March 18, 201115 yr These posts are in relation to an I/O error on Windows 7. An error that showed up when attempting to transfer or copy files from Windows 7 to Disk1 of my unRAID server. A solution was found: I'm very much interested in any solutions to this issue. Was about to open a new thread with the same error. I do not want to hijack betaman's thread (I/O errors thread), and will gladly stick around and 'listen in' looking for a solution. If someone could please let me know if I should rather open a new thread on same topic, will be deeply appreciated. Will do as needed. In the meantime, here's how this issue is affecting me- I'm running Windows 7 Ultimate (running 32 Bit on media PC and 64 bit on desktop unit) and am experiencing the same problem when trying to copy anything to my Disk 1. An I/O error is reported by Windows 7 (by both PCs) with every attempt to copy to Disk 1. All copies to Disk 2 (a 2TB Seagate LD Green) and to Disk 4 (a 500GB Seagate), have gone without a glitch. I've also been able to copy my music to Disk 3. Streaming from these three also perfect. Disk 1, Disk 3 and Parity Drive are identical 2TB 7K2000 Hitachi drives. All precleared at the same time w/o errors. I'm trying to copy my movies from the media PC to the unRAID server (running 4.7 Pro). Disks 1, 2 and 4 were set up for movies, but Disk 1 remains empty. None of my disks are full or close to full (all are currently empty or less than 50%). Can also upload syslog tonight, after an attempt to copy to Disk 1, as well as a screenshot of the Windows I/O error message. Cheers,
March 18, 201115 yr Author Copy to operation to Disk 1 failed again today- the I/O error. attached please find upper section of my latest syslog (errors) as well as prtScreen of Windows error message. Full 03-19 syslog is 2,600+ KB. Can zip and upload if needed for troubleshooting. I'm new to unRAID, but it seems my Disk 1 has a format error. What steps should I follow to fix this? This disk is empty. My server has data on disks 2, 3 and 4. Thanks, Ramon syslog-2011-03-19_errors_ProfQ_tower.txt
March 19, 201115 yr I have the same problem copying from a Mac to unRAID. The first copy fails at 50M. The second try works every time. This is an unRAID problem. I think it is due to the spinup delay because all subsequent transfers work. It has not bothered me enough to check an initial copy with the disks spun up first.
March 19, 201115 yr Author Since all other transfer and Copy attempts to the other three data disks in my array have been successful, and fast! (Teracopy from media PC to server at 60-105 MB/S), I've concluded that these I/O errors are Disk related. Given the errors reported by Disk1, I've stopped the array, removed Disk1, and restarted the array using the steps described by Joe L. elsewhere on this forum. Have verified SMART reports, ran ShSmart test on Disk1. Nothing of concern there, thus I'm running preclear on this disk. Preclear now at 11 hrs 40 mins into process- Preclear read complete, Step 1 of 10 complete, step 2 at 62% done. If preclear successful, will repeat once, Format and re-mount Disk1. If not, will prepare my spare Hitachi 7k2000, and replace this disk and RMA.
