Ubuntu Servers :: Interpreting Mdadm RAID1 Status?
Feb 7, 2011
I have a RAID1 array, where mdadm states that one of the disks is "removed." Naturally, I assume one of the drives has failed. The mdadm --detail command tells me that the sda drive has failed. However, further inspection from the mdadm -E /dev/sdb1 command says that sdb1 disk has been removed. I am a bit confused. Can someone clarify which drive is failed? Am I misreading the command outputs?
Code:
sudo fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sda: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
[Code]...
View 3 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Aug 11, 2010
intending to set up an all-in-one server, i threw in the ubuntu server 10.04 (amd64) cd. during the text-install, i set up the device-topology below, and it worked.
[Code]....
then i tested my raid by hot-pulling off the sda wire (ouch). worked fine, system still worked, and it also managed rebooting from the left sdb (which of course showed up being sda, lacking the first drive). now i am trying to recover this pre-crash state. adding the first disk (showing up as sdb), i can add it to md0 and let it start syncronizing for 2 hours. but... i can?t boot anymore with the recovered first disk being sda...
at first, booting got stuck in an initrd-prompt after complaining it couldn?t find my sys-logical volume. after a lot of trial and error i don?t even get any complaints, just a black screen which would let me wait for a boot for weeks... so, my system does not boot from my first disk, whether i plug in the second or not. my second disk still boots. my last attempt to get booting fine again has been: zero sda?s first and last gigabyte to kill any ids duplicate sdb?s first cylinder to sda to make it bootable reinitialize sdb?s part.table using command o in fdisk for a new disk-id recreate sda1 partition add sda1 to md0
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 14, 2010
One of the hard drives in my server failed the other day, backups saved the day and downtime was only a few hours, but when setting up the new drive I went ahead and migrated to software RAID, in the hopes it may give me less downtime in the future when a drive fails. It all went rather well, but my main root partition won't finish syncing for some reason.
sda was the original drive with sda4 as /, sda1 as /boot, and sda2 as swap. sdb was the drive that failed and was replaced with the new drive. So I set up sdb with the same partitions of sda, added it to a RAID1 array, copied files from sda, and reboot to md4 as /, md1 as /boot, and md2 as swap. I added the sda partitions to the array, and the sync went off without a hitch on md1 and md2, md4 progresses well, but after a few hours /proc/mdstat just shows this:
Code:
root@d668:~# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10]
md2 : active raid1 sdb2[1] sda2[0]
9767424 blocks [2/2] [UU]
[Code]...
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jan 21, 2011
when I start my raid5, only 2 disks of 3 are active on md0. The 3rd disk is inactive on md_d0.When I do mdadm --examine, the two active disks report 2 active, 2 working, 1 failed. the inactive disk resports 3 active, 3 working, 0 failed.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 31, 2011
I've 2 servers (xen1 and xen2 - their hostnames) with perversion configuration below: Each server have 4 SATA disks, 1 Tb each.
16 Gb ddr3
debian squeeze x64 installed:
root@xen2:~# uname -a
Linux xen2 2.6.32-5-xen-amd64 #1 SMP Wed Jan 12 05:46:49 UTC 2011 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Storage configuration: Former 256 Mb + 32 Gb of 2 of 4 disks are used as raid1 devices for /boot and swap respectively. The rest of space, 970 Gb on all 4 sata disks are used as raid10. There is LVM2 installed over that raid10. Volume group is named xenlvm (that servers are expected to use as xen 4.0.1 hosts, but the story is not about Xen troubles). / , /var, /home are located on logical volumes of small size (just found out I got mixed up with lv names and partitions, but that's not the problem, I think):
[Code]...
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jan 28, 2010
I'm trying to set up a RAID1 partition on my Ubuntu 9.10 workstation.On this dual-boot system, Ubuntu is running from a separate drive (/dev/sdc - an SSD that is quite small, which is why I need more disk space). Besides that, there are two traditional 500 GB hard drives, which have Windows 7 installed (I want to keep the Windows installation intact), and about half of the space unallocated. This space is where I want to set up a single, large RAID1 partition for Linux.
(This, to my understanding, would be software RAID, whereas the Windows partitions are on hardware RAID - I hope this isn't a problem... Edit: See Peter's comment. I guess this shouldn't be a problem since I see both drives separately on Linux.)On both disks, /dev/sda and /dev/sdb, I created, using fdisk, identical new partitions of type "Linux raid autodetect" to fill up the unallocated space.
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 1 10 80293+ de Dell Utility
/dev/sda2 * 11 106 768000 7 HPFS/NTFS
[code]....
But so is "Device or resource busy" when trying to create the RAID array. Quite strange.
