As the title says, I have a failed RAID5 hard drive. What's the easiest way I can go by replacing it? I've seen many ways to do this, but I would like to know what other people are saying about this, and see how you would do it.
P.S. This is the one I found. [URL]
I've got a raid5 array of 4 disks with ubuntu 8.04 runing on it that is currently still working:
/dev/sda
/dev/sdb
/dev/sdc
/dev/sdd
Smartmontools for /dev/sdc tell that there are 9 sectors pending for reallocation:
Code:
197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 9
198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 9
And /dev/sdd has increasing number of reallocated sectors (about 1 every couple of minutes):
Code:
5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 100 100 036 Pre-fail Always - 1735
/dev/sdc has failed a coulple of times this week (but I have always sucessfully readded it to raid5) . But the increasing number of reallocated sectores on /dev/sdd concerns me even more.
I'm affraid that during removal of /dev/sdd and adding new /devs/sdd disk, raid might fall appart. That's why I would try to do it in Ubuntu Live CD:If the raid falls appart (/dev/sdc fails) during the readding of new /dev/sdd disk, I might still remove the new /dev/sdd and return the previous one and assemble the raid with:
/dev/sda
/dev/sdb
/dev/sdd (old one that was previously removed)
Does assembling Raid in Ubuntu Live and adding new disk for /dev/sdd write anything on /dev/sda, /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc in the process of adding /dev/sdd into raid5?
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.
I have a little nice Ubuntu server with 6x 1TB drives assebmbled into a RAID5 array. Recently SATA cable of one of the drives failed. So I ordered a new cable and ran the server in degraded mode for a few days. Like this:
Code:
/dev/md0:
Version : 00.90
Creation Time : Sat Sep 19 10:39:11 2009
Raid Level : raid5
Array Size : 4883812480 (4657.57 GiB 5001.02 GB)
code....
I'd like the 6th drive to be active, not spare, like before. Should I just wait for rebuild to be finished (it can easily take over 1 day)? Or should I add it somehow differently to be active immediately?
I'm not sure, but I think as I simulated failures unplugging one of the disk, after plugging it in again, the "failed" drive was active again and rebuilding was started as well of course. But it was 2 years ago, so...
The array works just fine for now - I can access files, etc. But I suspect, that in this state if another cable or drive fails, it won't survive anymore. Even after rebuilding is finished, but the 6th drive stays is still marked as "spare". Right?
My original config:
**Partition/Drive info**
/dev/sda Boot----------> 298.09 GB Hitachi HDT72503
20GB /
16GB /swap
50GB /var
[code]....
1. For some odd reason I tried connecting to a samba share as I had it setup and I could not.
2. Looked at webmin and it said my whole /dev/md0 RAID5 was being used..about 7.8TBs. decided to check my RAID5 setup and drives and noticed
**NEW Partition/Drive info**
/dev/sda Raid Array 1 1.82 TB SAMSUNG HD204UI
/dev/sdb Raid Array 1 1.82 TB SAMSUNG HD204UI
/dev/sdc1 /
[code]....
I didn't connect any new drives or anything. I had checked my "mdadm.conf" and "fstab" and everything looked the same?
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?
I tried to install OSS to see if it would allow my mircophone to work properly in the WinXP guest I was running in VirtualBox. I couldn't get it to install properly so now I'm left without any sound on my system. I was wondering how I could get rid of what ever files from OSS that are left and reinstall ALSA.I'm running Ubuntu 9.10.
View 1 Replies View RelatedSo I tried to install OSS to see if it would allow my mircophone to work properly in the WinXP guest I was running in VirtualBox. I couldn't get it to install properly so now I'm left without any sound on my system. I was wondering how I could get rid of what ever files from OSS that are left and reinstall ALSA. I'm running Ubuntu 9.10.
View 9 Replies View RelatedThis isn't exactly Ubuntu specific, but I do plan on using Ubuntu to try to recover this array. I've been using a Freedom9 freestor 4020 for the past few years and other than it totally blowing up last week it's been pretty good. I was on vacation for almost a month and a few days after I returned my NAS (freestor 4020) started acting up. I tried a few power cycles, but was dismayed to see that I could not log in via browser or SSH (SMB shares were no accessible either). A drive failure light is supposed to illuminate if a disk fails, but no dice.
