Search Results

Search found 12028 results on 482 pages for 'drive letters'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 128/482 | < Previous Page | 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135  | Next Page >

  • Brand new Seagate HDD has high raw read error rate

    - by kpax
    I've just purchased a brand new Seagate ST31000524AS 1TB HDD. Manufacture date shows as January 2012 (yes that's as new as new can get), so must be one of the new batches from the post-flood Thailand. Anyway, I downloaded a copy of Active Hard Disk Monitor tool to check the S.M.A.R.T. parameters and I find the parameter Raw Read Error Rate is very low. Should I be worried? Will this rectify over time? This hdd is just 7 hours old; what gives? Edit: I meant high raw read error rate - Title updated accordingly

    Read the article

  • Is it wise to use SSHDs (Solid state hybrid drives) on a server?

    - by Seb
    I have a bunch of servers with very heavy I/O that currently use SATA3/SAS drives, but do suffer from I/O wait on the SATA drives, and I have just been alerted to the existence of SSHDs which cost the same for 1TB as the 1TB SATA drives that we currently use. However, previously (until Seagate shipped their first 3.5" SSHD in March) they seemed to be exclusively for Netbooks/Notebooks, which leads me to suspect they're not exactly built for the heavy I/O they'd be in for with my servers. So, would an SSHD give me a performance boost over my SATA3 drives in a heavy I/O environment (such as multiple very large high speed file transfers) or is it best to stick with SATA3 with I/O wait??

    Read the article

  • What's the maximum size Windows 7 allows for ReadyBoost?

    - by ymasood
    I read somewhere the Windows 7 had removed the limit on ReadyBoost from 4GB and now allows an unlimited number of GBs. I would like to reconfirm this as a fact. At present, my Windows 7 RC 7100 allows me a maximum of 4GB on one of my 8GB flash drives (though I've tried to connect two at a time and use 4GB on one and 2GB on another). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Would an array of SSD drives be able to succesfully substitute the system memory?

    - by Florin Mircea
    I watched a few videos trying to answer this. This video (youtube.com/watch?v=eULFf6F5Ri8) shows a bunch of guys stacking 24 SSD's reaching a peak of around 2GBps r/w. That's under the limit of the worst DDR3 in this list (memorybenchmark.net/write_ddr3_amd.html) - that shows DDR3 memory performance varying from 2.78 to 6.55 Gb per second, but that video is over 3 years old. This video (youtube.com/watch?v=27GmBzQWwP0) shows a more optimistic situation, but for PCI-E SSD drives: 5 drives peaking at around 4Gb. And this other video shows that stacking up more than 3 SSD's doesn't realistically offer a substantial added performance. This and the fact that in all benchmarks the drives act quite poorly when dealing with small files (5k file read/write averaging from 10MB to around 30-40MBps) as opposed to how native memory handles such files, seems to indicate a definite NO to this question. Also, the write life cycle is indeed limited and the drives might wear out quickly, as kindly pointed out by paddy. However, I wanted to get more opinions on this. Would it be possible to at least obtain current memory performance with SSD's in RAID 0? And if so, in what circumstances? I am assuming using this configuration with a Windows OS that has a memory pagefile resident to that stack of SSD's, thus making it very fast to work with.

    Read the article

  • Not able to safely remove external disk after having mounted and unmounted a VHD on it

    - by Agnel Kurian
    I am using Windows 7 SP 1. I have an external hard disk (Seagate 500GB) which I am able to use without problems most of the time. I am able to plug it in, use it and then safely unmount it via the "Eject USB Mass Storage Device" option in the taskbar tray. However, if I attach a VHD file located on this disk using "Disk Management", then detach the VHD and finally try to safely disconnect the disk via the system tray, I get an error which says: "Problem Ejecting USB Mass Storage Device: Windows can't stop your 'Generic volume' device because a program is still using it. Close any programs that might be using the device, and then try again later." How do I avoid this problem? Which process could still be accessing the device (even after I have closed the "Disk Management" application) ?

    Read the article

  • ASUS P5B Plus motherboard - no any drives found - how to restore RAID array?

