[Durham] SMART errors
Oliver Burnett-Hall
olly at burnett-hall.co.uk
Sun Nov 9 16:39:19 UTC 2014
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 9 November 2014 16:09:00 GMT+00:00, David Leggett <david+lists+durhamlog at asguard.org.uk> wrote:
>
>The disk is dead, you should replace it.
Thought so.
>You can pull out all the smart details from a disk by doing
>smarctl -a /dev/sd?
>and you can tun some tests by doing
>smartctl -t long /dev/sd?
>or
>smartctl -t short /dev/sd?
>
>The test will run in the background on the disk controller.
>Once the test is finished you can get the results of the last few tests
>by
>doing
>smartctl -l selftest /dev/sda
This is where I'm getting confused: I've run those tests but they are not reporting any errors.
>Looks like you are definitely running a 2 disk raid 1 here..
>MD will have noticed the read errors from the broken disk and evicted
>it from
>the array.
>I assume these are 2TB disks, in which case yes you have a 2 disk raid
>1, if
>it was a 3 disk raid5 the capacity should be showing ~4TB.
Yes, these are 2TB disks. Like you say, the three disks set up as RAID5 would have given a capacity of 4TB. I thought that if you have a single disk fail in RAID5 you'd still keep the same capacity, just without any redundancy and with the risk of things going horribly wrong if another disk fails. Instead I appear to have lost half my capacity.
This didn't appear to have caused any problems, I'd set up md0 as a physical volume for LVM and was only using 1.5TB.
Hmmm, I wonder if I could have messed up setting this up and created a three disk RAID1 array by mistake?
Time to do some more digging...
- --
— olly
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=dzcq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Durham
mailing list