March 21, 201115 yr Author Preclears of problematic Disk 1 were successful. Have reassigned this Hitachi Disk1 drive to a Motherboard port. Currently again as Disk 1 in Array. Due to forum recommended hardware list have opted to install my spare 2Tb WD EADS in the server, instead of the extra Hitachi. Currently running preclear on the WD. Tomorrow will test the Hitachi w a Teracopy file transfer. Then will know if the Hitachi can remain as Disk1, or will have to be RMA'd Cheers,
March 21, 201115 yr Author Hi, I need help. In spite of two New preclear runs without errors on Disk1, and successfully adding the Disk back to the Array w/out errors, and all Green, Disk1 I/O errors are back. I've hit a wall. Help?!! Attempted a file transfer from Windows to Disk1 and got the same I/O errors as before the new preclears and reassignment of Disk one to a new port (now directly to MB port, w new Sata cables). After this failed copy to Disk1 I tried transfers to Disks 2, 3 and 4. These were successful. These are the last few lines from today's syslog about this: Mar 22 07:12:11 Tower kernel: REISERFS error (device md1): zam-7001 reiserfs_find_entry: io error Mar 22 07:12:11 Tower kernel: REISERFS warning: reiserfs-5090 is_tree_node: node level 1 does not match to the expected one 2 Mar 22 07:12:11 Tower kernel: REISERFS error (device md1): vs-5150 search_by_key: invalid format found in block 32770. Fsck? Mar 22 07:12:11 Tower kernel: REISERFS error (device md1): zam-7001 reiserfs_find_entry: io error Mar 22 07:12:11 Tower kernel: REISERFS warning: reiserfs-5090 is_tree_node: node level 1 does not match to the expected one 2 Mar 22 07:12:11 Tower kernel: REISERFS error (device md1): vs-5150 search_by_key: invalid format found in block 32770. Fsck? These repeat in the syslog quite a number of times. I can upload I/O error message and the syslog, if needed. This drive is one of three identical Hitachi 7K2000 in the array. The other two have been flawless. Only noticeable difference is this one seems to run a few degrees hotter and stats show a lot more writes and much fewer reads for this Disk (/dev/sde). From unMenu: Array Disk Status Status Disk Mounted Device Model/Serial Temp Reads Writes Errors Size Used %Used Free OK parity /dev/sdd Hitachi_HDS72202_JK1101YAJVWJKV 38°C 5287081 212363 OK /dev/md1 /mnt/disk1 /dev/sde Hitachi_HDS72202_JK1101YAJLA3RV * 133 5091518 2.00T 173.40M 1% 2.00T OK /dev/md2 /mnt/disk2 /dev/sdb 9VT1_5YD25J25 34°C 8479659 35 2.00T 1.54T 77% 460.66G OK /dev/md3 /mnt/disk3 /dev/sdc Hitachi_HDS72202_JK1101YAK3JBVZ 39°C 8810966 334516 2.00T 283.52G 15% 1.72T OK /dev/md4 /mnt/disk4 /dev/sdf ST3500418AS_9VMWHKKM * 1273869 33 500.09G 433.06G 87% 67.03G Total: 6.50T 2.26T 34% 4.24T Parity is Valid:. Last parity check < 1 day ago with no sync errors. I am ready to RMA, but this is quite puzzling. Any help will be deeply appreciated. Thank you, Ramon
March 22, 201115 yr Those errors indicate that the reiser file system on that disk is in need of repair. the physical disk is not the issue... Follow the reiserfsck procedure described here: http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php?title=Check_Disk_Filesystems
March 22, 201115 yr Author Those errors indicate that the reiser file system on that disk is in need of repair. the physical disk is not the issue... Follow the reiserfsck procedure described here: http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php?title=Check_Disk_Filesystems Thank you Joe, And thanks for the link. I've started reiserfsck on md1. First line of output says 'filesystem seems mounted read-only. Skipping journal replay." Will report back with results, or more questions if needed, or if --rebuild-sb is recommended. Update: ran successfully --rebuild tree was recommended. Running it now. Will report back Thank you, Ramon
March 22, 201115 yr Author Those errors indicate that the reiser file system on that disk is in need of repair. the physical disk is not the issue... Follow the reiserfsck procedure described here: http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php?title=Check_Disk_Filesystems Thanks. I've run reiserfsck rebuild-tree option, as recommended by check of my md1 disk Got this message with rebuild tree run. Frankly I do not understand much of it. ===== root@Tower:~# reiserfsck --rebuild-tree /dev/md1 reiserfsck 3.6.21 (2009 www.namesys.com) ************************************************************* ** Do not run the program with --rebuild-tree unless ** ** something is broken and MAKE A BACKUP before using it. ** ** If you have bad sectors on a drive it is usually a bad ** ** idea to continue using it. Then you probably should get ** ** a working hard drive, copy the file system from the bad ** ** drive to the good one -- dd_rescue is a good tool for ** ** that -- and only then run this program. ** ** If you are using the latest reiserfsprogs and it fails ** ** please email bug reports to [email protected], ** ** providing as much information as possible -- your ** ** hardware, kernel, patches, settings, all reiserfsck ** ** messages (including version), the reiserfsck logfile, ** ** check the syslog file for any related information. ** ** If you would like advice on using this program, support ** ** is available for $25 at www.namesys.com/support.html. ** ************************************************************* Will rebuild the filesystem (/dev/md1) tree Will put log info to 'stdout' Do you want to run this program?