I plugged all 4 drives from the NAS into an Ubutnu 9.04 Desktop system and one started throwing out all kinds of errors. Thinking that it would be a simple rebuild, I went to my local computer shop and picked up another 500GB drive (same manufacturer/part #), replaced the failed drive, and powered up the NAS again... Nothing. I left it for 12 hours then powered it down, plugged the new drive into my linux box again to see if it rebuilt... the drive was a virgin. What gives me hope that I can still recover the data is Ubuntu sees "RAID components" on the drives (through disk manager and parted), and gives me the option of initializing the array.
My plan of attack is to plug all of the drives back into my Ubuntu box, initialize the RAID array via LVM, and pretty much hope for the best. The data is not uber critical, but it would be a pretty big pain in the behind to rip/upload all the software that was on it (ripping hundreds of DVD/CD images is not fun). If my Ubuntu box can make sense of this newly initialized/mounted RAID set... I'll plug in a 2TB external drive, copy the data over, and rebuild the NAS from scratch, then put my data back on (perhaps a different unit, or something running openfiler).
I've got a 3 year old self-assembled system running Ubuntu 9.04, with an AMD Phenom 9850 quadcore with 4G ram on and M3A78-EMH-HDMI motherboard. I'm not really a hardware person, but the assembly was pretty smooth. A year ago (while running Ubuntu 8.04) I started getting messages that my HD was about to die (a 500G Western Digital). I ran out and bought two new HDs, a 1T WD Caviar black onto which I copied everything from the dying drive, and a 500G WD Caviar green onto which I installed Ubuntu 9.04. Everything went fine, except that I couldn't seem to get the system to boot if I removed the dying drive. So I just left it in. I've been getting "About to die" messages for the last year, but I had all the data on the backup 1T drive, and the system was actually running from the new 500G drive, so I didn't worry about it.
Last week the dying drive finally actually died, and the system failed to reboot on the next try, the error message was: Secondary Master Hard Disk Error No IDE Master H.D.D. Detected! Press F1 to ResumeNothing happened after hitting F1. There are 6 SATA ports, 4 red ones (1-4) and 2 black ones (5-6). Sadly, I failed to note which ports the drives were plugged into before I started tinkering. I seem to be able to replicate this error whenever the 500G drive with the master boot record is in a higher numbered port than the 1 T drive. If I reverse that so the 500G is on a lower port number, and if I make sure that the 500G drive has a higher boot priority in BIOS, then I get no error messages at all, but after the POST sequence is finished all I get is a blinking cursor at the top of the screen that doesn't respond to the keyboard (never even getting to GRUB). I can Ctrl-Alt-Delete to reboot, but nothing else has any effect.......
These are the settings on my server, which has a static ip:
Code:
[tim@computim ~]$ cat /etc/exports
/media/cavern 192.168.1.*(rw,sync)
Code:
[tim@computim ~]$ cat /etc/hosts.deny
portmap:ALL
mountd:ALL
rquotad:ALL
statd:ALL
lockd:ALL
Code:
[tim@computim ~]$ cat /etc/hosts.allow
portmap: 192.168.1.2/100
lockd: 192.168.1.2/100
rquotad: 192.168.1.2/100
mountd: 192.168.1.2/100
statd: 192.168.1.2/100
When I try to mount the disk from my client machine I get the error:
Code:
[tim@localhost ~]$ sudo mount -t nfs 192.168.1.10:/media/cavern /media/cavern
mount.nfs mount system call failed
Thinking the problem might be due to iptables I tried the following command as recommended by a book I found on google:
Code:
sudo iptables -A INPUT -i wlan0 -f -j ACCEPT
didn't help so tried disabling the firewall - still getting the error
Both machines are running FC11 - should i be using nfs4?
Here is what I have and what I want to do.
3 new 1.5TB HD. 1 used 1.5TB hd with 980MB of data. I want to set up a raid 5 with a hot spare. I have music, pictures, videos, and movies (About 2.8TB worth). I have had a mismatch of drives previously, 250GB, 2 320GB, 500GB, 2 1TB and now a 1.5TB all with data. I have removed the one 250 and 2 320s and put the data on the 1.5TB that is currently installed.
What I would like to do is create a raid5 with the three new 1.5TB HD's, copy the data over from the currently installed 1.5TB and then grow or add that drive as a hot spare. Or just add it and then add another 1.5TB down the road as a hot spare don't know for sure.
