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
ADVERTISEMENT
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
Jun 30, 2011
I know you can fail and then remove a drive from a RAID5 array. This leaves the array in a degraded state.
How can you remove a drive and convert the array to just a regular, clean array?
View 9 Replies
View Related
May 3, 2010
Created my own file server/nas, but get stuck in a problem after couple of months. I have a server with 4x 1,5tb disks, all connected to sata ports and 1 40gb ata133 disk running ubuntu 9.10 x64 amd. I've created a raid5 array using mdadm. It all worked great for couple of months but lately the raid5 array is degraded. disk sdd1 is faulting every few days. I have checked the drive but it is fine. If I re-add the disk and wait for 6 hours my raid5 array is all fine again, but after a few shutdowns, it is degraded.
my mdadm detail:
Quote:
root@ubuntu: sudo mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 00.90
Creation Time : Mon Dec 14 13:00:43 2009
Raid Level : raid5
[Code].....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Nov 2, 2010
I have ubuntu server 10.04 on a server with 2.8ghz 1gb ddr2 with the os on a 2gb cf card attached to the IDE channel and a software raid5 with 4 x 750gb drives. On a samba share using these drives I am only getting around 5 MB/s connected via wireless N at 216mbps and my router and server both having gigabit ports. Is a raid 5 supposed to be that slow? I was seeing speeds of anywhere from 20-50MB/s from other people and am just wondering what i am doing wrong to be so far below that.
View 4 Replies
View Related
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
Jul 27, 2010
after a failed upgrade from 9.10 to 10.04 I had to format my computer and do a clean install of 10.04, and now my mdadm raid5 array wont start.my array is called "The Library", and i believe the space between "The" and "Library" is causing the command disk utility uses to start the array to fail.The exact error isAn error occurred while performing an operation on "The Library" (RAID-5 Array): The operation failed
Error assembling array: mdadm exited with exit code 1: mdadm: unrecognised word on ARRAY line: Library
mdadm: unrecognised word on ARRAY line: Library
[code]....
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 13, 2011
My fileserver initially had 3 1TB drives in RAID 5 configured with mdadm as /dev/md1. (System root is a mirrored raid on /dev/md0) I went to go add a 4th 1TB drive to /dev/md1 and grow the raid 5 accordingly. I was initially following this guide: [URL] but ran into issues on the 3rd and 4th commands. I've been trying a few things to remedy the issue since, but no luck. The drive seems to have been added to /dev/md1 properly, but I can't get the filesystem to resize to 3TB. I also am not entirely sure how /dev/md1p1 got created, but it appears to be the primary partition on the logical device /dev/md1.
Relevent information:
Code:
fdisk -l /dev/md1
Disk /dev/md1: 3000.6 GB, 3000606523392 bytes
2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 732569952 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 65536 bytes / 196608 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xda4939fa .....
The filesystem originated as ext3, I believe its showing up as ext2 in some of these results because I disabled the journal when doing some initial troubleshooting. Not sure what the issue is, but I didn't want to blindly perform operations on the filesystem and risk losing my data.
View 9 Replies
View Related
Jul 19, 2011
This is the error message I'm getting when trying to Format the mdadm RAID5 created with 4 drives
Code:
Error creating partition: helper exited with exit code 1: In part_add_partition: device_file=/dev/md1, start=0, size=6001196531712, type=
Entering MS-DOS parser (offset=0, size=6001196531712)
MSDOS_MAGIC found
found partition type 0xee => protective MBR for GPT
Exiting MS-DOS parser
[Code]...
View 3 Replies
View Related
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
Jun 21, 2011
I've been playing with this for hours, and have been unable to figure it out. I tried to convert my RAID5 array of 4 active disks and 1 spare to a RAID6 with 5 active disks.
