Ubuntu :: Unable To Format RAID5 Created With Mdadm

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


ADVERTISEMENT

Ubuntu :: Can't Autostart And Automount RAID5 Created With Mdadm But It Starts Manually

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

Ubuntu Servers :: Convert Mdadm 6 Disk Raid5 To 5 Disk Raid5?

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

Ubuntu Servers :: Mdadm Raid5 Keeps Degrading?

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

Ubuntu Servers :: Slow Raid5 Using Mdadm?

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

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 View Related

Ubuntu :: Mdadm RAID5 Array Wont Start?

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

Ubuntu Servers :: Growing Software RAID5 With MDADM

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

Ubuntu :: WD15EARS Drives Not Working With Mdadm And RAID5, Especially After Reboot

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

Debian Configuration :: Mdadm Raid5 Reshape Hung?

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

General :: Mdadm - RAID5 To RAID6, Spare Won't Become Active

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

Software :: Mdadm Shrinking RAID5 Array From 6 To 5 Devices

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

Ubuntu Servers :: RAID5 Failed - MDADM (Device Or Resource Busy)

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

Ubuntu Servers :: Mdadm RAID5 Vs. 4x4 LVM Striped In Worse Case Scenarios?

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

Fedora :: Lost Mdadm Superblock But Not Drives / Can Rebuild Software RAID5?

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

Software :: RAID Created With 'mdadm' On /dev/md0, But Uses /dev/md3?

Mar 10, 2010

I have done lots of searching and I haven't been able to find anyone else with the same problem. Whenever I create a RAID with 'mdadm', regardless of level (I've done linear, 0, and 5) the command I use is:

Code:
mdadm --create --run --verbose /dev/md0 --raid-devices=11 --spare-devices=1 --chunk=256 --level=5 /dev/sd[abcdefghijkl]1

The RAID is build RAID 5 as it should be. However, when I check /proc/partitions it shows under "md3".

[Code]...

View 1 Replies View Related

Ubuntu :: Mdadm RAID5 "appear To Have Very Similar Superblocks"

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

Hardware :: Can't Get A Drive From A Former RAID5 Array To Format?

Jun 15, 2011

I'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]...

View 3 Replies View Related

Ubuntu :: Save A Document Created In OpenOffice.org In .doc Format?

May 3, 2010

How do I save a document I created in OpenOffice.org in .doc format? I want to use the same file in a windows OS. Whenever i select the "Windows XP" option then click save OpenOffice crashes. How do I fix this?

View 7 Replies View Related

CentOS 5 Hardware :: Raid5 SW + LVM Upgrade To An "advanced Format" Drive

Oct 25, 2010

I have a Raid5 software partitioned using LVM (at centos 5.2 installation). Actually the raid is composed by 3 320Gb HDD. I would like to replace them with 3 2T hdd, but I'm worried about the alignment issues of the upgrade. I know it is easy to align the raid partition URL But what will happen to the LVM partition? Reformat and install everything is not an option

View 15 Replies View Related

Ubuntu :: MDADM - Unable To Assemble Array

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

Ubuntu :: Unable To Dd Drive And Retain UUID And Mdadm Superblock

May 18, 2011

I have an mdadm linear array of 4 500GB drives. One of them had a few bad sectors, so I've dd'ed it to a new one (conv=noerror), and tried to start my array. Mdadm refuses, saying, "mdadm: /dev/md4 assembled from 3 drives - not enough to start the array."I had diffed different samples from different positions on the source and the mirror drive and confirmed they were identical. Checking the superblocks confirms three old drives still having their superblocks as expected, while the newly mirrored one has,

daniel@lnxsrv:~$ sudo mdadm --misc --examine /dev/sdf1
mdadm: No md superblock detected on /dev/sdf1.
- and,
daniel@lnxsrv:~$ sudo blkid /dev/sdf1

[code]....

As before. The mirror apparently has no uuid, but the original does. To confirm my sanity, I did,

daniel@lnxsrv:~$ sudo dd bs=1M count=50 if=/dev/sdc of=./sdc && sudo dd bs=1M count=50 if=/dev/sdd of=./sdd && sudo diff -s sdc sdd
50+0 records in

[code]...