    - by Moha
    We have a small server machine with an ASUS P5B Plus motherboard and 4 SATA HDDs. The HDDs were configured in a RAID10 array. Up until now, everything worked fine, but now the system doesn't recognize the drives. BIOS is set to RAID, jMicron controller is set to RAID, yet I can't see any of the drives in the BIOS setup, and jMicron BIOS tells me "no any drives found" The HDDs all spin up, I hear no clicking sounds or anything that would suggest HDD error. I did a search on this problem and replaced the SATA cables as suggested, but nothing's changed. What I have in mind is checking the CMOS battery and resetting the BIOS to use IDE mode, but I don't know if it will ruin the RAID system on the HDDs. It is not a critical server and there's only one database running on it (which I have backup of), but I don't want to setup the server from scratch if not necessary. What should I try to restore the RAID array and put the server back to working order?

    Read the article

  • Is there a limit on the number of USB external drives?

    - by Beska
    I've got three external HDDs, all My Books, 500 GB, 750 GB, and 1 TB. If I hook one or two of them up to a computer, everything seems fine. If I hook all three of them to a computer (I've tried this on two different computers, one running Windows XP, one running Windows Vista), the bootup time goes up by more than an order of magnitude. It can suddenly take about 10-20 minutes to boot the machine, whereas before it might take a minute. All three drives work fine on their own. I'm not using any kind of hub; all three are plugged directly into the machine. Is this associated with some kind of inherent limit in USB? Is this bad hardware design in the CPU box? Is this a My Book problem?

    Read the article

  • USB sticks optimized for OS booting and virus removal [closed]

    - by Rupert
    I'm looking to buy some usb sticks which will mainly be used in tech support for the purposes of removing viruses and booting up various OS's. Therefore, I am looking for the following features: Write protected switch (so that they may be safely plugged in to potentially infected machines) As fast as possible (so that loading, for example, a windows recovery, doesn't take forever) At least 4GB in size Any other features that might be useful for the above purpose Price is no object but, of course, the cheaper the better.

    Read the article

  • High disk I/O activity in CentOS server

    - by triiim
    I have about 16 websites in a CentOS dedicated, and I am having some problems on high traffic hours, it seems to be a high disk I/O activity causing a general slowdown. I've installed atop and this is what I see on the bottom (the server has been restarted thats why the values are so low): *** system and process activity since boot *** PID RDDSK WRDSK WCANCL DSK CMD 1/18 2176 1.7G 7.3G 854.4M 39 mysqld 671 1248K 3.0G 0K 13 flush-8:0 566 0K 1.1G 0K 5 jbd2/sda2-8 2401 124.2M 529.1M 22408K 3 crond 2032 2.2G 502.0M 0K 12 nginx 2360 425.8M 115.3M 4188K 2 httpd flush-8:0 and jbd2/sda2-8 are the processes I see with iotop using 99% on the IO column, and they are the processes that write the most on the hdd (after mysql). From what I saw in google this could be caused by some ext4 related bug, the current kernel is: Linux srvr.com 2.6.32-71.29.1.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Jun 27 19:49:27 BST 2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux I asked the hosting support to update the kernel and they tried but they now say that the server wont boot with the new installed kernel and they had to go back to the previous, they are not helping very much. Does someone has any idea how could I solve the high disk usage caused by flush-8:0 and jbd2/sda2-8 processes?

    Read the article

  • end_request: I/O error, dev sda, sector xxxxxxxxx

    - by muruga
    I have a IBM server. This server contains 3 hard disk with RAID 5. It was working fine earlier. Unfortunately this machine got the following error message. After that I have rebooted the systems. After that I am getting the following error message in kern.log and demsg kernel: [65896.678870] end_request: I/O error, dev sda, sector 17430271 kernel: [69263.783957] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Result: hostbyte=DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE,SUGGEST_OK : [69263.783957] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Sense Key : Hardware Error [current] kernel: [69263.783957] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Add. Sense: Internal target failure Whether it is kernel problem or hard disk problem or Raid problem

    Read the article

  • Dual boot: Windows XP and Ubuntu

    - by user19455
    (I know that there are some questions similar to this one, but the ones I have read (and I have read more than one, did not answer my question) I have installed, in two physically different hard drives Windows XP and Ubuntu 9.0. I would like to have a dual boot that, if nothing was pressed, the Windows XP would start automatically. I have read about Grub but got the impression that it wasn't possible to default the operating system to start to something other than Ubuntu. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Recover data from a Windows Dynamic Volume Spanned Disk