I did this:
Code:
mdadm --grow /dev/md4 --raid-devices 5 --level 6
Here is what I have on /dev/md4:
Code:
/dev/sde1 active
/dev/sdg1 active
/dev/sdj1 active
/dev/sdf1 active
removed
/dev/sdh5 spare
code....
but it tells me that /dev/sde is busy, and then that it has a bad superblock (From what I've read, I'm sure the bad superblock is just because of the "busy" message). I've tried this with the -f option, too, with no luck.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Feb 15, 2010
I have a problem with my mdadm RAID. I wanted to know if anyone had any experience with shrinking RAID5 arrays. I was growing the array from 5 to 6 devices however the grow got interrupted and it has recovered to 5 drives. The 6th drive is toast and I am unable to re add it to the system. I would like to drive the device listed as "removed". I have tried mdadm /dev/md0 --remove detached and failed with no success. I am running Ubuntu kernel 2.6.28-11 and mdadm is v3.1.1.
Here is output of a "mdadm -D dev/md0"
/dev/md0:
Version : 0.90
Creation Time : Wed Jan 12 00:46:41 2009
Raid Level : raid5
Array Size : 4883812480 (4657.57 GiB 5001.02 GB)
Used Dev Size : 976762496 (931.51 GiB 1000.20 GB)
Raid Devices : 6
Total Devices : 5
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Update Time : Mon Feb 15 20:25:07 2010
State : active, degraded
Active Devices : 5
Working Devices : 5
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 64K
UUID : 74fa5199:84b88e81:4ae0fbae:92643084
Events : 0.1331010
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 16 0 active sync /dev/sdb
1 8 32 1 active sync /dev/sdc
2 8 48 2 active sync /dev/sdd
3 8 0 3 active sync /dev/sda
4 8 64 4 active sync /dev/sde
5 0 0 5 removed
cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md0 : active raid5 sdb[0] sde[4] sda[3] sdd[2] sdc[1]
4883812480 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [6/5] [UUUUU_]
unused devices: <none>
View 4 Replies
View Related
Feb 2, 2010
Something weird happened last night and my raid5 failed. I am trying to re activate it and see if my data is dead or what. When I run mdadm -Asv /dev/md0 I get
Code:
mdadm: looking for devices for /dev/md0
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/dm-1: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/dm-1 has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/dm-0: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/dm-0 has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sde2: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sde2 has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sde1: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sde1 has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sde: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sde has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sdd: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sdd has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sdc: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sdc has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sdb: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sdb has wrong uuid.
mdadm: cannot open device /dev/sda: Device or resource busy
mdadm: /dev/sda has wrong uuid.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jan 17, 2011
Relatively inexperienced user using Linux/ubuntu. Not too savvy I admit and like to use GUI as much as possible. Not a great fan of the Terminal window... I have installed a couple weeks ago Ubuntu 10.10 (Desktop Edition) using Alternative install disk (don't ask why!) on 4Gb usb stick. Working fine except one thing with the raid array. I have created a raid5 array made of 6 drives using GUI (Disk Utility). After an expansion of the array (or was it a reinstall of the OS, I can't remember exactly?) the array does not autostart anymore. Of course nor does it automount anymore.
THE WEIRD THING is that I can still start it MANUALLY from the "Disk Utility" GUI after two tries. And it works just fine thereafter!!! The first time i try to start it gives an error (something about /dev/md0_127 being not ready or buisy). THE SECOND TRY ALWAYS WORKS like a charm, the array starts and i can mount it just fine. Here is a screenshot: I have also noticed that there is no entry in fstab for /dev/md0 although I can manually mount it using the same Disk Utility GUI. That is strange to me. Is it normal? i could easily add it manually but Ubuntu it won't boot anymore (i tried and failed, hence the reinstall). I tried for two weeks to find a solution browsing on different forums but the problem is beyond my expertise...
BELOW are further details about my configuration mdadm.conf, fstab, fdisk -l result and other info. I don=t want to loose my data but it would be nice to make this thing work and be able to access my fileserver via vnc instead of having to keep it connected to a lcd monitor as now. This is the blkid result:
[Code]...
