SEARCH  

NEWS

2010.10.06:11:36:28
Najpopularniejsze domeny dla Twojej firmy w nazwa.pl (reklama)
Myślisz o zdobyciu zagranicznych rynków? Chcesz mieć adresy WWW w najbardziej rozpoznawalnych domenach? A może chciałbyś zabezpieczyć swoją markę przed wykorzystaniem jej przez kogoś innego? Powinieneś więc rozważyć rejestrację firmowych adresów WWW zawierających najpopularniejsze rozszerzenia używane na świecie.

 

147322094738_508260007418Sevrin Robstad

 
173628214910_544060007147Message not availabl

 
178327634502_528460007752Molle Bestefich

 
118728304709_533060007922Francois Barre
On Monday July 17, quackyo@xxxxxxxx wrote: I have written some posts about this before... My 6 disk RAID 5 broke down because of hardware failure. When I tried to get it upnrunning again I did

 
173723274926_508760007478Francois Barre

 
149822634687_523660007141Tuomas Leikola

 
165520824963_556460007935Jeff Breidenbach

 
171223054698_521360007712Jeff Breidenbach

 
196627764541_567460007275Bill Davidsen

 
159628434602_552260007393Neil Brown
Hi all, I have a RAID6 array where a disk went bad. I removed the old disk, put in an identical one, and repartitioned the new disk. I am now trying to add the new partition to the array, but I

 
200024294657_568760007002Neil Brown
Thanks for the reply, Neil. Here is my version: [root@paul log]# mdadm --version mdadm - v2.3.1 - 6 February 2006 This is a somewhat production system, running Fedora Core 5. Official packages co

 
182823194084_579160007607Neil Brown
Please, please! I am dead in the water! To recap, I have a RAID6 array on a Fedora Core 5 system, using /dev/hd[acdeg] 2 and /dev/sd[ab]2. /dev/hdd went bad so I replaced the drive and tried to ad

 
172625954912_542360007501Paul Waldo
On Sunday 23 July 2006 07:25, Neil Brown wrote: On Sunday July 23, pwaldo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Please, please! I am dead in the water! To recap, I have a RAID6 array on a Fedora Core 5

 
113427754277_567660007383Paul Waldo
On Sunday July 23, pwaldo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: At this point, Id just be happy to be able to get the degraded array back up and running. Is there any way to do that? Thanks! mdadm --as

 
195220444226_555460007156Paul Waldo

 
194725664585_560360007250Paul Waldo

 
160620804570_569160007453Dan Graham
On Sunday July 23, pwaldo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Here is the dmesg output. No log files are created with the FC5 rescue disk. Thanks! On Sunday 23 July 2006 07:59, Neil Brown wrote:

 
129825964048_520960007857Paul Clements
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Dan Graham wrote: Hello; I have an existing, active ext3 filesystem which I would like to convert to a RAID 1 ext3 filesystem with minimal down time. After casting about

 
171121544631_598860007079Robert Heinzmann
Paul Clements wrote: Is 16 blocks a large enough area? Maybe. The superblock will be between 64KB and 128KB from the end of the partition. This depends on the size of the partition:

 
137127824124_559760007690Paul Waldo
Still no joy after zeroing the superblock, Mikael. :-( [root@paul ~]# mdadm --examine /dev/hdd2 /dev/hdd2: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 00.90.00 UUID : 2e316d9e:20cac82a

 
175422814255_533960007508Neil Brown
Hi i have small problem when i booting i have md1 as /boot md2 as swap and md3 as / (root) and when it come to md3 it say something like "md3 has no identity information" i cant read it

 
159024904588_515960007458linuxmania lizhi
A client of mine desperately wants a Dell solution rather than a self-build. They are looking at an external Dell box with 15 x 500GB SATA drives in it and a Dell 1U host controller - but the connec

 
161324794054_566160007073linuxmania lizhi
On Thursday July 13, linuxmania.lizhi@xxxxxxxxx wrote: Hi all, Im new to MD RAID. When I read the book "Understanding the Linux Kernel", I know that there are several layers between Fil