In addition since I have 2 1 TB drives, I could add 2 more (Good deals on 1 TB drives right now) and have a total of 4 1TB drives. Could I have 2 raid5's (4-1TB's and 4-1.5TB's)in two separate arrays? I really do not know if that makes sense or not but here comes LVM. I am tired of managing my HD space and since i have multiple folders (Movies, music, pictures, videos) and within the movies folder I have R, G & PG folders for the ratings of the movies. (Pwd protect the R so the kids can't get to it) So with LVM installed with the Raid5 I should be able to create my folders and just keep adding data and not worry about moving folders around when I grow the storage by adding new drives. Is that correct? Maybe someone could point me to a how to.
Also, if I create 2 arrays (And I need to know so I can order the 2 additional 1TB drives), then I could put all the music, G and PG content on the one array and all the R and spicy stuff on the other and password protect it.
My cdrom was sort of working, but the tray was physically damaged. The usb was working without a problem.
After replacing the the cdrom drive with a similar model known to work well I could not get it to mount. I then tried to move important files to usb to try a fresh install. The usb stick flickered when I put it in, but it didn't mount. Same behaviour as the cdrom, the light goes on when I turn on the computer, but once I'm logged in I can't access the cdrom.
I have tried multiple variations of playing with fstab and trying to mount things in terminal to no avail. I just can't get Ubuntu to recognize the usb or cdrom even though their lights go on when I first try to use them.
Ok, i want to remove ubuntu and replace it with windows
I have the iso of windows xp on my desktop and on a usb
I want to install windows xp in anyway.
I cannot use any windows computers to do it, 2 of the computers have ubuntu, and 1 has windows, and the windows one I cannot use because its password protected due to my parents and their fear of me crashing their computer (Lol)
I want to install windows completely on my hard drive and get rid of ubuntu
Reasons to get rid of:
1. Annoying on my netbook
2. Cant do my video editing with it (the way Iwant to do it)
3. Wine doesnt work with anything i wanna install
4. Too hard to use
5. Made netbook slower
All i want is good old xp
(used to have windows 7, accidentally wiped it with ubuntu, and now i want to install windows xp on Samsung N150 Netbok)
I dont have a CD Drive or access to windows computers
All i have is a 4GB USB
I recently installed a new home backup server with Ubuntu 9.10 x86_64 using the alternate CD. I used the CD's installer to partition my disk and created a software RAID 5 array on 4 disks with no spares. The root file system is located outside the raid array.
At first the array performed nicely but as it started to fill up, the io performance dropped significantly to the point where I get a transfer rate of 1-2MB/s when writing!
[Code]...
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].....
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 RelatedI'm a bit at a loss on this one. I couldn't get a drive from a former RAID5 array to format. I did a dd to write zero's to the drive and attempted to fsck only to be stopped every time with the error: Couldn't find ext2 superblock, trying backup blocks.. fsck.ext3: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/sda1
Smartctl shows no problems with the drive (a Seagate 750GB), but I haven't removed it and thrown it in a windows machine to do seagates proprietary drive diagnostics yet. Running Centos5.6 .I've never had this problem before. The drive is not mounted and the old md device has been removed as far as I can tell. It could still be attempting to assemble the RAID5 with the 1 drive, but I didn't see it attempt to do so.
[Code]...
I have a Fedora 12 system running just fine (AMD box w/2 Maxtor 200 GB (PATA) hard drives. I have a spare 320 GB drive (fallout from a Windows box HD upgrade) and would like to replace 1 of the 200 GB drives in the Fedora system. Is there an easy, straightforward way to do this w/out messing up the system?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI've built a server with (intentionally) very low-power components. The motherboard uses a Via C3 CPU running at 700MHz. The server has 512MB of RAM and I'm running 8.04 Server Edition (no GUI). This is purely a file server - not a lot of daemons started (except the defaults) -- no web server, etc. Just NFS, Samba and Open SSH (for remote administration). I'm not sure how much free RAM it has (it's down at the moment).
Is the RAM/CPU going to be inadequate for running software RAID5? I've done some big rsyncs and even without RAID, this thing is pretty slow. I'm not terribly concerned about the write speed, but if the read performance is going to be inadequate for playing (not streaming - just playing) a 720p MKV movie over my LAN, then I need to rethink this.
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.
I have software raid 5 array, each time I reboot my server, I have to rebuild array again. Rebuilding array takes too long. I am using ubuntu server 10.10.
