On 04.10.2021 03:41, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
That's not it then... googling "md127" I found a *bunch* of possible
causes.
I tried already updating the name attribute, setting the homehost to
none and a few others. Unfortunately none helped.
Reiner Buehl writes:
> On 02.10.2021 01:32, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>> Is it possible you need to update your init ramdisk? Maybe your changes
>> to your mdadm.conf aren't being seen?
>
> I do run update-initramfs -u after each change. Shouldn't that be
> enough to to update the mdadm.conf in the ini
On Fri, 1 Oct 2021, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
Tim Woodall writes:
On Fri, 1 Oct 2021, Reiner Buehl wrote:
On 01.10.2021 16:11, Felix Miata wrote:
Mine (old) is like so:
# head -n3 /etc/mdadm.conf
HOMEHOST
DEVICE containers partitions
ARRAY /dev/md0 metadata=1.0 name=msi85:0tmp UUID=...
I tried
On 02.10.2021 01:32, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
Is it possible you need to update your init ramdisk? Maybe your changes
to your mdadm.conf aren't being seen?
I do run update-initramfs -u after each change. Shouldn't that be enough
to to update the mdadm.conf in the init ramdisk?
Tim Woodall writes:
> On Fri, 1 Oct 2021, Reiner Buehl wrote:
>
>> On 01.10.2021 16:11, Felix Miata wrote:
>>> Mine (old) is like so:
>>> # head -n3 /etc/mdadm.conf
>>> HOMEHOST
>>> DEVICE containers partitions
>>> ARRAY /dev/md0 metadata=1.0 name=msi85:0tmp UUID=...
>> I tried changing the HOME
On Fri, 1 Oct 2021, Reiner Buehl wrote:
On 01.10.2021 16:11, Felix Miata wrote:
Mine (old) is like so:
# head -n3 /etc/mdadm.conf
HOMEHOST
DEVICE containers partitions
ARRAY /dev/md0 metadata=1.0 name=msi85:0tmp UUID=...
I tried changing the HOMEHOST from to but that did not
help.
I've
On 01.10.2021 16:11, Felix Miata wrote:
Mine (old) is like so:
# head -n3 /etc/mdadm.conf
HOMEHOST
DEVICE containers partitions
ARRAY /dev/md0 metadata=1.0 name=msi85:0tmp UUID=...
I tried changing the HOMEHOST from to but that did not
help.
On 01.10.2021 15:50, Linux-Fan wrote:
I have observed this in the past, too and do not know how to "fix" it.
Why is it necessary for the volume to appear under /dev/md3? Might it
be possible to use its UUID instead, i.e. check the output of
ls -l /dev/disk/by-uuid
to find out if your m
Reiner Buehl composed on 2021-10-01 11:11 (UTC+0200):
> I created a new mdadm RAID 1 as /dev/md3. But after each reboot, it gets
> activated as md127. How can I fix this - preferably without haveing to
> delete the whole array again...
> The array is defined like this in /etc/mdadm:
> ARRAY /dev/
Reiner Buehl writes:
I created a new mdadm RAID 1 as /dev/md3. But after each reboot, it gets
activated as md127. How can I fix this - preferably without haveing to delete
the whole array again...
The array is defined like this in /etc/mdadm:
ARRAY /dev/md3 metadata=1.2 level=raid1 num-dev
I created a new mdadm RAID 1 as /dev/md3. But after each reboot, it gets
activated as md127. How can I fix this - preferably without haveing to
delete the whole array again...
The array is defined like this in /etc/mdadm:
ARRAY /dev/md3 metadata=1.2 level=raid1 num-devices=1
UUID=41e0a87f:22a2205
Linux-Fan writes:
> On 10/07/2014 11:41 PM, lee wrote:
>
> Transferring data via network is also my favorite means of
> "transportation". On the other hand, my connection has an upload speed
> of about 70 KiB/sec and is therefore not suited for transferring medium
> amounts of data like 150 MiB (
On 10/07/2014 11:41 PM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
>> On 09/30/2014 01:40 AM, lee wrote:
[...]
>>> Last time I looked into buying an USB stick, I found out that I'd be
>>> better off buying an USB disk because the sticks were so expensive and
>>> their capacity relatively low, so I bought an
Linux-Fan writes:
> On 09/30/2014 01:40 AM, lee wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> I think I figured it out: The USB stuff was actually going to sleep and
>> remained unresponsive once it fell asleep, until a reboot. I used
>> powertop to disable the power management for USB and didn't have any
>> further is
On 09/30/2014 01:40 AM, lee wrote:
[...]
