Jump to content

JorgeB

Moderators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    67,565

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    707

 Content Type 

Everything posted by JorgeB

  1. JorgeB
    If it's the only one do it.
  2. JorgeB
    No, if you format the disk parity is updated accordingly. You can try btrfs repair but it won't work for this error, it's fatal.
  3. JorgeB
    Not much more I can help then, you can try the mailing list or IRC like mentioned in the FAQ.
  4. JorgeB
    I said you should use the btrfs restore option, it's the most likely to work for this.
  5. JorgeB
    Yep, you can't do that with a btrfs filesystem and then rebuild, or always mount them in read-only mode if doing it without parity, if not the trans id of the rebuilt disk won't match, and this error is fatal, best bet it to try the btrfs restore option here.
  6. JorgeB
    Disk3 SMART error it's not always immediately critical, i.e., disk might still be OK for now, and not seeing any related errors in the syslog so far, there are errors about disk4, and it dropped offline, first thing to try it to check filesystem on the emulated disk4 (and hope no errors on disk3 for now) and check connection on actual disk4 to get a SMART report.
  7. JorgeB
    Same issue as this: I believe most usually caused by a docker moving/renaming files.
  8. JorgeB
    No doubt about it, there can't be any errors, replace and run memtest again.
  9. JorgeB

    Encryption

    JorgeB replied to Hussie's topic in General Support

    Unrelated but make sure those hard drives are patched, or they can cause data loss when polled by smartmontools, and you can't even tell by the firmware version, to be sure you must run the update (if not done yet). https://www.smartmontools.org/wiki/SamsungF4EGBadBlocks
  10. JorgeB
    Retest with rc2, there are some related fixes.
  11. JorgeB
    Changed Status to Retest
  12. JorgeB
    Should be fixed in rc2:
  13. JorgeB
    Since the OP started a new thread locking this one, continues here:
  14. JorgeB
    Run without -n or nothing will be done.
  15. JorgeB
    No need to start the array to forget old parity, just assign new one and start.
  16. JorgeB
    Same as this.
  17. JorgeB
    It's mostly because of being a COW filesystem, also because it's checksummed, with small writes amplification can go up to 25x IIRC.
  18. JorgeB
    Yes. Don't know, possibly, but IT mode is always preferred though.
  19. JorgeB
    dm-0 is disk1.
  20. JorgeB
    Note that I can say for sure the SSDs are the problem, but since a transfer to the array is fine, it's the most likely problem.
  21. JorgeB
    Yep.
  22. JorgeB
    And for reference here are my own tests with the models I mentioned, I had them installed as a small array, so no trim, transfer size was around 26GB in large files:
  23. JorgeB
    I've had all sorts of performance trouble with cheap SSDs, including similar ADATA models.
  24. JorgeB
    Not all SSDs can sustain fast writes, especially QLC based SSDs like the ones you're using, recommend using a 3D TLC model, like the 860 EVO, Crucial MX500, WD Red/Blue, etc.
  25. JorgeB
    It's in RAID mode: 02:00.0 RAID bus controller [0104]: Broadcom / LSI MegaRAID SAS 2008 [Falcon] [1000:0073] (rev 03) Subsystem: Dell PERC H310 [1028:1f78] Kernel driver in use: megaraid_sas Kernel modules: megaraid_sas
×
×
  • Create New...