View 7 Replies View RelatedI want to use the my-huge.cnf file, but when I replace /etc/mysql/my.cnf with the one in /usr/share/doc/mysql-server-5.1/examples/my-huge.cnf, mysql will not start; it is just hanging the process. The only thing i'm seeing in log files is repeating
Sep 26 06:42:51 caseaware kernel: [52647.422669] type=1505 audit(1285497770.990:1240): operation="profile_replace" pid=28591 name="/usr/sbin/mysqld"
Sep 26 06:43:22 caseaware kernel: [52678.675282] type=1505 audit(1285497802.320:1241):
[code]....
I have an old computer here running Fedora Core 2 that had 3 hard drives mounted as LVM2.
This is the output from parted for the first disk -
Code:
Using /dev/sda
Information: The operating system thinks the geometry on /dev/sda is
48641/255/63. Therefore, cylinder 1024 ends at 8032.499M.
(parted) print
[Code]....
I can't get the computer to boot without commenting out the volume in fstab, but it won't mount.
Is there any way to view the data on the two working disks?
For starters, I apologize if this turns out to be a double post. My windows laptop hiccupped in the middle...
So I had a Linux box with two drives running happily for years. Both drives were in the same logical volume, and the second had a file system on it.
The the boot drive croaked. I replaced it and reinstalled CENTOS (making sure, of course, to be careful to use the new drive). The I put the second drive back into the volume group (and that's it).
I'm assuming I probably need to create a new logical volume, because that's how it was before, but I really really don't want to format it.
Am I missing a step or am I screwed?
Fsck -l showed the following output both before and after I put the drive in the volume group. code...
I also get sent to a Busybox (initramfs) shell with no text editor and don't know how to copy all the error messages and post them here. If there is a way, let me know. I've typed it out in the meantime:
Code:
md0 : inactive sdxxxx
Attempting to start the RAID in degraded mode...
mdadm: CREATE user root not found
mdadm: CREATE group disk not found
[Code].....
This is with a 3 disk RAID5 array. I turned off the system, pulled out a drive, and started it back up. Fresh install, all I've done so far is apt-get update and upgrade.
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 RelatedI'm a light linux user over the last couple of years and I decided to built a HTPC/NAS device.
Setup:
40gb ide -> usb boot drive
3x2tb sata (4k Sector) drives
I've got another 2tb identical drive but it's holding data that is going to be copied to the raid after it's up and running and then be 'grown' into the raid array to yield a final 5+tb array. I tried doing a disk util raid array and it ended up failing after reboot due to it using the /dev/sd* designations and they swapped. I have no idea how to do the UUID version, my googlefu and practical guide to ubuntu. So I decided to do it manually in order to also fix the sector issue as disk util wasn't formatting them correctly and once formatted wouldn't let me create a raid array from the discs.
[Code]....
I am trying to build a file server with RAID 5 over a couple of 1TB HDDs, to serve about 10 client machines using Ubuntu Server. I already own a 22-port switch: HP ProCurve v1810G-24 Switch (J9450A), which I am assuming will do the job. And for the actual server I am thinking of buying: HP ProLiant DL120 1U. Will this hardware suffice, or am I missing something important to get the whole thing running?
View 9 Replies View RelatedI am setting up a new server and am in the midst of testing RAID. This is an Ubuntu 9.10 server. RAID1 (/dev/md1) is spread across 12 one-terabyte SCSI disks (/dev/sdi through /dev/sdt). It has four spares configured, each of which are also one-terabyte SCSI drives (/dev/sdu through /dev/sdx). I have been following the instructions on the Linux RAID Wiki ([URL]....
I have already tested the RAID successfully by using mdadm to set a drive faulty. Automatic failover to spare and reconstruction worked like a champ. I am now testing "Force fail by hardware". Specifically, I am following the advice, "Take the system down, unplug the disk, and boot it up again." Well, I did that, and the RAID fails to start. It outright refuses to start. It doesn't seem to notice that a drive is missing. Notably, all the drive letters shift up to fill in the space left by removing a drive. The test I did was to:
[code]....
Is removing a disk from the bus a reasonable test in the first place? Meaning, is this likely to happen in a production environment by other means than a human coming by and yanking out the drive? Meaning, is there a hardware failure that would replicate this event? Because, if so, then I don't know how to recover from it.