September 15, 201510 yr One day there will be a solution. Forced me to pluck my two new SAS2 cards out and install 2 H310 cards I was lucky enough to get from work.
September 16, 201510 yr I wanted to provide an update on my situation. I was not one of the users who had real performance issues with the cards, but did have drives go offline after one of my controllers crashed, and so I decided to swap out my SAS2LP cards with M1015 cards. While I was getting around 95 MB/sec on an overall parity check there were a few comments that this was still not great and should have been better. I've run 5 minute tests on the SAS2LP card and the new M1015s: SAS2LP Total size: 6 TB Elapsed time: 5 minutes Current position: 32.7 GB (0.5 %) Estimated speed: 111.6 MB/sec Estimated finish: 14 hours, 51 minutes M1015 Total size: 6 TB Elapsed time: 5 minutes Current position: 40.6 GB (0.7 %) Estimated speed: 119.2 MB/sec Estimated finish: 13 hours, 53 minutes As you can see there is a bit of a speed pickup, but it does fluctuate (as I am sure the SAS2LP did). I will post final parity check results as well once complete, and then I am going to re-run tunables to see what it does. For this initial test I did nothing but replace the cards and cables (the originals were too short). However, on the surface, it appears that based on my system and drives I was pretty close to where I should be on the SAS2LP cards.
September 17, 201510 yr I wanted to provide an update on my situation. I was not one of the users who had real performance issues with the cards, but did have drives go offline after one of my controllers crashed, and so I decided to swap out my SAS2LP cards with M1015 cards. While I was getting around 95 MB/sec on an overall parity check there were a few comments that this was still not great and should have been better. I've run 5 minute tests on the SAS2LP card and the new M1015s: SAS2LP Total size: 6 TB Elapsed time: 5 minutes Current position: 32.7 GB (0.5 %) Estimated speed: 111.6 MB/sec Estimated finish: 14 hours, 51 minutes M1015 Total size: 6 TB Elapsed time: 5 minutes Current position: 40.6 GB (0.7 %) Estimated speed: 119.2 MB/sec Estimated finish: 13 hours, 53 minutes As you can see there is a bit of a speed pickup, but it does fluctuate (as I am sure the SAS2LP did). I will post final parity check results as well once complete, and then I am going to re-run tunables to see what it does. For this initial test I did nothing but replace the cards and cables (the originals were too short). However, on the surface, it appears that based on my system and drives I was pretty close to where I should be on the SAS2LP cards. I don't think everyone that has the SAS2LP card(s) have the slow parity check issue. Not sure if that's been confirmed, but Lime-Tech did respond previously in this thread and said they were able to duplicate the slow parity check speeds. I had two SAS2LP cards with a max of 60MB/sec parity check speeds. Replaced those two cards with the Dell H310 HBA card and jumped to over 110MB/sec. I'm done playing for a little bit and want to spend more time enjoying the content on the drives.
September 17, 201510 yr I wanted to provide an update on my situation. I was not one of the users who had real performance issues with the cards, but did have drives go offline after one of my controllers crashed, and so I decided to swap out my SAS2LP cards with M1015 cards. While I was getting around 95 MB/sec on an overall parity check there were a few comments that this was still not great and should have been better. I've run 5 minute tests on the SAS2LP card and the new M1015s: SAS2LP Total size: 6 TB Elapsed time: 5 minutes Current position: 32.7 GB (0.5 %) Estimated speed: 111.6 MB/sec Estimated finish: 14 hours, 51 minutes M1015 Total size: 6 TB Elapsed time: 5 minutes Current position: 40.6 GB (0.7 %) Estimated speed: 119.2 MB/sec Estimated finish: 13 hours, 53 minutes As you can see there is a bit of a speed pickup, but it does fluctuate (as I am sure the SAS2LP did). I will post final parity check results as well once complete, and then I am going to re-run tunables to see what it does. For this initial test I did nothing but replace the cards and cables (the originals were too short). However, on the surface, it appears that based on my system and drives I was pretty close to where I should be on the SAS2LP cards. I don't think everyone that has the SAS2LP card(s) have the slow parity check issue. Not sure if that's been confirmed, but Lime-Tech did respond previously in this thread and said they were able to duplicate the slow parity check speeds. I had two SAS2LP cards with a max of 60MB/sec parity check speeds. Replaced those two cards with the Dell H310 HBA card and jumped to over 110MB/sec. I'm done playing for a little bit and want to spend more time enjoying the content on the drives. No, not everyone experiences the slow parity issues, however when I posted my 95MB/sec it was suggested this is still sub-par. I honestly didn't care, and only swapped them out because one of my cards crashed and I ended up with some corrupted data (my own fault, but still). I just wanted to let people know that if they are getting 90-105MB/sec there is likely nothing wrong with the cards, and you are not really going to see an improvement by swapping them out. Some scenarios will give 150MB/sec or higher, but there are a number of other factors than just the controllers that play into this.