    - by iCe
    I have a dynamic volume created with two spanned partitions over two disk. Recently, one disk has started failing, and I want to copy the data inside that disk to another disk, before replacing it. However I don't know how to select only what is inside the failing disk, because the partitions spans across both disks. Maybe imaging the entire disk should do the work? Or I have to copy all the data from both disks? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • frequent errors with subversion repository on fat32 on USB memory stick

    - by sal
    I keep a copy of a Subversion Repository on a USB memory stick that is formatted with FAT32. I am using TortoiseSVN on XP and command line svn 1.6.x on Ubuntu and OSX with this memory stick. I notice that I need to do an svn cleanup just about every time or updates and commits will not work. I routinely have errors with .lock and *.svn/text-base/** files getting corrupted. Errors tend to be parameter is incorrect or lock file can not be read Sometimes svn cleanup works and sometimes chflags -R nouchg * Is there anything I can do to prevent this?

    Read the article

  • How to know which disk has failed on a Mirrored Raid? marked as DR0 [migrated]

    - by Saariko
    Our 2ndry DC, which is on a W2K8R2 Mirrored software raid has lost it's sync, and disk management displays the failed redundancy error How do I know which of the disks has failed? (beside to try and replace one - and see if it loads and syncs) On the device manager, under disks I see both disks, one of them has an icon of: Disable, while the other doesn't Event log displays an event id 7 - bad block on Hard disk DR0 The thing is that looking in device manager, both disks are located in '0' location, which is bizzare

    Read the article

  • one 16K random read I/O issues 2 scsi I/O (16K and 4K) requests in linux

    - by hiroyuki
    I noticed weird issue when benchmarking random read I/O for files in linux (2.6.18). The Benchmarking program is my own program and it simply keeps reading 16KB of a file from a random offset. I traced I/O behavior at system call level and scsi level by systemtap and I noticed that one 16KB sysread issues 2 scsi I/Os as following. SYSPREAD random(8472) 3, 0x16fc5200, 16384, 128137183232 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 226321183 size: 4096 bufflen 4096 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008068009 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 226323431 size: 16384 bufflen 16384 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008075927 SYSPREAD random(8472) 3, 0x16fc5200, 16384, 21807710208 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 1889888935 size: 4096 bufflen 4096 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008085128 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 1889891823 size: 16384 bufflen 16384 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008097161 SYSPREAD random(8472) 3, 0x16fc5200, 16384, 139365318656 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 254092663 size: 4096 bufflen 4096 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008100633 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 254094879 size: 16384 bufflen 16384 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008111723 SYSPREAD random(8472) 3, 0x16fc5200, 16384, 60304424960 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 58119807 size: 4096 bufflen 4096 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008120469 SCSI random(8472) 0 1 0 0 start-sector: 58125415 size: 16384 bufflen 16384 FROM_DEVICE 1354354008126343 As shown above, one 16KB pread issues 2 scsi I/Os. (I traced scsi io dispatching with probe scsi.iodispatching. Please ignore values except for start-sector and size.) One scsi I/O is 16KB I/O as requested from the application and it's OK. The thing is the other 4KB I/O which I don't know why linux issues that I/O. of course, I/O performance is degraded by the weired 4KB I/O and I am having trouble. I also use fio (famous I/O benchmark tool) and noticed the same issue, so it's not from the application. Does anybody know what is going on ? Any comments or advices are appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Automatically distinguish difference between multiple HDDs in linux?

    - by Jakobud
    I'm running Ubuntu Server 9.10. I have two external USB HDDs. I use them each for different backup reasons. So certain data gets stored on one HDD, and different information gets stored on the other HDD. I want to make a script that can look at the external HDD can determine which HDD it is, so that it can copy the proper information to it. Is there a way for Linux to determine this? Like if I see one HDD as /dev/sdc1, then unplug it and plug in the other HDD, should Linux see it as /dev/sdd1 or will it be /dev/sdc1? I'm a bit of a Linux newb and I don't quite understand how it determines the /dev/sdxx values that it assigns to drives.

