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.

 

157524604704_532060007504Sevrin Robstad

 
148029314227_578260007558Message not availabl

 
154720384914_596360007285Molle Bestefich

 
183321004337_509160007962Francois 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

 
198527924537_546260007055Francois Barre

 
187720594515_558160007886Tuomas Leikola

 
108428604817_531260007047Jeff Breidenbach

 
187021884086_578460007622Jeff Breidenbach

 
106829834723_540560007175Bill Davidsen

 
136720584968_590560007451Neil 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

 
196023984511_547460007890Neil 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

 
136020634750_517660007391Neil 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

 
122422454579_531060007729Paul 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

 
193320964712_565560007786Paul 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

 
183028694845_579860007366Paul Waldo

 
124927324764_576060007743Paul Waldo

 
165025674806_539960007181Dan 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:

 
179029674426_536860007455Paul 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

 
109722104551_580960007052Robert 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:

 
159526954922_544060007694Paul 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

 
180627424426_557060007632Neil 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

 
131221504198_511760007942linuxmania 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

 
129823394909_572560007186linuxmania 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

 
117928054396_573160007260Gordon 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

 
178422084956_570560007448Burn Alting

 
139924544189_582560007691Andrew Skolarz

 
145723354841_565660007390Andrew Skolarz

 
159727524729_550560007436Andrew 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

 
169126564240_508660007854Justin 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

 
134721714062_530360007711Jan 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

 
175222754164_594160007188Jan 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

 
163225584524_547360007977David Greaves

 
186328104729_559260007205David Greaves

 
102820054862_526960007248Vladimir 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

 
112324404420_518560007296Vladimir 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

 
189624954572_506060007673Mario 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

 
124820674230_577260007443Mario 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

 
174924034253_547860007568Neil Brown

 
168320244574_554560007667Tejun Heo

 
179424164107_521360007851Bill 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

 
150924984346_508160007782Justin Piszcz

 
175428074850_598460007389Justin Piszcz

 
142723274793_568060007789Christian Pernegger

 
124724884813_582260007106Molle 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

 
148828274523_559560007124Henrik 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....

 
144625494623_579260007180Karl 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

 
157323844987_542260007565Karl Voit

 
181227944893_560560007698Karl Voit

 
139327214186_520660007220Karl Voit

 
131220304046_583660007085Karl Voit