 
151723994228_514860007058Gordon Henderson
Last year, there were discussions on this list about the possible use of a co-processor (Intels IOP333) to compute raid 5/6s parity data. We are about to see low cost, multi core cpu chips with very

 
122727584840_535160007175Burn Alting

 
104121084456_529760007341Andrew Skolarz

 
180520374832_539260007012Andrew Skolarz

 
185128094491_590660007179Andrew Skolarz
Am Mittwoch, 12. Juli 2006 06:10 schrieben Sie: Care to enlighten the rest of us what did the trick? Dex please disregard this email .. after doing more google research i have re-assembled the

 
197929874579_520760007966Justin Piszcz
On Tuesday July 11, pletopia@xxxxxxxxx wrote: Checksum : 4aa9094a - expected 4aa908c4 This is a bit scary. You have a single-bit error, either in the checksum or elsewhere in the superbloc

 
126523624723_510560007077Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday July 11, jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Neil, It worked, echoing the 600 to the stripe width in /sys, however, how come /dev/md3 says it is 0 MB when I type fdisk -l? Is t

 
128027554186_573760007635Jan Engelhardt
On Tuesday July 11, jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Neil, It worked, echoing the 600 to the stripe width in /sys, however, how come /dev/md3 says it is 0 MB when I type fdisk -l? Is t

 
107728574672_590960007869David Greaves

 
192120994678_541260007147David Greaves

 
159229844133_517160007268Vladimir Strycek
On Tuesday July 11, david@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Horrid stuff but important to many. Speaking of which, Neil, if you read this - are the man pages under the GFDL or the GPL? GPL. Ill make that

 
113624564631_586060007344Vladimir Strycek
On Tuesday July 11, david@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Horrid stuff but important to many. Speaking of which, Neil, if you read this - are the man pages under the GFDL or the GPL? GPL. Ill make that

 
193828424099_512360007151Mario BitKoenig Holb
Hello Vladimir, Tuesday, July 11, 2006, 11:41:31 AM, you wrote: VS Hi, VS I created to 3 x /dev/md1 to /dev/md3 which consist of six identical VS 200GB hdd VS my mdadm --detail --scan looks

 
175826554007_543060007256Mario BitKoenig Holb
Hello Vladimir, Tuesday, July 11, 2006, 11:41:31 AM, you wrote: VS Hi, VS I created to 3 x /dev/md1 to /dev/md3 which consist of six identical VS 200GB hdd VS my mdadm --detail --scan looks

 
129824854355_597660007359Neil Brown

 
112224894342_525660007533Tejun Heo

 
152527974989_515560007549Bill Davidsen
On Tuesday July 11, htejun@xxxxxxxxx wrote: Christian Pernegger wrote: The fact that the disk had changed minor numbers after it was plugged back in bugs me a bit. (was sdc before, sde afte

 
150025934390_559960007969Justin Piszcz

 
175124754624_575960007187Justin Piszcz

 
101422034672_537060007569Christian Pernegger

 
173023024058_507160007719Molle Bestefich
Hi! I created a sw-raid md0 and a LVM above with four 250GB Samsung SATA disks a couple of months ago. I am not an raid expert but I thought I could handle it with a little help of my friends from g

 
160520834515_559360007170Henrik Holst
Molle Bestefich <molle.bestefich <at gmail.com writes: From the paste bin: 443: root <at ned ~ # mdadm --examine /dev/sd[abcd] Shows that all 4 devices are ACTIVE SYNC....

 
114227384764_553360007480Karl Voit
Henrik Holst <henrik.holst <at idgmail.se writes: Karl Voit wrote: [snip] Well this is because of the false(?) superblocks of sda-sdd in comparison to sda1 to sdd1. I dont

 
150120874955_512460007860Karl Voit

 
131228614062_598460007241Karl Voit

 
155329614544_561260007102Karl Voit

 
133026374185_584560007423Karl Voit