> I think I figured it out: The USB stuff was actually going to sleep and
> remained unresponsive once it fell asleep, until a reboot. I used
> powertop to disable the power management for USB and didn't have any
> further issues since.
>
> It might be w
Linux-Fan writes:
>> On 09/29/2014 12:56 AM, lee wrote:
>
> I cannot tell much about the reliability of SMART data in general but
> should I see a lot of "bad" values suddenly appearing I would
> immediately perform some additional backups and check the data more
> closely, listen to the drive so
On 09/29/2014 12:56 AM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
>> On 09/27/2014 09:52 PM, lee wrote:
>>> Linux-Fan writes:
On 09/22/2014 03:23 AM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
I always at least try to read/interpret the SMART data. I consider it
valuable information, although it is
Linux-Fan writes:
> On 09/27/2014 09:52 PM, lee wrote:
>> Linux-Fan writes:
>>> On 09/22/2014 03:23 AM, lee wrote:
Linux-Fan writes:
> On 09/21/2014 08:41 PM, lee wrote:
>> Linux-Fan writes:
On 09/20/2014 04:55 PM, lee wrote:
I've seen the smart info show incred
On 09/27/2014 09:52 PM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
>> On 09/22/2014 03:23 AM, lee wrote:
>>> Linux-Fan writes:
On 09/21/2014 08:41 PM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
>>> On 09/20/2014 04:55 PM, lee wrote:
>>>
>>> I've seen the smart info show incredible numbers for the hours and
Linux-Fan writes:
> On 09/22/2014 03:23 AM, lee wrote:
>> Linux-Fan writes:
>>> On 09/21/2014 08:41 PM, lee wrote:
Linux-Fan writes:
>> On 09/20/2014 04:55 PM, lee wrote:
>>
>> I've seen the smart info show incredible numbers for the hours and for
>> the temperature. Hence I can only
On 09/22/2014 03:23 AM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
>> On 09/21/2014 08:41 PM, lee wrote:
>>> Linux-Fan writes:
> On 09/20/2014 04:55 PM, lee wrote:
> Other than that, in my experience Seagate disks my have an unusually
> high failure rate.
Mine all work here. SMART repor
Linux-Fan writes:
> On 09/21/2014 08:41 PM, lee wrote:
>> Linux-Fan writes:
On 09/20/2014 04:55 PM, lee wrote:
Other than that, in my experience Seagate disks my have an unusually
high failure rate.
>>>
>>> Mine all work here. SMART reports
>>
>> They'll work until they fail. I
On 09/21/2014 08:41 PM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
>>> On 09/20/2014 04:55 PM, lee wrote:
>>> Other than that, in my experience Seagate disks my have an unusually
>>> high failure rate.
>>
>> Mine all work here. SMART reports
>
> They'll work until they fail. I don't believe in the smart-inf
Linux-Fan writes:
>> On 09/20/2014 04:55 PM, lee wrote:
>
>> Other than that, in my experience Seagate disks my have an unusually
>> high failure rate.
>
> Mine all work here. SMART reports
They'll work until they fail. I don't believe in the smart-info.
> The "unreliability" has just happened
"Andrew M.A. Cater" writes:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 03:51:54AM +0200, lee wrote:
>> Andrew McGlashan writes:
>>
>> > Whilst it is usually quite easy to find older server class hardware at
>> > bargain prices (compared to new), it is often the case that older
>> > hardware is slower and much l
On 09/20/2014 04:55 PM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
>> On 09/14/2014 04:33 PM, lee wrote:
>>> Linux-Fan writes:
or even buy some additional drives (I know that it is often said that
"today drives are cheap" but for me being comparatively new to
computing, 60€ are still much for
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 03:51:54AM +0200, lee wrote:
> Andrew McGlashan writes:
>
> > Whilst it is usually quite easy to find older server class hardware at
> > bargain prices (compared to new), it is often the case that older
> > hardware is slower and much less power efficient to newer hardware
Andrew McGlashan writes:
> Whilst it is usually quite easy to find older server class hardware at
> bargain prices (compared to new), it is often the case that older
> hardware is slower and much less power efficient to newer hardware and
> the pricing on lots of new gear has collapsed enough to
Cindy-Sue Causey writes:
> After going through this several times lately, I think of it this way:
> $25 for a cheap part when better quality is $50. That cheap part WILL
> break and usually very soon. $25 DOWN THE DRAIN, boom, just like that
> when that same $25 could have gone towards that $50 p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 21/09/2014 4:00 AM, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
> First off, I used to use this script [1], with an entry
> in /etc/rc.local to kick it off on boot. My goal was to start
> the RAID1 array only if 2 members could be found (minimum), I
> added a 3rd me
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
I'm going to address a number of things here
First off, I used to use this script [1], with an entry in /etc/rc.local
to kick it off on boot. My goal was to start the RAID1 array only if 2
members could be found (minimum), I added a 3rd m
On 9/20/14, lee wrote:
>
> What's the point of creating and attaching to your computer an
> unreliable storage system which continues to give you trouble because
> it's unreliable?