    Read the article

  • Pendrive not working on USB port - USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 27CC

    - by user1664417
    I have a situation here, is kind of weird. Situation as below: If i enable the 'Intel(R) 82801G (ICH7 Family) USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 27CC' , then my pc will not be able to read any USB stick/pendrive, but usb port work fine with keyboard and mouse. If I disable the device driver, then all kind of pendrive can be read. Below is What i have done : 1) try the same pendrive on other pc, it work like charm. 2) try others pendrive on issue pc, same problem, but it work fine in others pc. 3) try all the port, including the port that connected to mouse n keyboard. 4) update the driver version. 5) restore default setting of usb in bios Please help to solve these issue if anyone experience it before. Many thanks.. :

    Read the article

  • Tool to test USB sticks?

    - by Tony_Henrich
    Some of the files I copy to a USB stick seems to be corrupted? Maybe the stick is bad but I haven't used it much and want to know for sure. Is there a Windows utility to test the stick? Mark bad areas as bad so the file system doesn't save to them? I format before I copy but I still get corrupted files? Does chkdsk work on USB sticks reliably?

    Read the article

  • Is really good have a big (500GB/1T) Hard Disk as main one!?

    - by aSeptik
    Hi All guys! ;-) i'm building my new PC so i'm starting the usual search for a good hardware/price around the net! but this time i'm not sure i want buy a big Hard Disk! i was thinking to have a "very small" HD like 50GB as main one and external (big) for store all other stuff! Assuming i'm using classic slow softwares like adobe suite (photoshop, flash, autodesk) and some very simple soft like notepad, php and so on...! do you think this is a good practice for improve performance/speed or i'm jast saying some stupid thing!?

    Read the article

  • Is really good have a big (500GB/1T) Hard Disk as main one!?

    - by aSeptik
    Hi All guys! ;-) i'm building my new PC so i'm starting the usual search for a good hardware/price around the net! but this time i'm not sure i want buy a big Hard Disk! i was thinking to have a "very small" HD like 50GB as main one and external (big) for store all other stuff! Assuming i'm using classic slow softwares like adobe suite (photoshop, flash, autodesk) and some very simple soft like notepad, php and so on...! do you think this is a good practice for improve performance/speed or i'm jast saying some stupid thing!?

