Ubuntu :: Unmountable LuksContainer After RAID5 Resize
Jan 8, 2010
I used a raid 5 of 5*1TB via Kernel raid on md0. I then created a luks out of md0 -> /dev/mapper/md0. I formatted ext3 this container. That worked fine. Now I baught another Harddrive and grew the raid to now 6 Devices. The Raid is now running und bigger than before - great. The luksOpen still works BUT I can't mount the ext3 on it. It seems like the luks Volume also grew, it's now 1TB bigger without doing anything. The Problem: I can't mount the luks anymore, mapping it was no big deal so.. Always tells me that I should specify the filesystem type:
Code:
root@ubuntu:/home/ubuntu# mount /dev/mapper/md0 /mnt/tmp
mount: Sie missen den Dateisystemtyp angeben
If I do is then it continues to give me errors:
Code:
root@ubuntu:/home/ubuntu# mount /dev/mapper/md0 /mnt/tmp -t ext3
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/mapper/md0,
missing codepage or helper program, or other error
Manchmal liefert das Syslog wertvolle Informationen - versuchen
Sie dmesg | tail oder so
It seems as if the luks system doesnt know that the luks container isn't using the whole drive.
View 2 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
May 3, 2010
I just tried mounting my Iomega 1tb hard external hard drive, but it doesn't seem to work. The drive doesn't show up in nautilus. When I look at it with parted it shows as a ms-dos filesystem. If I plug it into my imac, it shows doesn't mount either, but in the driveutility it shows up as a fat32.Windows 7 doesn't seem to helpfull as it just says that the drive needs to be formatted.Is there any way to recover my files before I format, or better yet solve this problem without formatting?
View 5 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 4, 2010
Let's begin this yelp with a story. I lent my 16GB OCA Rally 2 flash drive to a friend to use. He plugged it into his brand new ASUS compact notebook to get some files off of it. For some reason, while he was using it, it stopped working. He tried plugging it into a desktop machine we have in the office and then into my computer. The thing doesn't work anymore.When I run dmesg after plugging it in, I get the following output:
Code:
[ 233.475963] usb 2-1.2: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address 4
[ 248.508945] usb 2-1.2: device descriptor read/64, error -110
[code]...
View 1 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
Apr 17, 2010
So my Ubuntu 9.10 install has been hanging on boot lately. At first I thought it was a problem with the 2.6.31-20 kernel, because that is the default boot option in GRUB2. It seemed things worked fine if I instead chose the 2.6.31-19 kernel, but I had that hang yesterday too.I also had 2.6.31-20 boot just fine yesterday. Once. Next time I tried it - system hang.
What I mean by "hang" is,I would see the GRUB OS selection screen (I have 2 versions of Windows and 2 versions of Ubuntu on this machine),select the first choice (Ubuntu with the 2.6.31-20 kernel),see the "pulsating white Ubuntu logo" briefly,then a bunch of scrolling text, then...blank screen.Then nothing.I let it sit for a few minutes to a few hours when it did this, but nothing further happened.Then yesterday, I decided to let it sit the whole time I was at work, approximately 9 hours.I came home to a screen with the white Ubuntu logo and the following error message:
Code:
One or more of the mounts listed in /etc/fstab cannot yet be mounted:
swap: waiting for UUID=3fba81a3-de14-4f56-9e7b-ace95d933a0e
/proc/bus/usb: waiting for none[code]....
So it looks like I have a disk partition that refuses to mount sometimes.Gparted for some reason wouldn't tell me the UUIDs of swap partitions.They also don't show up in /dev/disk/by-uuid. Using the bootinfo script, I found out that 3fba81a3-de14-4f56-9e7b-ace95d933a0e is the 4 GB swap partition associated with my Ubuntu 9.10 install.The disk that partition is on is rated "healthy" by Disk Utility, with only a few bad sectors. The HDD is about 7 years old, so it's in remarkably good shape.What could cause this swap partition to not mount during boot, and how do I fix it?
View 3 Replies
View Related
Oct 5, 2010
I'm familiar with the software and hierarchy of the mount command but I can't find any info on why it is needed or preferred. What are the physical aspects of it? What is the burden of having files accessible all the time?