September 25, 201510 yr Hello I currently have 2xSAS2LPs on an ASRock z77 Extreme4-m motherboard running unRAID v5.0.5 Pro. I've got my parity drive (3TB RED) and cache drive on mb sata ports and the remaining 13 drives that make up my array are spread across the SAS2LPs. I have the 2-pack Pro licenses assigned to different USB sticks. Only one is in use. The thing has been rock-solid for years. Normally I wouldn't tempt fate by making changes, but there are some nice tools/features in v6 I would like to use (NAS stuff, I won't be making use of the virt. capabilities... yet).I was ready to pull the trigger on an upgrade to v6 when I ran across this thread. The way I see it, I have two routes I could take: [*]Buy 2xm1015 flashed to IT and replace/sell my SAS2LP. Then upgrade. $$ [*]Clone my config to my second USB key. Upgrade that key to v6. Boot and see what happens with a parity check. If it works well, fantastic . If I have obvious slowness I would shutdown and boot back up on my current v5.0.5 key. I guess then I 'd be forced to option 1 :'( I would prefer not to buy two m1015s if I can avoid it, but what kind of risk am I exposing myself to by pursuing option #2? I've read that speeds are severely impacted, but is it causing stability or data corruption issues? Not sure if I've conclusively heard anyone say that. As long as its only going to impact my speed, I think #2 is a fairly safe option. At least I'll be able to see if my particular mb + SAS2LP combo has the issue. Thoughts? Thanks
September 25, 201510 yr Community Expert Hello I currently have 2xSAS2LPs on an ASRock z77 Extreme4-m motherboard running unRAID v5.0.5 Pro. I've got my parity drive (3TB RED) and cache drive on mb sata ports and the remaining 13 drives that make up my array are spread across the SAS2LPs. I have the 2-pack Pro licenses assigned to different USB sticks. Only one is in use. The thing has been rock-solid for years. Normally I wouldn't tempt fate by making changes, but there are some nice tools/features in v6 I would like to use (NAS stuff, I won't be making use of the virt. capabilities... yet).I was ready to pull the trigger on an upgrade to v6 when I ran across this thread. The way I see it, I have two routes I could take: [*]Buy 2xm1015 flashed to IT and replace/sell my SAS2LP. Then upgrade. $$ [*]Clone my config to my second USB key. Upgrade that key to v6. Boot and see what happens with a parity check. If it works well, fantastic . If I have obvious slowness I would shutdown and boot back up on my current v5.0.5 key. I guess then I 'd be forced to option 1 :'( I would prefer not to buy two m1015s if I can avoid it, but what kind of risk am I exposing myself to by pursuing option #2? I've read that speeds are severely impacted, but is it causing stability or data corruption issues? Not sure if I've conclusively heard anyone say that. As long as its only going to impact my speed, I think #2 is a fairly safe option. At least I'll be able to see if my particular mb + SAS2LP combo has the issue. I would suggest going with option 2. From what I have seen in the forum posts many people are using the SAS2LP controllers without any issues. Another subset have the parity check speed issue and nothing else. With any luck you will fall into one of these camps and as you have indicated that the parity check speed is not critical you would be good to go with v6. One or two have more serious issues and there is no apparent reason why these users are different and you would only know if you try it. As long as you make sure you have an easy reversion to v5 (which you suggest is the case as you have a second unRAID license) so you can use separate USB stick for the two versions then it is low risk. Just make sure that you do not make configuration changes on the v6 USB stick that are not reflected on the v5 one. In fact the ability to easily switch between v5 and v6 in this way was one of the reasons giving for offering a very cheap second unRAID license during the original v6 beta phase. There is a possible 3rd option which is to simply wait. Limetech have said that they have reproduced the slow parity check issue in their lab so presumably this is being worked on and at some point a resolution is likely (although I must admit I have not yet seen any suggestion that the cause has been identified). However if this involves getting appropriate patches accepted upstream into the Linux kernel it may not be a fast process.
