|
|
Post by maximehilaire on Jan 3, 2007 12:25:38 GMT 7
I have two Samsung HD400LJ in a RAID1 configuration (381,554Mb). They seemed to be ok... until i changed to 2.1.03, yesterday. (I got my N2100 3 days ago) Now, the status is "Degraded"  hereunder , what i did : 1 - Change Firmware to 2.1.03 (OK) 2 - Try to reconstruct RAID 1 (rmq 32 from the 'Thecus download center') 3 - The result : always stop at 45.1% and automaticly re-try 4 - i Suppressed the partitions (thanks to my pc) 5 - put back the disks in my N2100 6 - try to reconstruct RAID 1 7 - result : wait a long time at the same place, but finished with the status 'Healthy' 8 - Unfortunately, a short time later, the status was 'DEGRATED' Did you exprecienced the same issue ? Did you think it might come from the disk ? |
|
|
|
Post by maximehilaire on Jan 3, 2007 12:45:29 GMT 7
In case you have access via ssh try this command "mdadm --detail /dev/md0". It will give you a more detailed answer of what might be wrong with your drives. What does the Status line report? Hi, The result of this command is below... At this moment my situation is : - reinstall all (it's the second time) - succeeded to obtain RAID 1 'Healthy' (as at the first time) - but ... at first reboot N2100 detects 'DEGRADED' and try to recovery and stop à 2.2 % ... and try again and again mdadm --detail /dev/md0 /dev/md0: Version : 00.90.01 Creation Time : Tue Jan 2 17:46:16 2007 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 389198656 (371.17 GiB 398.54 GB) Device Size : 389198656 (371.17 GiB 398.54 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Wed Jan 3 06:32:04 2007 State : clean, degraded, recovering Active Devices : 1 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 1 Rebuild Status : 1% complete UUID : 5f36a92f:85262024:da0ed1c8:e2f3f494 Events : 0.5386 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 - removed 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2 2 8 2 0 spare rebuilding /dev/sda2 |
|
madru
New Member
Posts: 5 
|
Post by madru on Jan 3, 2007 14:28:44 GMT 7
I use use 2.1.03 with the same disk configuration without any problems (OK, the n2100 is brand new  ) I reconstructed the RAID 3 times yesterday for test purpose, is it possible that your drives have different FW on board and/or the bad block marking does not work ....... ? N2100:~# mdadm --detail /dev/md0 /dev/md0: Version : 00.90.01 Creation Time : Tue Jan 2 18:35:39 2007 Raid Level : raid1 Array Size : 389198656 (371.17 GiB 398.54 GB) Device Size : 389198656 (371.17 GiB 398.54 GB) Raid Devices : 2 Total Devices : 2 Preferred Minor : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Wed Jan 3 08:19:08 2007 State : clean Active Devices : 2 Working Devices : 2 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 UUID : 4e90ac16:873036be:958c91c3:8299d8cc Events : 0.8570 Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 8 2 0 active sync /dev/sda2 1 8 18 1 active sync /dev/sdb2 N2100:~# |
|
oreos
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by oreos on Jan 3, 2007 16:54:05 GMT 7
I have the same discs in raid 1 too and had do issues whatsoever since FW 2.1.00, I now run also the latest one. The only thing that comes to mind could be perhaps incorrect jumper settings (M, S, CS) on the HDs? If you have no important data I would also try to delete the Raid completely and build a new raid again.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
Post by maximehilaire on Jan 5, 2007 17:15:47 GMT 7
I use use 2.1.03 with the same disk configuration without any problems (OK, the n2100 is brand new ) Thank madru, My N2100 is a new one (I bought it as a new one ;-) ) :SN : 00-14-FD-10-0B-AE AF or N2100S00632) Hereunder the thecus support answer ... and my new questions to them : |
|
|
|
Post by maximehilaire on Jan 5, 2007 17:19:10 GMT 7
I have the same discs in raid 1 too and had do issues whatsoever since FW 2.1.00, I now run also the latest one. The only thing that comes to mind could be perhaps incorrect jumper settings (M, S, CS) on the HDs? If you have no important data I would also try to delete the Raid completely and build a new raid again. Good luck. Thanks oreos and happy new year, I'm afraid there is no more jumper on my S-ata disks .... |
|
oreos
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by oreos on Jan 6, 2007 18:16:42 GMT 7
So true, stupid comment on my side... Had this issue in the past with IDE and forgot that SATA were more intelligent on that side.
|
|
|
|
Post by dbridges on Jan 6, 2007 18:52:41 GMT 7
This is probably a bit out there but have you tried building a raid0 array on the disks and then rebuilding the raid 1 from scratch.
The raid 0 build will completely wipe the disks and allow you to build the raid 1 from fresh disks rather than trying to recover a degraded system (which obviously isn't working)
Out of curiosity... Have you got any modules installed??? and which ones???
Edit:
Just re-read your first post. Is it always the same disk that's failing? What happened when you swapped them over?
|
|
|
|
Post by maximehilaire on Jan 8, 2007 5:39:31 GMT 7
Hi dbridges, This is probably a bit out there but have you tried building a raid0 array on the disks and then rebuilding the raid 1 from scratch. The raid 0 build will completely wipe the disks and allow you to build the raid 1 from fresh disks rather than trying to recover a degraded system (which obviously isn't working) Yes, i did. Edit: Just re-read your first post. Is it always the same disk that's failing? What happened when you swapped them over? no it changes when i swap them over ; Today i did two experiences : i put them in my linux PC (fedora core 5) : - I create one partition via fdisk - then a " mkfs -V -t ext3 -c /dev/sdb1" (-c : verify corrupted blocks.) for the 2 disks the mkfs stops at the same place as in the N2100 (one at 45 % , the other at 2,5 %). they didn't stop completly but the progress was very very slow (and i have to stop them) I put then in my XP PC : - i create a partition : no problem - i forced a CHKDSK : no problem My diag, at this moment, is ..... not clear  Out of curiosity... Have you got any modules installed??? and which ones??? - ROOTPSW.mod - SSH.mod |
|
|
|
Post by dbridges on Jan 8, 2007 6:39:07 GMT 7
I was asking about modules as a long shot but your FC tests would suggest that there's something wrong with the drives.
|
|
|
|
Post by maximehilaire on Jan 9, 2007 2:03:35 GMT 7
I was asking about modules as a long shot but your FC tests would suggest that there's something wrong with the drives. I just got two drives 40GB for a test period, thanks to my company. I will try with this night .... Result (this morning) : With those Western Digital 40GB HDD, all works fine ; I tested in a RAID 1 config Western Digital 40GB WD400. Drive parameters : LBA 78125000 ============================= Today I got a mail from the Thecus Support. They proposed me to get control on my N2100 through internet. I hope they could find what is wrong with my 400GB Samsung HDD ! |
|
|
|
Post by maximehilaire on Feb 1, 2007 3:54:27 GMT 7
Today I got a mail from the Thecus Support. They proposed me to get control on my N2100 through internet. I hope they could find what is wrong with my 400GB Samsung HDD ! 20 days later .... Thecus Support helped me to diag : many tests, boots and reboots, disks position exchanges ... Finally they concluded that one of my new disks has some defaults and the best were to run diag from Samsung. For Information, they used smartctl (http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net) to do their diags. I got the samsung disk utility(HUTIL.exe) , but the only useful thing i found to do with this utility was a "low level format" (15 hours each !!!). After that, I try to obtain from Thecus the smartctl parameters to re-do the smartctl tests by myself... But, without answer, I put back, a week ago, the 2 disks inside my N2100 ... and now It's OK |
|
)
