and fdisk showed that the FreeBSD partition was still there.
A couple weeks ago, my separate backup server failed, so as a short-term backup I did a 'dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/sdb' to make an exact copy of my Xubuntu install on drive A upon drive B (the former FreeBSD drive), then mounted /dev/sdb1 on /mnt to make sure it worked successfully. So far so good, but I still didn't set up any RAID stuff.
Several days later, I needed to reboot because of a security upgrade, and when I logged out, the GUI froze up. Thinking not too much of it, I restarted the system, and it came up fine. But the next day, I discovered that I was missing several days worth of email and recent files. In fact, everything had been reverted back to a state from several days earlier --- I think from the day I copied the first drive to the second one. Files I created in the interim were gone, and files I deleted in the interim were back. It was as if the first drive was 'restored' from the second one without my knowledge.
Doing some testing now, I find that if I create a new file on /dev/sda1 and then mount /dev/sdb1, the file also exists on sdb1. It's as if they're acting as a RAID1 mirror, without my telling it to do so. Could it just decide to do RAID1 because it sees there are two identically partitioned drives? That seems dangerous. And if they were really in a RAID mirror, why would it let me mount them separately? It's very strange.
I don't mind if it's suddenly decided to do RAID, but I want to make sure it's not going to 'restore' a more current filesystem from an older one again, if that's indeed what happened.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Apr 24, 2010
I shall start off by saying that I have just jumped from Windows 7 to Ubuntu and am not regretting the decision one bit. I am however stuck with a problem. I have spent a few hours google'ing this and have read some interesting articles (probably way beyond what the problem actually is) but still don't think I have found the answer.I have installed:
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description: Ubuntu lucid (development branch)
Release: 10.04
Codename: lucid
I am running the install on an old Dell 8400. My PC has an Intel RAID Controller built into the MB. I have 1 HDD (without RAID) (which is houses my OS install) and then I have 2 1TB drives (These are just NTFS formatted drives with binary files on them nothing more.) in a RAID 1 (Mirroring) Array. The Intel RAID Controller on Boot recognizes the Array as it always has (irrespective of which OS is installed) however, unlike Windows 7 (where I was able to install the Intel RAID controller driver) .Does anyone know of a resolution (which doesn't involve formatting and / or use of some other software RAID solution) - to get this working which my searches have not taken me too?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 9, 2011
I'm looking for advise on which drives to add into my server for software raid 5. I would like to use 2TB drives for the array. The server currently boots off a RAID 1 array and I have a couple other drives mounted until I build a RAID 5 array with new drives. I've read horror stories on using Western Digital WD20EARS and Seagate ST32000542AS. So I'm wondering which large drives are best to use in software raid?
View 9 Replies
View Related