*100% ditto*
This is coming from someone operating at an extremely low income
level: Buy the more expensive shtuff
Linux-Fan writes:
> On 09/14/2014 04:33 PM, lee wrote:
>> Linux-Fan writes:
>>
On 09/14/2014 12:38 PM, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>>>
>>> or even buy some additional drives (I know that it is often said that
>>> "today drives are cheap" but for me being comparatively new to
>>> computing, 60
Linux-Fan writes:
> On 09/14/2014 04:35 PM, lee wrote:
>> Linux-Fan writes:
>>
>>> Also, the reliability of the external storage is required to be
>>> perfect
>>
>> Then forget USB disks. Get an HP Microserver and reliable disks.
>
> Sorry, forgot to insert a not :).
> It should read "the rel
Sorry, this should have been sent to the list in the first place.
Original Message
Subject: Re: MDADM RAID1 of external USB 3.0 Drives
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:12:41 +0200
From: Linux-Fan
To: Reco
On 09/14/2014 06:06 PM, Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sun, 14 Sep 2014
On 09/14/2014 04:33 PM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
>
>>> On 09/14/2014 12:38 PM, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>>
>> or even buy some additional drives (I know that it is often said that
>> "today drives are cheap" but for me being comparatively new to
>> computing, 60€ are still much for a HDD)
>
Hi.
On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 17:55:46 +0200
Linux-Fan wrote:
> Concerning editing the initscript: I am now going to do that but I guess
> it is going to produce trouble when upgrading to Jessie.
No it won't. Installing a new version of mdadm package will produce a
different version of /etc/init.d/m
On 09/14/2014 04:35 PM, lee wrote:
> Linux-Fan writes:
>
>> Also, the reliability of the external storage is required to be
>> perfect
>
> Then forget USB disks. Get an HP Microserver and reliable disks.
Sorry, forgot to insert a not :).
It should read "the reliability of the external storage
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 02:30:34PM +0200, Linux-Fan wrote:
> On 09/14/2014 01:42 PM, Linux-Fan wrote:
> > On 09/14/2014 02:06 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> In the meantime, you can:
> >> - add a bitmap file to the RAID, which will speed up rebuilds.
> >> - use the --no-degraded flag, to
Linux-Fan writes:
>> On 09/14/2014 12:38 PM, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>
> or even buy some additional drives (I know that it is often said that
> "today drives are cheap" but for me being comparatively new to
> computing, 60€ are still much for a HDD)
Where do you get good 2TB+ drives for only E
Linux-Fan writes:
> Also, the reliability of the external storage is required to be
> perfect
Then forget USB disks. Get an HP Microserver and reliable disks.
--
Knowledge is volatile and fluid. Software is power.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a s
On 09/14/2014 01:42 PM, Linux-Fan wrote:
> On 09/14/2014 02:06 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
[...]
>> In the meantime, you can:
>> - add a bitmap file to the RAID, which will speed up rebuilds.
>> - use the --no-degraded flag, to prevent assembly of a RAID that
>> is lacking a disk.
>
> Thank you very
On 09/14/2014 12:38 PM, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 08:06:59PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
[...]
>> It's almost certainly a real problem, and in my experience it is
>> not the disk itself which is bad, but something in the path (the
>> USB port, the USB cable, the USB-SATA int
On 09/14/2014 02:06 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 06:17:00PM +0200, Linux-Fan wrote:
[...]
>> Is there any means to configure MDADM (or such) to make sure that all
>> devices are recognized before attempting to start the array so that I
>> could manually reconnect the missing di
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 08:06:59PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 06:17:00PM +0200, Linux-Fan wrote:
> > some time ago, I bought two external Seagate 2 TB USB 3.0 HDDs in order
> > to expand my local storage (all internal slots are already in use).
> > Having created a RAID1 wit
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 06:17:00PM +0200, Linux-Fan wrote:
> some time ago, I bought two external Seagate 2 TB USB 3.0 HDDs in order
> to expand my local storage (all internal slots are already in use).
> Having created a RAID1 with MDADM just as normal, it all seemed to work,
> until at one system
Dear list members,
some time ago, I bought two external Seagate 2 TB USB 3.0 HDDs in order
to expand my local storage (all internal slots are already in use).