September 25, 201510 yr I don't think you really need to clone one USB key to the other if you don't want too. All you really need is a clone backup on a desktop computer so that you can restore v5 onto that USB key. Might be a good idea to create a backup off your array regardless. Just to be safe.
September 25, 201510 yr Community Expert I don't think you really need to clone one USB key to the other if you don't want too. All you really need is a clone backup on a desktop computer so that you can restore v5 onto that USB key. Might be a good idea to create a backup off your array regardless. Just to be safe. Just be sure to stop the array BEFORE you clone the USB key. That will prevent a parity check if you have to restore the Key drive from the cloned copy.
September 26, 201510 yr Thanks for the input everyone. I decided to go ahead and upgrade to see how it would impact my Parity Check speeds. I normally see speeds around 85-100MB/sec in 5.0.5 and my array finishes between 10-11hrs. After upgrading: 40MB/sec - Estimated finish: ~20 hrs I'm definitely impacted by this issue. I'm going to restore my usb stick from backup and wait to see what lime-tech comes up with re: these cards. Update: Parity check speeds are consistently back between 85-100MB/sec. after reverting back to v5.0.5.
October 2, 201510 yr I'm definitely impacted by this issue. I'm going to restore my usb stick from backup and wait to see what lime-tech comes up with re: these cards. I just wanted to add a caution here. Waiting for LimeTech to fix it is certainly an option, but I'm not sure it's a good one. LimeTech does not write drivers or firmware. So there may not be anything they can do for you. If no one out there ever fixes the driver support or corrects the firmware, you may never have a good option again. I just felt you should be aware of that. I'm sure Tom would love to fix this, but it's not fully under his control.
October 3, 201510 yr I'm definitely impacted by this issue. I'm going to restore my usb stick from backup and wait to see what lime-tech comes up with re: these cards. I just wanted to add a caution here. Waiting for LimeTech to fix it is certainly an option, but I'm not sure it's a good one. LimeTech does not write drivers or firmware. So there may not be anything they can do for you. If no one out there ever fixes the driver support or corrects the firmware, you may never have a good option again. I just felt you should be aware of that. I'm sure Tom would love to fix this, but it's not fully under his control. Thanks Rob, I appreciate the caution. I do understand the limitations and therefore am planning to undertake some pending upgrades on my other servers before I give up on a fix that allows the SAS2LP to work in unRAID v6 as it does in v5.0.5. I have an ESXi server on which I'd like to virtualize my (currently) physical XPEnology server. I just ordered a m1015 for that so I will have a good understanding of the flashing procedure should I need to move to that card in unRAID if the SAS2LP issue is not fixable. At present, I think I'll likely wait until after the first of the year and if there's no progress by then on a fix I'll have to save the $, buy the cards and then try to re-sell my SAS2LPs. That said, I hope that if Lime-Tech determines that this issue is caused by something they can't fix, they'll announce that here ASAP so customers who are trying to avoid spending cash on new cards to replace ones that worked fine in 5.0.5 know the investigation and attempt to resolve has concluded. -Brian
October 3, 201510 yr SIGH. Wish I had seen this earlier. Just got the 2s and my parity check just dipped to 1.5... Suggestions on new cards? I have the SASLPs still, so I will put those back in for now. Ugh...as I was typing this out, I went and looked at the GUI: Total size: 4 TB Elapsed time: 1 day Current position: 384 GB (9.6 %) Estimated speed: 1.3 MB/sec Estimated finish: 31 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes
October 3, 201510 yr SIGH. Wish I had seen this earlier. Just got the 2s and my parity check just dipped to 1.5... Suggestions on new cards? I have the SASLPs still, so I will put those back in for now. Ugh...as I was typing this out, I went and looked at the GUI: Total size: 4 TB Elapsed time: 1 day Current position: 384 GB (9.6 %) Estimated speed: 1.3 MB/sec Estimated finish: 31 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes The m1015 seems to have the least amount of problems from what I've read. This is the one I'm getting: http://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-SERVERAID-M1015-ADAPTER-PCI-E-2-0-X8-RAID-CONTROLLER-CARD-46M0861-LOW-P-/311412447947?hash=item4881a0dacb