[N/Yes] (note need to type Yes if you do):Yes Replaying journal: Done. Reiserfs journal '/dev/md1' in blocks [18..8211]: 0 transactions replayed ########### reiserfsck --rebuild-tree started at Tue Mar 22 21:57:14 2011 ########### Pass 0: ####### Pass 0 ####### Loading on-disk bitmap .. ok, 23633 blocks marked used Skipping 23115 blocks (super block, journal, bitmaps) 518 blocks will be read 0%....20%....40%....60%....80%....100% left 0, 172 /sec Could not find a hash in use. Using "r5" "r5" hash is selected Flushing..finished Read blocks (but not data blocks) 518 Leaves among those 0 Objectids found 2 Pass 1 (will try to insert 0 leaves): ####### Pass 1 ####### Looking for allocable blocks .. finished Flushing..finished 0 leaves read 0 inserted ####### Pass 2 ####### Flushing..finished No reiserfs metadata found. If you are sure that you had the reiserfs on this partition, then the start of the partition might be changed or all data were wiped out. The start of the partition may get changed by a partitioner if you have used one. Then you probably rebuilt the superblock as there was no one. Zero the block at 64K offset from the start of the partition (a new super block you have just built) and try to move the start of the partition a few cylinders aside and check if debugreiserfs /dev/xxx detects a reiserfs super block. If it does this is likely to be the right super block version. Have no idea what Zero the block....means. Disk1 was always empty (no data). What should be done now? Any help will be deeply appreciated. Thank you, Ramon
March 22, 201115 yr As an FYI for this thread, To clarify the issue of writing to an unRAID server from Win 7 x64, there is no ongoing issue. I have two unRAID servers here and I do massive sync's from a Windows 2003 server through Win 7 Pro x64 over to the unRAID server and I have never seen any Windows timeout errors. In short, Windows 7 x64 and unRAID are perfectly compatible. Rick
March 22, 201115 yr Author As an FYI for this thread, To clarify the issue of writing to an unRAID server from Win 7 x64, there is no ongoing issue. I have two unRAID servers here and I do massive sync's from a Windows 2003 server through Win 7 Pro x64 over to the unRAID server and I have never seen any Windows timeout errors. In short, Windows 7 x64 and unRAID are perfectly compatible. Rick Nice to see you haven't had any issues with writing to an unRAID server from Windows 7. That has not been the case for everyone. I, for one, had to apply a number of network tweaks to both of my Windows 7 systems (64 and 32 bit) so they'd work flawlessly with my unRAID server. In short, it was not an out of the box 'perfectly compatible' experience in my case. Working very well by now. Thanks for the comment. Ramon
March 22, 201115 yr Author Those errors indicate that the reiser file system on that disk is in need of repair. the physical disk is not the issue... Follow the reiserfsck procedure described here: http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php?title=Check_Disk_Filesystems Hi, Thanks to Joe L. for his help and guidance. What a star! The reiserfsck check and rebuild tree operation was successful after two recommended runs. I then repeated reiserfsck check twice. Finally formatted Disk1 using Format button on the main unRAID management console. Restarted array and ran recommended commands to start normal operations. Shares visible, test copy to Disk1 (~7GB file) was successful, and quick. It seems that, after some more testing, I better contact Hitachi and cancel RMA number I was issued for this drive. Thank you! Best, Ramon
March 22, 201115 yr Ouch, did this thread ever get off track. That's what happens when you hijack a thread with a new issue. This disk1 corruption issue had nothing to do with original post. Peter
March 22, 201115 yr Ouch, did this thread ever get off track. That's what happens when you hijack a thread with a new issue. This disk1 corruption issue had nothing to do with original post. Peter I split if off on its own thread.
March 22, 201115 yr Author Ouch, did this thread ever get off track. That's what happens when you hijack a thread with a new issue. This disk1 corruption issue had nothing to do with original post. Peter Disk1 corruption was found thanks to the I/O error message that happened when attempting to copy from Windows 7 (the original issue) to Disk1. Joe L's split of the thread made these solutions available to all. Cheers,
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.