View 3 Replies
View Related
Mar 12, 2011
I'm trying to find out which one is safer when it comes down to recovery process in case of a drive failure
A RAID5 created in mdadm
or
a Stripe RAID created on pure LVM
the RAID is purely for data storage for a SAMBA server, the OS will reside on its own drive.Ideally the RAID physical hard drives should be re-build on another machine in case of catastrophic server failure (mother board problem, or any other random problems as an example)I can't decide which of the 2 software RAID method is more convenient and safest, don't care about performance, it'll be a dedicated server for mass storage, it's going to mirror other 3 file servers on fakeRAIDs (dmraid), it's simply a redundant backup for the backups
The important goal here is portability.from what've read it appears that LVM might be more portable?but according to some dated (2009) info the mdadm seems to be a bit buggy when it comes to rebuilding the array, yet LVM doesn't appear that safe either which one would you pick for ease to rebuild on catastrophic failures?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 17, 2011
One of the disks in my RAID5 arrays started acting up, giving me some I/O buffer errors and making the RAID stop. disk info
Code:
=== START OF INFORMATION SECTION ===
Device Model: WDC WD10EARS-00Y5B1
Serial Number: WD-WMAV51466805
Firmware Version: 80.00A80
[Code]...
View 9 Replies
View Related
Aug 6, 2010
I'm trying to get mdadm to assemble all my drives with help of uuid.
When I use
$ sudo mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sdd
mdadm: /dev/md0 has been started with 3 drives.
So the setup works. But I want to do it the proper way with UUID.
$ sudo blkid
[Code]...
View 1 Replies
View Related
Aug 10, 2011
I have created a RAID 1 array using this tutorial. Rather than reiterate everything I'll just say that I followed the instructions to the letter, including the creation of /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf and editing /etc/fstab as instructed in the tutorial.The problem comes when I reboot the system. I get the following message before seeing a login prompt.
Code:
fsck from util-linux-ng 2.17.2
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/md0,
[code]....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Dec 11, 2010
I have a 1TB SATA2 disk in my home Debian server. I'm planning to buy two more drives (1TB too) in order to build a RAID5. Does it make any difference if I use the SATA2 drive with two SATA3 drives? I'm getting the SATA3 with more cache (64MB) at the same price than the old one and I'm not sure if the SATA version or the cache size can impact in the normal behavior of a RAID5
[code]...
View 5 Replies
View Related
May 29, 2011
Running OpenSuse 11.4 and have setup 2 x Raid5 configs - raid created, disks format, everything working fine. I've just rebooted and the raid5 fails to initialize.
Getting these errors:
Code:
May 29 16:58:30 suse kernel: [ 1788.170692] md: md0 stopped.
May 29 16:58:30 suse kernel: [ 1788.197864] md: invalid superblock checksum on sdb1
May 29 16:58:30 suse kernel: [ 1788.197876] md: sdb1 does not have a valid v0.90 superblock, not importing!
[Code]....
View 9 Replies
View Related
May 2, 2010
Software RAID 5 on 4 2TB caviar green disks. Then 12 partitions or about 500GB, and finally LVM to use the partitions as pv, and create some vg for my needs.
My disks are /dev/sda to /dev/sdd I boot on /dev/sde which is an sd card
My doing (and at the end, my issue):
Code:
(parted) select /dev/sda
(parted) mklabel
Warning: The existing .... blablabla [msdos] ? gpt
(parted) select /dev/sdb
[Code].....
View 3 Replies
View Related
Feb 17, 2011
I have a CentOS 5 based Linux system with a 3Ware 9550SU RAID card and four 500GB drives set up in a RAID5 array (3 in the array and 1 hot spare).
I want to 'replace' these drives with four 2TB drives without data loss. My server case has a total of 8 drive bays all hot-swap and all attached to the RAID card, this means I have four empty drive bays on the RAID card.
One thought is to put the four new 2TB drives in the empty drive bays, configure them in a new RAID5 array. Then the question is now to I "mirror" the original RAID5 array over to the new one?
This is just a thought though, I am not sure it will work. In short my question to this forum is how do I accomplish this upgrade?.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Dec 5, 2010
I'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]....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Apr 14, 2010
Suddenly I noticed that all my file system had gone into read-only mode. My first thought was that the Sata data cable had got loose for one of the drives, but that wasn't it. All cables were connected correctly. So I booted up again, but I only came to a rescue mode terminal.