October 3, 201510 yr SIGH. Wish I had seen this earlier. Just got the 2s and my parity check just dipped to 1.5... Suggestions on new cards? I have the SASLPs still, so I will put those back in for now. Ugh...as I was typing this out, I went and looked at the GUI: Total size: 4 TB Elapsed time: 1 day Current position: 384 GB (9.6 %) Estimated speed: 1.3 MB/sec Estimated finish: 31 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes The m1015 seems to have the least amount of problems from what I've read. This is the one I'm getting: http://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-SERVERAID-M1015-ADAPTER-PCI-E-2-0-X8-RAID-CONTROLLER-CARD-46M0861-LOW-P-/311412447947?hash=item4881a0dacb That's great, thanks so much. I wonder why mine seems even worse than anyone else's. I was all excited to have upgraded to the SAS2LP because I started getting really good read speeds compared to the SASLP. Then a parity check kicked on and I couldn't understand what was happening. After nearly 5 years of unRAID, I just put in 32GB of RAM and an i7 3.4GHz with hyper-threading in the hopes I'd never open that thing again. Ha. Maybe after the M1015s, I won't have to. Thanks again for the suggestion.
October 3, 201510 yr SIGH. Wish I had seen this earlier. Just got the 2s and my parity check just dipped to 1.5... Suggestions on new cards? I have the SASLPs still, so I will put those back in for now. Ugh...as I was typing this out, I went and looked at the GUI: Total size: 4 TB Elapsed time: 1 day Current position: 384 GB (9.6 %) Estimated speed: 1.3 MB/sec Estimated finish: 31 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes The m1015 seems to have the least amount of problems from what I've read. This is the one I'm getting: http://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-SERVERAID-M1015-ADAPTER-PCI-E-2-0-X8-RAID-CONTROLLER-CARD-46M0861-LOW-P-/311412447947?hash=item4881a0dacb That's great, thanks so much. I wonder why mine seems even worse than anyone else's. I was all excited to have upgraded to the SAS2LP because I started getting really good read speeds compared to the SASLP. Then a parity check kicked on and I couldn't understand what was happening. After nearly 5 years of unRAID, I just put in 32GB of RAM and an i7 3.4GHz with hyper-threading in the hopes I'd never open that thing again. Ha. Maybe after the M1015s, I won't have to. Thanks again for the suggestion. Since those speeds are so abysmally slow, it would be wise to post your diagnostics, as there may be something else going on here. (IE: since you had to play with the cables, any chance you didn't plug them in all the way, or disturbed the SATA ends (if not using a SAS backplane) or power connectors to the drives? A diagnostic might point in the correct direction
October 4, 201510 yr SIGH. Wish I had seen this earlier. Just got the 2s and my parity check just dipped to 1.5... Suggestions on new cards? I have the SASLPs still, so I will put those back in for now. Ugh...as I was typing this out, I went and looked at the GUI: Total size: 4 TB Elapsed time: 1 day Current position: 384 GB (9.6 %) Estimated speed: 1.3 MB/sec Estimated finish: 31 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes The m1015 seems to have the least amount of problems from what I've read. This is the one I'm getting: http://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-SERVERAID-M1015-ADAPTER-PCI-E-2-0-X8-RAID-CONTROLLER-CARD-46M0861-LOW-P-/311412447947?hash=item4881a0dacb That's great, thanks so much. I wonder why mine seems even worse than anyone else's. I was all excited to have upgraded to the SAS2LP because I started getting really good read speeds compared to the SASLP. Then a parity check kicked on and I couldn't understand what was happening. After nearly 5 years of unRAID, I just put in 32GB of RAM and an i7 3.4GHz with hyper-threading in the hopes I'd never open that thing again. Ha. Maybe after the M1015s, I won't have to. Thanks again for the suggestion. Since those speeds are so abysmally slow, it would be wise to post your diagnostics, as there may be something else going on here. (IE: since you had to play with the cables, any chance you didn't plug them in all the way, or disturbed the SATA ends (if not using a SAS backplane) or power connectors to the drives? A diagnostic might point in the correct direction Thanks for the help. Even if it takes 24 hours to get a parity check done, I can live with that over the 28 days it was going to take. The cables are all plugged in all the way. There are no errors, which was an issue for me for a while and not since I did the upgrade. So, no idea what was causing that either. Attached the diag. zion-diagnostics-20151003-1923.zip