    Read the article

  • e2fsck extremly slow, although enough memory exists

    - by kaefert
    I've got this external USB-Disk: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ lsusb -s 2:3 Bus 002 Device 003: ID 0bc2:3320 Seagate RSS LLC As can be seen in this dmesg output, there are some problems that prevents that disk from beeing mounted: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ dmesg | grep sdb [ 114.474342] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) [ 114.475089] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off [ 114.475092] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 43 00 00 00 [ 114.475959] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA [ 114.477093] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) [ 114.501649] sdb: sdb1 [ 114.502717] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] 732566645 4096-byte logical blocks: (3.00 TB/2.72 TiB) [ 114.504354] sd 5:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI disk [ 116.804408] EXT4-fs (sdb1): ext4_check_descriptors: Checksum for group 3976 failed (47397!=61519) [ 116.804413] EXT4-fs (sdb1): group descriptors corrupted! So I went and fired up my favorite partition manager - gparted, and told it to verify and repair the partition sdb1. This made gparted call e2fsck (version 1.42.4 (12-Jun-2012)) e2fsck -f -y -v /dev/sdb1 Although gparted called e2fsck with the "-v" option, sadly it doesn't show me the output of my e2fsck process (bugreport https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=467925 ) I started this whole thing on Sunday (2012-11-04_2200) evening, so about 48 hours ago, this is what htop says about it now (2012-11-06-1900): PID USER PRI NI VIRT RES SHR S CPU% MEM% TIME+ Command 3704 root 39 19 1560M 1166M 768 R 98.0 19.5 42h56:43 e2fsck -f -y -v /dev/sdb1 Now I found a few posts on the internet that discuss e2fsck running slow, for example: http://gparted-forum.surf4.info/viewtopic.php?id=13613 where they write that its a good idea to see if the disk is just that slow because maybe its damaged, and I think these outputs tell me that this is not the case in my case: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: Timing cached reads: 3562 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1783.29 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 82 MB in 3.01 seconds = 27.26 MB/sec kaefert@blechmobil:~$ sudo hdparm /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: multcount = 0 (off) readonly = 0 (off) readahead = 256 (on) geometry = 364801/255/63, sectors = 5860533160, start = 0 However, although I can read quickly from that disk, this disk speed doesn't seem to be used by e2fsck, considering tools like gkrellm or iotop or this: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ iostat -x Linux 3.2.0-2-amd64 (blechmobil) 2012-11-06 _x86_64_ (2 CPU) avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 14,24 47,81 14,63 0,95 0,00 22,37 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await r_await w_await svctm %util sda 0,59 8,29 2,42 5,14 43,17 160,17 53,75 0,30 39,80 8,72 54,42 3,95 2,99 sdb 137,54 5,48 9,23 0,20 587,07 22,73 129,35 0,07 7,70 7,51 16,18 2,17 2,04 Now I researched a little bit on how to find out what e2fsck is doing with all that processor time, and I found the tool strace, which gives me this: kaefert@blechmobil:~$ sudo strace -p3704 lseek(4, 41026998272, SEEK_SET) = 41026998272 write(4, "\212\354K[_\361\3nl\212\245\352\255jR\303\354\312Yv\334p\253r\217\265\3567\325\257\3766"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 48404766720, SEEK_SET) = 48404766720 read(4, "\7t\260\366\346\337\304\210\33\267j\35\377'\31f\372\252\ffU\317.y\211\360\36\240c\30`\34"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 41027002368, SEEK_SET) = 41027002368 write(4, "\232]7Ws\321\352\t\1@[+5\263\334\276{\343zZx\352\21\316`1\271[\202\350R`"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 48404770816, SEEK_SET) = 48404770816 read(4, "\17\362r\230\327\25\346//\210H\v\311\3237\323K\304\306\361a\223\311\324\272?\213\tq \370\24"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 41027006464, SEEK_SET) = 41027006464 write(4, "\367yy>x\216?=\324Z\305\351\376&\25\244\210\271\22\306}\276\237\370(\214\205G\262\360\257#"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 48404774912, SEEK_SET) = 48404774912 read(4, "\365\25\0\21|T\0\21}3t_\272\373\222k\r\177\303\1\201\261\221$\261B\232\3142\21U\316"..., 4096) = 4096 ^CProcess 3704 detached around 16 of these lines every second, so 4 read and 4 write operations every second, which I don't consider to be a lot.. And finally, my question: Will this process ever finish? If those numbers from fseek (48404774912) represent bytes, that would be something like 45 gigabytes, with this beeing a 3 terrabyte disk, which would give me 134 days to go, if the speed stays constant, and he scans the disk like this completly and only once. Do you have some advice for me? I have most of the data on that disk elsewhere, but I've put a lot of hours into sorting and merging it to this disk, so I would prefer to getting this disk up and running again, without formatting it anew. I don't think that the hardware is damaged since the disk is only a few months and since I can't see any I/O errors in the dmesg output. UPDATE: I just looked at the strace output again (2012-11-06_2300), now it looks like this: lseek(4, 1419860611072, SEEK_SET) = 1419860611072 read(4, "3#\f\2447\335\0\22A\355\374\276j\204'\207|\217V|\23\245[\7VP\251\242\276\207\317:"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 43018145792, SEEK_SET) = 43018145792 write(4, "]\206\231\342Y\204-2I\362\242\344\6R\205\361\324\177\265\317C\334V\324\260\334\275t=\10F."..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 1419860615168, SEEK_SET) = 1419860615168 read(4, "\262\305\314Y\367\37x\326\245\226\226\320N\333$s\34\204\311\222\7\315\236\336\300TK\337\264\236\211n"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 43018149888, SEEK_SET) = 43018149888 write(4, "\271\224m\311\224\25!I\376\16;\377\0\223H\25Yd\201Y\342\r\203\271\24eG<\202{\373V"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 1419860619264, SEEK_SET) = 1419860619264 read(4, ";d\360\177\n\346\253\210\222|\250\352T\335M\33\260\320\261\7g\222P\344H?t\240\20\2548\310"..., 4096) = 4096 lseek(4, 43018153984, SEEK_SET) = 43018153984 write(4, "\360\252j\317\310\251G\227\335{\214`\341\267\31Y\202\360\v\374\307oq\3063\217Z\223\313\36D\211"..., 4096) = 4096 So this number of the lseeks before the reads, like 1419860619264 are already a lot bigger, standing for 1.29 terabytes if the numbers are bytes, so it doesn't seem to be a linear progress on a big scale, maybe there are only some areas that need work, that have big gaps in between them. (times are in CET)

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135  | Next Page >