Update: Could the device mapper have something to do with this? How do /dev/mapper and dmraid relate to all this mdadm stuff anyway? Both provide software RAID, but.. differently? Sorry for my ignorance here. Under /dev/mapper/ there are some device files that, I think, somehow match the 3 Windows RAID partitions (sd{a,b}1 through sd{a,b}3). I don't know why there are four of these arrays though.
$ ls /dev/mapper/
control isw_dgjjcdcegc_ARRAY1 isw_dgjjcdcegc_ARRAY3
isw_dgjjcdcegc_ARRAY isw_dgjjcdcegc_ARRAY2
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 11, 2010
I am running Kernel 2.6.18-128.el5 on a 64bit quad core machine with 8GB RAM. Using "mdadm" I setup a RAID1 array between two Western Digital 1.5TB drives. The problem is that the resync is running VERY slow. Here is a current status.
[root@royalflush shared]# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid1]
md1 : active raid1 hdc5[1] hda5[0]
1304493952 blocks [2/2] [UU]
[=>] resync = 6.2% (81592192/1304493952) finish=4280156.0min speed=4K/sec
unused devices: <none>
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 12, 2010
I'm looking to recover a RAID1 array hopefully using mdadm. Ive not really used Linux much befor but I'm keen to learn to get my data back. Basically one of the disks in my Maxtor Shared Storage II (2x500GB sata) died and I could do with either rebuilding the array or getting the data off another way.
I have a spare machine I could use for recovery process. It has a spare drive but its only 120Gig, I also have a bigger 320gig disk but thats IDE not SATA. Do I need to purchase another 500GB sata drive or can I use either of my spares? If i do need to buy a new drive could I use a 1TB or 1.5TB or will it have to be 500? Next question is what is that best version of linux to use, I have knoppix 6.2 and Ubuntu (not sure on version) already. I noticed that mdadm isn't installed by default on Ubuntu.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 27, 2010
Posted this on the centos forum too, but I might get better attention here. I just moved my centos server to a mdadm raid1 array. I went partially after this guide: [URL].. What I did was to boot up a livecd and made three partitions on both of my empty disks, one for / one for swap and one for /vz (it's an openvz server). Made those partitions into seperate raid1 arrays and then rsync-ed everything from the old disk to the new partitions.
After I had moved everything I did chroot into the new raid array and edited both grub config files and fstab, according to the guide.
[Code]...
I have managed to run the system on the raid1 disks when using super grub2 disk off a cd, but it has it's own grub and can boot any distro, so I can see that the system is working fine, except for grub. I have tried installing grub both from a livecd (ubuntu 64bit) and when booted into the raid1 array, but it gives the same results as stated above.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Aug 7, 2011
I'm convinced that mdadm is going to be the death of me. I've wasted numerous hours on this so far without luck.
OpenSuse 11.4 on an old Supermicro box, creating a software RAID1 array across 2 x IDE 500GB disks. Creating /dev/md0 as a 250MB partition across /dev/sda1 and /dev/sdd1 for /boot, another 465GB partition across /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdd2 as an LVM partition to hold volumes for the various other OS filesystems. After the initial installation and configuration there were a series of mishaps with faulty IDE cables that had drives failing to show up at boot. Somehow, /dev/sdd2 got configured to array /dev/md1 as a spare drive. And nothing I've done so far gets it to show up as an active drive.
The obvious step of failing the partition, removing it, then adding (or re-adding) will bring it back as a spare. I've tried roughly a dozen different permutations of those same steps. The latest was to 'dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdd2' to clear the partition. Thought this might be the trick - after the zero, mdadm -E /dev/sdd2 reported 'no superblock' and no md1 configuration.
So 'mdadm --add /dev/md1 /dev/sdd2' and it still comes back as a spare. Here is mdadm -D /dev/md1
/dev/md1:
Version : 1.0
Creation Time : Sat Jul 9 10:26:01 2011
Raid Level : raid1
Array Size : 488119160 (465.51 GiB 499.83 GB)
code....
I can't stop this array, the OS is running from there. I can't easily boot from CD to repair, all IDE ports have disks attached.
Does anyone have an incantation to promote a spare to active?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jul 22, 2011
I have SLES10-SP3 running on an Intel SR1600URHS board with 3 hot-swap SATA disks configured using mdadm as Raid1 with hot spare. If I pull one of the active disks, all file i/o will stop for about 2.5 minutes after which it will start again and the raid array will be rebuilt using the spare disk. Is there any way I can reduce this 2.5 minutes of inactivity? I've tried setting /sys/block/sdX/device/timeout and /sys/block/sdX/device/retries to 1 for all disks, but this hasn't made any difference. The output from messages is:
12:11:56: ata2.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x2 frozen
12:11:56: ata2.00: cmd ea/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 tag 0 cdb 0x1e data 0
12:11:56: res 40/00:03:00:00:20/00:00:00:00:00/b0 Emask 0x4 (timeout)
[code]....
