February 25, 200917 yr Hi, I'm running 4.5 beta 1 still and have no issues with it, but I found something a few days ago that puzzled me. I added an older PATA drive to my previously native SATA array so that I could offload some files and free up space on a larger drive and found this oddity when changing the spin down delay for that specific drive (ata-MAXTOR_STM3320620A_4QF038BK). . This drive is connected to a Promise PCI controller (non-RAID) because the onboard IDE port is not detected by unRAID. The drive works perfectly fine, nothing appears out of the ordinary, no parity errors, etc....just that it shows that instead of the expected "reiserfs" like all the other drives. Is this anything to be concerned about? Should I "upgrade" to a final 4.4 version? Ignore it? Thanks! Jon
February 25, 200917 yr Hi, I'm running 4.5 beta 1 still and have no issues with it, but I found something a few days ago that puzzled me. I added an older PATA drive to my previously native SATA array so that I could offload some files and free up space on a larger drive and found this oddity when changing the spin down delay for that specific drive (ata-MAXTOR_STM3320620A_4QF038BK).. This drive is connected to a Promise PCI controller (non-RAID) because the onboard IDE port is not detected by unRAID. The drive works perfectly fine, nothing appears out of the ordinary, no parity errors, etc....just that it shows that instead of the expected "reiserfs" like all the other drives. Is this anything to be concerned about? Should I "upgrade" to a final 4.4 version? Ignore it? Thanks! Jon I would go ahead and upgrade to 4.4.2 and see what happens. If all else fails then you can put the bz_root and bz_image files back on the flash to go back to 4.5 beta1
February 25, 200917 yr Take a look in your syslog (or post it for us), and search hda (I'm assuming this is the only IDE drive). After setting it up, there should be a line similar to the following: kernel: hda: hda1 If not, what does it say?
February 25, 200917 yr Author It's reported as hdf (I think my port multiplier is causing 5 drives to show up as hda-e). Anyway, here is the section of syslog regarding the IDE drive: Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: Probing IDE interface ide2... Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: MAXTOR STM3320620A, ATA DISK drive Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: host max PIO4 wanted PIO255(auto-tune) selected PIO4 Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: UDMA/100 mode selected
February 25, 200917 yr That is the first part of the drive setup, keep looking farther down. It should follow lines about sectors and cache flushes, similar to the following: kernel: hdf: max request size: 512KiB kernel: hdf: 625142448 sectors (320072 MB) w/16384KiB Cache, CHS=38913/255/63 kernel: hdf: cache flushes supported kernel: hdf: hdf1 The last line indicates it found one partition hdf1 on drive hdf. If there were no partition table, you would see something like this: (common for brand new drive) kernel: hdf: unknown partition table If there were multiple partitions, you would see something like this: (more common on a used drive being reused in unRAID) kernel: hdf: hdf1 hdf2 hdf3 hdf4
February 25, 200917 yr Author You're right. There's nothing after kernel: hdf...it's just blank. Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: max request size: 128KiB Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: 625142448 sectors (320072 MB) w/16384KiB Cache, CHS=38913/255/63 Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: cache flushes supported Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: Is this a problem?
February 25, 200917 yr You're right. There's nothing after kernel: hdf...it's just blank. Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: max request size: 128KiB Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: 625142448 sectors (320072 MB) w/16384KiB Cache, CHS=38913/255/63 Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: cache flushes supported Feb 21 13:35:34 MEDIASVR kernel: hdf: Is this a problem? If everything is working, probably not a problem. What do you get when you type: vol_id /dev/hdf1 It should look a lot like this: root@Tower:/etc# vol_id /dev/hda1 ID_FS_USAGE=filesystem ID_FS_TYPE=reiserfs ID_FS_VERSION=3.6 ID_FS_UUID=f0241f95-552b-4488-95b8-28488e09873e ID_FS_UUID_ENC=f0241f95-552b-4488-95b8-28488e09873e ID_FS_LABEL= ID_FS_LABEL_ENC= If the reiserfs is not being recognized, I'd run a file-system check on it, just to make sure it is ok. I do seem to remember this issue of not seeing the file-system-type on the spin-down page was mentioned before and reported as a bug. It has been a while. You are not the first to notice this. The conditions of the prior report was that the file-system type was identified when the system was booted, and the prior poster had not yet added the drive to their array, and therefore it did not yet have a file-system on it. The spin-down page reflected the initial snapshot in time when the server was booted. Did you perhaps add the drive in question to your array since it was booted last? That might explain why it does not show the reiserfs file system. It did not yet exist. Joe L.
February 25, 200917 yr Author I got: MEDIASVR login: root Password: Linux 2.6.27.7-unRAID. root@MEDIASVR:~# vol_id /dev/hd1 /dev/hd1: error opening volume root@MEDIASVR:~# vol_id /dev/hdf1 ID_FS_USAGE=filesystem ID_FS_TYPE=reiserfs ID_FS_VERSION=3.6 ID_FS_UUID=48e060e9-c507-4564-aaca-74835ad98171 ID_FS_UUID_ENC=48e060e9-c507-4564-aaca-74835ad98171 ID_FS_LABEL= ID_FS_LABEL_ENC= root@MEDIASVR:~# So, I guess that looks on par. I did just recently add it and have not rebooted since. I just went through a clear, format and then copied my files over.
February 26, 200917 yr I got: MEDIASVR login: root Password: Linux 2.6.27.7-unRAID. root@MEDIASVR:~# vol_id /dev/hd1 /dev/hd1: error opening volume root@MEDIASVR:~# vol_id /dev/hdf1 ID_FS_USAGE=filesystem ID_FS_TYPE=reiserfs ID_FS_VERSION=3.6 ID_FS_UUID=48e060e9-c507-4564-aaca-74835ad98171 ID_FS_UUID_ENC=48e060e9-c507-4564-aaca-74835ad98171 ID_FS_LABEL= ID_FS_LABEL_ENC= root@MEDIASVR:~# So, I guess that looks on par. I did just recently add it and have not rebooted since. I just went through a clear, format and then copied my files over. There is nothing wrong with your server... as I said, the spin-down page reflects the initial snapshot in time when the server was booted. At that time, the disk did not have a file-system on it. Hopefully, Tom will update the status reported there in future releases when disks are added to the array. For now, it is just inaccurately reported until you reboot in the user-interface. Joe L.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.