View 14 Replies
View Related
Mar 31, 2011
I have been a Linux user for about 6 years now, and recently switched to Fedora just to try something new. I used Ubuntu for the majority of the time so I am somewhat familiar with the command line, but seem to be having trouble with my external HDD. Ubuntu automounted it no problem. Fedora doesn't seem to like to do that. I tried searching and I did what almost every thread insisted upon; which is mount /dev/sdb(that is what dmesg said) but it says already mounted or /mnt/busy. So this is the extent of my Terminal experience with mounting an external drive, and I am completely dumbfounded as to why it simply won't mount. I am liking Fedora so far and so long as there is a remedy for this I don't plan on going back.
View 3 Replies
View Related
May 23, 2011
I have created a 9TB raid from 4 1.5TB drives and 3 2TB drives (1.6 and .4 partition). I thought it would be a 9TB partition, and Ubuntu says it is a 9TB partition except when looking at what drive space is left.Nautilus' Properties and System Monitor both say that the raid is 4.1TB with 1TB free but Disk Utility and Nautilus say it is a 9TB RAID. very odd. I have tried checking the raid and the xfs file system. no errors.here is from watch cat /proc/mdstat
Code:
md1 : active raid5 sdg1[5] sdf1[6] sde1[4] sda[0] sdd[3] sdb[2] sdc[1]
8790830976 blocks level 5, 4k chunk, algorithm 2 [7/7] [UUUUUUU]
[code]....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Apr 15, 2010
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.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jun 10, 2011
I am trying to build a new array after adjusting TLER on my disks, which permanently changed some of the drives sizes. I am not sure if the following inconsistencies are related to the newly mismatched drive sizes.
Using:
Code:
mdadm --create --auto=md --verbose --chunk=64 --level=5 --raid-devices=4 /dev/md1 /dev/sdd /dev/sde /dev/sdf /dev/sdg
Nets me (build-time was two full days):
[Code]....
On a side note, since I'm recreating my array from scratch, I was wondering if anyone here knows of any optimized settings I could use. I've got 3Tb of data to transfer, so lots of test material.
These are Western Digital First Generation 2TB Green Drives (WD20EADS-00R6B0) with WDidle3 fix applied & TLER=ON. These are pre Advanced Format (aka not 4K).
Code:
mkfs.ext4 -E stripe-width=48,stride=16 /dev/md1
View 9 Replies
View Related
Mar 5, 2010
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]...
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
Dec 31, 2010
I recently went shopping at newegg for components for a new home server to fulfill multiple needs--chief amongst them to replace an aging old Athlon box which has been running a 4TB software raid for years now So I ordered an ASUS P7P55D-E LX mobo, 8GB DDR2, a core i5 quad-core, and 6 WD "green" 2TB drives (I'm more concerned with capacity than speed). I got it all assembled, using a 500GB 2.5" drive as the boot / host drive, a blu-ray reader, and splitting the 2TB drives amongst the 2 controllers (4 on the remaining ports of the x6 SATA controller and 2 on the x2 SATA-III controller, just not needing the SATA III capabilities). I plan to use Software RAID5 rather than the fakeraid that might be supported by the chipset. This affords maximum portability for the future.
At any rate, I installed 10.10 64-bit (Desktop), let it update, then installed mdadm and set about configuring the RAID5. I decided to use the nifty graphical tool. Last time I did this on my old Fedora box, it was all CLI.All seemed to be going well, and I was letting it fully recover / synchronize before setting up a filesystem (planning on ext4 this time). I kept an eye on it with cat /proc/mdstat.
After 20 hrs (averaging 25MB/sec on the sync...seems a bit slow, but who knows?)...it finishes and the RAID is immediately degraded with one volume (/dev/sdc1) marked as faulty and another volume marked as a spare. I replaced the SATA cables with brand new ones as long ago I ran into an issue like this due to a bad cable. Before trying again I ran the extensive SMART test and a read/write benchmark on each drive. They all checked out fine. So I started over and 20hrs later, same thing.So I shut down and removed the offending drive and started with only 5 drives. Another 19hrs go by and this one turns up /dev/sde1 faulty and another drive marked as a spare. That drive was fine before, and is on a different controller from the one that it was finding as faulty before.
Now I am suspicious that there is a larger underlying issue and that the drives are not bad at all. Should I have just gone with a 32-bit + PAE install? Does the 64-bit have known issues with the software RAID? Should I have just built it using the CLI? Looking online, it seems people are having success with the GUI tool. I don't think it is the GUI tool. Checking with mdadm, it seems everything is being configured right.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 25, 2011
i've just triede setting up my new raid with 4 discs however it wont let me create the raid?
