johnnie.black

Members
  • Content count

    6718
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

johnnie.black last won the day on July 21

johnnie.black had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

338 Very Good

3 Followers

About johnnie.black

  • Rank
    winter is here

Converted

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

756 profile views
  1. Split all
  2. You're right, but the split level is not set to split all folders, try after changing that.
  3. That's normal, it will only appear after unRAID starts writing that share on disk2 (or if you manually create that folder on disk2), since you're using highwater it will only start writing on disk2 after disk1 is over 50% used, so all perfectly normal, if you turn on the help all this is explained.
  4. IMO main current advantage of ZFS over btrfs is RAIDZ for pools, RAID5/6 on btrfs is still experimental and not ready for production, but using a ZFS pool would negate unRAID main advantages over FreeNAS, like using full capacity from different sized disks, possibility of adding or removing disks from the array, etc, since unRAID uses each disk as a separate filesystem btrfs is as good option, and don't forget that unlike btrfs, ZFS has no filesystem repair tools, if a disk turns unmountable there's nothing you can do, and although rare it happens, you can see that on the FreeNAS forum.
  5. All files are checksummed automatically, if you want to check if everything is OK you can run a scrub, but btrfs checks all files on read and will error on any checksum error, i.e., you're are watching a movie from your server, if the checksum fails there will be and error during playback or copy.
  6. I think so, I use it on all my servers, have no problem recommending it as long as it a stable and UPS protected server. Yes, and more important than that for me, it allows you to be sure if any files were corrupt when something unexpected happens, e.g., some read errors on another disk during a rebuild, a disk getting disabled during a file copy operation, etc.
  7. Never seen xfs_repair delete an entire disk (though it's certainly possible), but parity is real time, unless something is not working as it should or you did something to the disk outside the array, it will always reflect the current data as on that disk, and since current disk1 (md1) is being emulated, whatever is there is the result of current parity. If xfx_repair can't fix the emulated disk your only option is to use data recovery software, on the original disk or on the emulated/rebuilt disk.
  8. Difficult to know where to start here... you should have asked for help much earlier. I'm not clear on all the steps you did or if your parity is still valid. Not usually, parity can't fix filesystem corruption, but since I'm not sure what you did you may try this, disk1 is currently disable and unmountable, you don't need to rebuild it to see if there's any fixable data there, just start the array in maintenance mode and run xfs_repair on md1 again, whatever data comes up (or doesn't) it's the same you'll get after rebuilding. P.S. Is there a reason you're using 2 USB disks when you still have 4 available SATA ports? Although supported USB disks are not recommended as array disks, in this case besides SMART not working the serial number for those disks is not correctly displayed, that can cause a number of problems, like the disk not being correctly identified.
  9. Most likely related to this: Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: ata13.00: qc timeout (cmd 0x27) Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: ata13.00: failed to read native max address (err_mask=0x4) Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: ata13.00: HPA support seems broken, skipping HPA handling Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: check SRS 0 00000001. Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_sas.c 1435:mvs_I_T_nexus_reset for device[6]:rc= 0 Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: mvsas 0000:01:00.0: Phy6 : No sig fis Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: drivers/scsi/mvsas/mv_sas.c 1870:Release slot [0] tag[0], task [ffff880419976f00]: Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: sas: sas_ata_task_done: SAS error 8a Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: ata13.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x11) Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: random: crng init done Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: ata13.00: qc timeout (cmd 0xec) Jul 21 14:38:29 Tower kernel: ata13.00: failed to IDENTIFY (I/O error, err_mask=0x5) Do you know what ata13 is? is any device missing? it doesn't appear to be an array device, if unsure reboot and post new diags.
  10. Tools -> Diagnostics Not usually as long as it an HBA and not a RAID controller (or a controller in RAID mode).
  11. Diagnostics may shed some light on the problem, the only user I know with one is@Pauven, not sure if some initial config is needed to get it working but don't think so.
  12. Since it's correcting a large number of sync errors it's normal to slow down a lot, are so many sync errors expected?
  13. You can use the Unassigned devices plugin, note however that a disk format there can't be added later to the array.
  14. Yes, sorry, forgot about that, you can try to fix file system first, but it will probably not work: https://wiki.lime-technology.com/Check_Disk_Filesystems#Drives_formatted_with_ReiserFS_using_unRAID_v5_or_later
  15. If disk14 was replaced and you still have old one you may try to recover data from there, if not, you can try to copy data form both disk9 and the emulated disk14 to other disks or better yet, another computer, start with the most important data, but with one disk failed and another one failing there's a big chance you're going to lose data from both.
Copyright © 2005-2017 Lime Technology, Inc. unRAIDĀ® is a registered trademark of Lime Technology, Inc.