Having created a RAID1 with MDADM just as normal, it all seemed to work,
until at one system startup MDADM told me via local mail that the
On 08/11/12 10:52, Berni Elbourn wrote:
Hello, Please can I share my puzzlement here in the hope a problem shared is a
problem halved...
Sdb on this system has smart errors and a replacement disk is on order.
However, I notice that sda is also mentioned.
Oct 29 01:42:03 sv24 kernel: [1529665.
Hello, Please can I share my puzzlement here in the hope a problem shared is a
problem halved...
Sdb on this system has smart errors and a replacement disk is on order.
However, I notice that sda is also mentioned.
Sadly I can find nothing wrong with sda, smart and tests are all clean. I am wo
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 05:16:31PM -0400, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 01:24:53PM -0500, Sam Leon wrote:
> > Is there anyway to get mdadm to stripe disk reads in raid1? Some of the
> > documentation I read makes me think that it does this by default but in
> > my tests
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 01:24:53PM -0500, Sam Leon wrote:
> Is there anyway to get mdadm to stripe disk reads in raid1? Some of the
> documentation I read makes me think that it does this by default but in
> my tests it is not
I'd like to know too. It doesn't on my Etch box.
Doug.
--
To UN
Is there anyway to get mdadm to stripe disk reads in raid1? Some of the
documentation I read makes me think that it does this by default but in
my tests it is not
Thanks,
Sam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
also sprach Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.02.01.2358 +]:
> debian sarge - mdadm 1.8.0-4sarge1
please consider using the backport from backports.org.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :' : proud Debian de
debian sarge - mdadm 1.8.0-4sarge1
my problem is that on reboot the only md device that comes up is md1 which
is the / device that gets compiled into the initrd.img.
in the boot sequence when it comes to mounting the others from /e
On (29/12/05 15:33), Clive Menzies wrote:
> Update:
>
> Both machines have the same modules loaded, however on the second
> machine (Venus), the SATA modules don't seem to get loaded until mdadm
> fails to find the array.
> I'm not sure where to go from here; I don't have the knowledge or skill
On (21/12/05 16:43), Clive Menzies wrote:
> This isn't very helpful but I'm having the same problem. I had a
> similar problem when setting up two identical servers about a year ago
> and found the 2.6.8-1-686 worked but 2.6.8-1-386 didn't. FWIW the 2.4
> series kernel also worked.
>
> I just up
On (21/12/05 15:47), Jonathan Opperman wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Can someone please point me in the right direction with this? I've
> looked on
> google etc but can not find a solution to it, I will really appreciate
> it if I can get
> this working as before I did a kernel upgrade...
>
> Before ke
Hi All,
Can someone please point me in the right direction with this? I've
looked on
google etc but can not find a solution to it, I will really appreciate
it if I can get
this working as before I did a kernel upgrade...
Before kernel:
Partitioning scheme: RAID1
mdadm -Q /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Hi All,
Can someone please point me in the right direction with this? I've
looked on
google etc but can not find a solution to it, I will really appreciate
it if I can get
this working as before I did a kernel upgrade...
Before kernel:
Partitioning scheme: RAID1
mdadm -Q /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Hi All,
Can someone please point me in the right direction with this? I've
looked on
google etc but can not find a solution to it, I will really appreciate
it if I can get
this working as before I did a kernel upgrade...
Before kernel:
Partitioning scheme: RAID1
mdadm -Q /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
I am using the whole disk, not just partitions.
Thanks for your suggestion!
At Tuesday, 30 November 2004, Laurent CARON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Harland Christofferson wrote:
>
>>I think I figured it out but am still looking for suggestions:
>>
>>mdadm --stop /dev/md0
>>mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l1
Harland Christofferson wrote:
I think I figured it out but am still looking for suggestions:
mdadm --stop /dev/md0
mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l1 -n2 /dev/hda /dev/hdc
and it looks like the kern.log reflects that the array is being resynchronized.
Is this correct?
I would have done
mdadm /dev/md0 -a /dev
I think I figured it out but am still looking for suggestions:
mdadm --stop /dev/md0
mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l1 -n2 /dev/hda /dev/hdc
and it looks like the kern.log reflects that the array is being resynchronized.
Is this correct?
At Monday, 29 November 2004, Harland Christofferson <[EMAIL PROTEC
I had a problem w/ my system crashing and I noticed there was an
I/O error to /dev/hda. In a fit of panic, I swapped the IDE cable
of /dev/hda and /dev/hdc and reboot. Come to find out, my CPU fan
was dying causing the CPU not to work.
Anyway ...
Upon putting the drives back where they belong,
64 matches
Mail list logo