I have four software MD raid volumes:
Code:
Running mdadm -D on the volumes told me that the sdc drive had been kicked out from both md0 and md1. However, md3 had kicked out two drives, so I couldn't get any information from mdadm -D on that. For md0 and md1 I could just add the kicked-out partitions back into the volume, but for md3 I don't even know which partitions got kicked out...
Here are some outputs:
Before I rebooted the first time I saved the 200 last rows of dmesg to a memory stick. Here they are:
Code:
Trying to restart the md3 volume in the rescue mode terminal:
Commands:
Code:
Output:
Code:
The "Array State" row seems interesting. I guess that AAAA means all four drives are OK. But then why does the array state differ between the members?
Does anyone know how to figure out which two members that got kicked out? And how do I get them back in (assuming that they're OK)?
View 3 Replies
View Related
Apr 26, 2009
I've got a RAID5 array that doesn't want to automount after rebooting. I'm pretty familiar with linux, RAID, and mdadm, and up until now, I've had the RAID5 array working just fine. However, whenever I reboot, the array drops off and won't remount until I manually assemble and then mount the thing. I find this odd because I had everything automounting just fine back in 10.3, and even in 11.0 (I think - not sure on that). Currently, things are working, but I'd really like to not not have to type
Code:
mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1
followed by
Code:
mount /dev/md0 /mnt/data every time I reboot. Even including this in some sort of start-up script seems kludgey... Surely there must be a more elegant way of automatically bringing up a RAID5 array after booting? I'm not sure what information you'll need, so I'm going to go ahead and include as much as I can anticipate...
So having already used the commands:
[Code]....
View 9 Replies
View Related
Jan 16, 2010
I am trying to set up a mdadm raid in a new PC that I am building for home theatre. the machine boot just fine from /dev/sdc running ubuntu 9.10 However in gparted /dev/sda and dev/sdb show to be part of /devmapper/sil_ajbicfacbaej Both dev/sda and /dev/sdb were drives that used to be part of a sil hardware raid on a previous machine. I would like to use them as a new mdadm raid on this new machine the old hardware card was really quite slow. the drives are now pluged into the MB and should bw much faster there.
fdisk -l shows this
*********************************************** ~$ sudo fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sda: 1500.3 GB, 1500301910016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 182401 cylinders
[code]....
View 6 Replies
View Related
Mar 11, 2011
I have a 4 disk raid 5 array on my Ubuntu 10.10 box. They are /dev/sd[c,d,e,f].Smartctl started notifying me that /dev/sde had some bad sectors and the number of errors was increasing each day. To mitigate this I decided to buy a new drive and replace it.I have an external 4-bay disk enclosure. I failed /dev/sde via mdadm:
Code:
mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --fail /dev/sde
mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --remove /dev/sde
[code]...
View 5 Replies
View Related
Apr 24, 2011
Its from a Synology Box with 3 disks, which one is damaged. But this disk wasnt in use.Take a look on the raid-size of 493 GB - and the both available disks with 250GB..)
On the others there were a linear raid. during this damaged disk the synology-device tells me, that the volume was crashed.But it look like, that this disk was not mounted into this volume.Quote:
DiskStation> mdadm --detail /dev/md2
/dev/md2:
Version : 00.90
[code]....
View 3 Replies
View Related
Nov 30, 2010
I am learning software raid 1 with centos 5.5. I created the raid with out any problems and removed the first drive to check there was no problems and it booted. I have installed the old drive back in the system as hdc and need to resync the drives (used old drive as partitions correct) I thought I could use raidhotadd but id does not seem to exist anymore. how I resync the drives in the array hda primary and hdc secondary using mdadm
View 1 Replies
View Related
Feb 20, 2011
This is message I get when I try and start itmdadm: /dev/md0 assembled from 2 drives - not enough to start the arrayBelow is the information I've collected about any help on how I can get the raid back up and going to I can get the data off of it would be awesome
sudo mdadm --examine --scan -v
ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid10 num-devices=4 UUID=91c36708:a7cbb532:5b51dc92:ba008491
devices=/dev/sdd1,/dev/sdc1,/dev/sdb1,/dev/sda1
[code]...
View 1 Replies
View Related