View 1 Replies
View Related
Feb 27, 2011
I've faced the problem with server freeze on heavy write.
System
CentOS 5.5 x64_86 with latest updates and kernel (2.6.18-194.32.1). Also tried 2.6.18-194.26.1 and 2.6.37-2 from ELRepo with the same results.
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz
Memory: 3 x 2Gb DDR3.
HDDs: 2 x Western Digital WDC WD1002FBYS-02A6B0
[Code].....
View 19 Replies
View Related
Jun 27, 2009
I have a used but good harddrive which I'd like to use as a replacement for a removed harddrive in existing raid1 array. mdadm --detail /dev/md00 0 0 -1 removed1 8 17 1 active sync /dev/sdb1I thought I needed to mark the removed drive as failed but I cannot get mdadm set it to "failed". I issue mdadm --manage /dev/md0 --fail /dev/sda1But mdadm response is:mdadm: hot remove failed for /dev/sda1: no such device or addressI thought I must mark the failed drive as "failed" to prevent raid1 from trying to mirror in wrong direction when I install my used-but-good disk. I want to reformat the good used drive first right? I believe I must prevent raid array from automatically try to mirror in the wrong direction.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Jan 11, 2011
After installing a new Rhel6.0 64bit on VMWare i got the information:
{
disabling swap...
/dev/dm-1
unmounting filesystems...
/mnt/runtime done
code....
View 6 Replies
View Related
Apr 22, 2011
I'm pretty new to FakeRAID vs JBOD in a software RAID, and could use some help/advice. I recently installed 11.4 on a brand new server system that I pieced together, using Intel RAID ICH10r on an ASUS P8P67 Evo board with 2500K Sandy Bridge CPU. I have two RAIDs setup, one RAID-1 mirror for the system drive and /home, and the other consists of four drives in RAID-5 for a /data mount.
Installing 11.4 seemed a bit problematic. I ran into this problem: [URL]... I magically got around it by installing from the live KDE version with all updates downloaded before the install. When prompted, I specified I would like to use mdadm (it asked me), however it proceeded to setup a dmraid. I suspect this is because I have fake raid enabled via the bios. Am I correct in this? Or should I still be able to use mdadm with bios raid setup?
Anyways, to make a long story short, I now have the server mostly running with dmraid installed vice mdadm. I have read many stories online that seem to indicate that dmraid is unreliable versus mdadm, especially when used with newer SATA drives like I happen to be using. Is it worth re-installing the OS with the drives in JBOD and then having mdadm configure a linux software raid? Are their massive implications one way or another on if I do or do not install mdadm or keep dmraid?
Finally, what could I use to monitor the health and status of a dmraid? mdadm seems to have it's own monitoring associated with it when I was glazing over the man pages.
View 9 Replies
View Related
Apr 2, 2010
I'm setting up a DIY NAS system, running Ubuntu server from a CF and using 2 SATA drives. I only need RAID1. so that should do. Setting up RAID1 with mdadm is straightforward, and all of my tests with failure/recover scenario work fine in VirtualBox. Most of the tutorials on the net are talking about using mdadm in conjunction with LVM2. What is the reasoning behind LVM2 over mdadm?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jan 5, 2011
I had a thread earlier asking for help installing Ubuntu Server to my homemade atom based NAS, but I gave up on that (GUI's are more helpful to me ) and so now I'm running Ubuntu 10.10 Desktop 64bit edition.Last night I was finally able to get mdadm set up. I have two 1TB disks set up in RAID1 config. I used
Code:
sudo mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
to create the array, and then waited until it finished assembling. Then I used System>Administration>Disk
[code]....
View 1 Replies
View Related
Oct 14, 2010
I'm the user operating ubuntu 9.10 server. I made configuration with software mirroring(raid1). when I checked cron, I found the mdadm in cron.d dir. 57 0 * * 0 root [ -x /usr/share/mdadm/checkarray ] && [ $(date +\%d) -le 7 ] && /usr/share/mdadm/checkarray --cron --all -- quiet checkarray is supposed to be run on the first sunday of every month. so I just want to know
1. what does checkarray do exactly?
2. does it make a stress to system?
3. Is there any problem if I get rid of the script from cron?
View 4 Replies
View Related
Mar 30, 2011
I've got a strange problem. I have the following system:
[Code]...
After doing this install everything works fine as expected. I can reboot, shutdown and bootup as I much as I want to and the system will work. Now, I proceed to do the following (as root obviously - sudo bash)
[Code]...
When I try to restart the system now, I get to the grub boot loader and then it just breaks with the following message I've identified 'mdadm' as being the culprit here. Any idea why this would happen? Just a subnote. The reason I'm installing mdadm is to create a soft-raid as follows with the remaining space on each drive:
[Code]...