Running my harddrives through a
Quote:
Promise SATA300 TX4 interface/controller
Thats my create command:
Code:
sudo mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --level=5
raid-devices=4 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1 /dev/sde1 /dev/sdf1
Error msg
Quote:
mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric
mdadm: chunk size defaults to 64K
mdadm: /dev/sdc1 is too small: 0K
mdadm: create aborted
if i try and do
Code:
sudo fdisk /dev/sdc
and tjek partitions with
code....
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 17, 2011
I am setting up a Raid5 and torture testing it. I added two eSata ports to my machine. When a drive is installed in that eSata port and the machine then booted up the device name (e.g. /dev/sdc) is inserted in the middle of my Raid devices. And that is just one example of how the device names can change.I did a search on 'static device names' but I saw nothing directly related to Raid. What I did see were suggestions to create udev rules based on UUID. But that was for single disks, not Raid, where each drive/partition in the raid array appears to have the same UUID.I'm surprised this does not come up in the various Raid howtos because it is impossible to keep a Raid array intact without solving this problem unless the machine is never touched thereafter.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Mar 6, 2011
I wanted to extend my raid array with one disk, but I made a major error. I forgot partition the new disk to utilize the full 640GB. I used the following commands to extend the array:
Code:
mdadm --add /dev/md0 /dev/sdf
mdadm --grow --raid-devices=6 /dev/md0
xfs_growfs /dev/md0
After noticing that something was wrong I used these commands to remove the new disk:
[Code]....
How can I repair this situation? Before starting this adventure I made a back-up of everything that was stored in the raid array.
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 30, 2011
I am running lucid and have a 4+1(spare) RAID5 array made up of 1TB disks. I upgraded my mdadm to version 3.1.4 and then performed the following operation:
$sudo mdadm --grow /dev/md3 --level=6 --read-device=5 --backup-file=/var/lib/mysql/md3backup
I have a 500GB drive mounted at /var/lib/mysql which is mostly empty and not part of any RAID array.The reshaping started and everything looked OK. The access lights on the 5 drives were all coming on at the same time on a regular basis. The status from /proc/mdstat showed the array being reshaped to RAID6, albeit slowly. The status showed an average speed of 4000KB and an estimated completion time of 4000 minutes. This all seemed reasonable. This was performed in late afternoon.
The next morning I checked the status and the average speed was down to 300->400KB and the estimated time to complete was 40,000 minutes. When I look at the drive lights, I have one drive whose access light is on solid and the other four drives come on intermittently. Running iotop doesn't show anything useful. mdadm and kjournal show up occasionally. The same is true for top (running on an i5 2500K Intel processor). Here is the output of cat /proc/mdstat:
Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10]
md2 : active raid1 sde3[4](S) sda3[3] sdc3[1] sdd3[2] sdb3[0]
987904 blocks [4/4] [UUUU]
[code]....
My biggest concern is keeping this system running for 20+ days without any hiccups.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Mar 18, 2010
I'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.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jun 7, 2010
I'm a bit sick to my stomach right now. I had a raid5 array (5x1.5TB drives) and I upgraded to lucid and now the array no longer works. Initially, on boot, it would try to mount it from fstab and that failed consistently as it wasn't assembling it.
then I tried to assemble it by hand (--scan) and that seemed to cause it to mount degraded (it seems md in the process tried to use on of the disks for something else!), but when I look at its partition table, it's empty. pretty pissed at the moment (somewhat at myself, didn't really need to upgrade), any ideas what went wrong?
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
Sep 16, 2010
This 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).
View 2 Replies
View Related
Dec 7, 2010
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]
View 3 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 8, 2011
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 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
Jan 29, 2010
I haven't tried to install Ubuntu in a while due to some frustrations during install previously. If memory serves I couldn't install it on to my ICH10R Raid5 boot array and I didn't want to give that up. So now I am getting the Ubuntu itch again.
here is my hardware:
Asus Maximus II Formula mobo
4GB G. Skill Ram
Intel Q6600 Quad Core
Soundblaster X-Fi Fatal1ty sound card
[code]....
So I downloaded the 64bit iso and attempted to install and very quickly ran in to a problem. The install is recognizing the array that has the bootable volume on it, but wants to erase the whole partition and use it all. On my laptop, it was able to install and share the partition with Windows 7.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jul 5, 2010
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.
View 4 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