How can the uuid not be the same when bit-for-bit from the very first byte of the drive, covering MFT etc., these two drives are identical according to diff?

View 5 Replies View Related

Software :: MDADM Unable To Assemble Array

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

Server :: Recreate A Raid5 MD0 Into A Raid5 MD3?

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

Ubuntu Multimedia :: Ffmpeg / Mtv Format - Error "Unable To Find A Suitable Output Format For Output.mtv"

Jan 22, 2011

I'm still trying to find out if my coby mp3 player will actually play mtv video files as is advertised.

ffmpeg -formats does list mtv but the only command I really ever used was one to convert a vid to an mp3 so I tried Code: ffmpeg -i test.mp4 -acodec copy output.mtv it returns Code: Unable to find a suitable output format for 'output.mtv' I can't find any mtv files online for purchase or free for that matter, so I know this is all pretty obscure but shouldn't there be a way to convert them since ffmpeg lists mtv format?

View 6 Replies View Related

Ubuntu :: Ext USB NTFS Disk Unable To Read Files Created Under 10.10

Feb 9, 2011

Using Ubuntu 10.10 (installed via mythbuntu) I'm unable to read or see files/directories created under Ubuntu. I think it started happening after a reboot to Windows. Some of the directories created under Ubuntu have disappeared completely and some of them produce the following error:
/media/storage/videos/Kids Videos$ ls
ls: cannot access Justin Bieber: Input/output error
ls: cannot access Octonauts: Input/output error
rest of directory is seen fine...

Same on some files:
ls -l
ls: cannot access Dirk Gently.mp4: Input/output error
ls: cannot access Dirk Gently.nfo: Input/output error
ls: cannot access Dirk Gently.srt: Input/output error
ls: cannot access Dirk Gently.tbn: Input/output error
ls: cannot access Human Planet: Input/output error
ls: cannot access Russell Howard's Good News: Input/output error
ls: cannot access The Planets: Input/output error
ls: cannot access Lost Land of the Tiger: Input/output error
total 300160 .....

Just to make it worse I copied more data onto the disk from windows so may have lost some it completely. It there anyway I can repair this? When trying to check under Windows it says it can't. Some of the missing files can be reloaded but others can't. Ran chkdsk /f under Windows XP. Some files have reappeared, but there has been a lot of unrecoverable files lost. Conclusion: Ubuntu 10.10 is badly broken for writing to NTFS. As I would like to share between Windows & Ubuntu using the external disk, I'm not sure what to do at this stage.

View 1 Replies View Related

Fedora :: MDADM On 12 64bit - Error "mdadm: Cannot Add Disks To A 'member' Array, Perform This Operation On The Parent Container"

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

Fedora :: Created NFS Server From 15 But Unable To Mount On Client?

Jul 12, 2011

I've setup an NFS share on my Fedora 15 host of which Google'ing told me that it had changed radically from the old NFSv3 config. Ie. no more /etc/hosts.allow or /etc/hosts.deny files.....My current setup is this..../etc/sysconfig/nfs:

Code:
#
# Define which protocol versions mountd

[code]...

View 4 Replies View Related

Fedora :: Unable To Select The Newly Created GLX Context?

Jul 25, 2011

I just updated my system, not sure which package may have caused this, here are the outputs:

Mutter:
Code:
(mutter:4637): Clutter-CRITICAL **: Unable to initialize Clutter: Unable to select the newly created GLX context
Window manager error: Unable to initialize Clutter.
Compiz:

[Code]...

View 3 Replies View Related

Debian :: Unable To Login To SVN For A Instance Created In A NEW Partition?

Dec 14, 2010

On a Debian Linux box, SVN Server is installed. In the partition where SVN was installed, Free disk space is causing anxiety, hence started creating new instances in a new partition, though I am able to get the first screen (it prompts for username and password), I am unable to login even though the username and passwords are correct.

View 1 Replies View Related







Copyrights 2005-15 www.BigResource.com, All rights reserved