View 5 Replies
View Related
Jul 29, 2010
I have built a small test server. I am planing on using this machine a an email and web server to test out its hosting capacities. in the future I will build a larger and more well equipped version.
AMD Athlon x2 2.0ghz
2 160gb SATA drives (hardware raid 1, done through the Motherboard)
2 gb ram (dual channel)
Like I said small test server. I am trying to install 10.04 server edition. When I get to the point of partitioning it asks me to activate the raid so I do. I get through the guided partitioning and get ready to write the file system to the drives and the screen goes red and says that it has failed. On a side note, this works if i install it on the same drives without any raid configuration.
View 6 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
Jul 9, 2010
I'm setting up Ubuntu 10.04 Server x64 on a Gateway DX4710. I installed on a 500GB SATA, using encrypted LVM, added webmin, and used ufw to configure iptables. All seemed fine.I then set up RAID1 on two 1TB SATAs. Using webmin, I created Linux RAID partitions on sdb and sdc. I then ran ...
sudo mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
sudo mkfs.ext3 /dev/md0
sudo mkdir /data
sudo chmod -R 777 /data
sudo mount /dev/md0 /data
All still seemed fine.I could see /data in the webmin filesystem list, and had ca. 1.4TB total local disk space.At that point, I decided that I really wanted an encrypted filesystem on /dev/md0. I also needed to tweak the fan setup. And so I shut down, without adding /dev/md0 to fstab. And it was probably still synching.Now /dev/md0 is semi missing. That is ...
sudo mdadm -D /dev/md0 => doesn't exist
sudo mdadm -E /dev/sdb1 => part of RAID1 with sdc1
sudo mdadm -E /dev/sdc1 => part of RAID1 with sdb1
What do I do now? Can I recover /dev/md0? Is it just that I didn't add it to fstab? Can I just do that now? Or do I need to delete sdb1 and sdc1, and start over?
View 5 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
May 5, 2010
I have an Ubuntu Server on (8.10) running under Citrix XenServer (though that shouldn't make a difference).
I installed on a single disk:
xvda1 - 200 MB - /boot
xvda2 - 9.8 GB - LVM (ubuntu-base)
The LVM is:
swap - 1.0 GB
root - 8.8 GB - /
I have successfully gotten this converted to RAID1 by adding a new drive (xvdb) and following the Debian howtoforge article [URL]
What I have not been able to do, is get grub working properly.
If I fail xvdb and reboot the system, everything comes up and I can reboot and run.
If I fail xvda and reboot the system, XenServer gives me a bootloader error. i.e.: no grub
If someone has done this, can they tell me what grub commands to run to get a successful boot of the primary disk fails?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Feb 4, 2011
I have a ubuntu sever with a raid1 data drive formated in native linux ext3. I have searched for answers to my question but most likely I'm not asking it correctly. I want to use the data drive to store backups of files from various ubuntu and windows machines. Do I need to reformat the drive as ntfs to enable windows use or can it remain as ext3? For that matter can I reformat as ext4 as a soultion? Again, I wish to use the data drive as a backup storage.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Apr 10, 2011
I accidentally rm -rf 'ed /etc directory from the main server. The server has raid1 soft-raid. Is there a way to recover the directory.
View 4 Replies
View Related
May 3, 2011
im on 10.10(desktop) and mdadm was v2.8.1 from 2008, very out of date so i tried 3.2.1 -> no change. mdadm raid1 read speeds are the same as single disk. note i used the tests in the disk utility benchmarking tool at first --these showed raid 5 atleast to be much better but when i tried dd reads raid5 dropped off with larger data to almost the same (slow) speed as raid1. compare:
[code]....
using two partitions will be enough to show raid1 performs at single disk speed. I dont really want to use a 4 disk raid0 just to get the read speed i should be able to get with raid1 as i dont really care about the size loss. I would of course use raid10 but i have found this suffers from the same problem (achieve same read speed as 2 disk stripe). So whilst im shocked others aren't reporting this, unless there is some obscure reason why my system would give these results i think raid1 in not behaving as it should.
View 6 Replies
View Related
Jul 12, 2010
I'm just about to commence a full reinstall of my home media server. Planning on using 1x 1tb and 7x 1.5TB drives in raid 6. I notice the version of mdadm distributed in Ubuntu is 2.6.7.1, but versions exist up to 2.6.9 (excluding all the 3.X ones) Is it worth using a later version? Or is 2.6.7.1 used for a particular reason?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Oct 6, 2010
Can I use UUIDs to setup a raid with mdadm?
View 3 Replies
View Related
Mar 3, 2011
I'm looking for a way to do a bare metal backup of our server using a tool such as ghost or clonezilla. The limitation is that / is on an mdadm raid 5. The only relevant info I could find on clonezilla's site was:
# Software RAID/fake RAID is not supported by default. It's can be done manually only.
View 6 Replies
View Related