October 4, 201510 yr SIGH. Wish I had seen this earlier. Just got the 2s and my parity check just dipped to 1.5... Suggestions on new cards? I have the SASLPs still, so I will put those back in for now. Ugh...as I was typing this out, I went and looked at the GUI: Total size: 4 TB Elapsed time: 1 day Current position: 384 GB (9.6 %) Estimated speed: 1.3 MB/sec Estimated finish: 31 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes I bought 4 Dell H310 cards. Flashed two of them to the Dell IT mode (which is supported by Dell) and flashed the other two with the 2118it.bin LSI firmware. All 4 cards working fine and have similar speed results. Also, I never needed to re-program the SAS address on any of the cards. Although I did save the address, just in case they were needed. Other posts out there regarding this are in other threads. I've become pretty familiar with the firmware update process.
October 4, 201510 yr SIGH. Wish I had seen this earlier. Just got the 2s and my parity check just dipped to 1.5... Suggestions on new cards? I have the SASLPs still, so I will put those back in for now. Ugh...as I was typing this out, I went and looked at the GUI: Total size: 4 TB Elapsed time: 1 day Current position: 384 GB (9.6 %) Estimated speed: 1.3 MB/sec Estimated finish: 31 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes The m1015 seems to have the least amount of problems from what I've read. This is the one I'm getting: http://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-SERVERAID-M1015-ADAPTER-PCI-E-2-0-X8-RAID-CONTROLLER-CARD-46M0861-LOW-P-/311412447947?hash=item4881a0dacb I wouldn't trust refurbished electronics. May as well spend the extra $15-$20 for a new card. I also like the Dell cards better (for my system) because the SAS ports in the back of the card and not the top. Much easier for me to plug in then if they were on the top. Here are brand new H310's. http://www.ebay.com/itm/201391927743?_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
October 4, 201510 yr SIGH. Wish I had seen this earlier. Just got the 2s and my parity check just dipped to 1.5... Suggestions on new cards? I have the SASLPs still, so I will put those back in for now. Ugh...as I was typing this out, I went and looked at the GUI: Total size: 4 TB Elapsed time: 1 day Current position: 384 GB (9.6 %) Estimated speed: 1.3 MB/sec Estimated finish: 31 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes The m1015 seems to have the least amount of problems from what I've read. This is the one I'm getting: http://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-SERVERAID-M1015-ADAPTER-PCI-E-2-0-X8-RAID-CONTROLLER-CARD-46M0861-LOW-P-/311412447947?hash=item4881a0dacb That's great, thanks so much. I wonder why mine seems even worse than anyone else's. I was all excited to have upgraded to the SAS2LP because I started getting really good read speeds compared to the SASLP. Then a parity check kicked on and I couldn't understand what was happening. After nearly 5 years of unRAID, I just put in 32GB of RAM and an i7 3.4GHz with hyper-threading in the hopes I'd never open that thing again. Ha. Maybe after the M1015s, I won't have to. Thanks again for the suggestion. Since those speeds are so abysmally slow, it would be wise to post your diagnostics, as there may be something else going on here. (IE: since you had to play with the cables, any chance you didn't plug them in all the way, or disturbed the SATA ends (if not using a SAS backplane) or power connectors to the drives? A diagnostic might point in the correct direction Thanks for the help. Even if it takes 24 hours to get a parity check done, I can live with that over the 28 days it was going to take. The cables are all plugged in all the way. There are no errors, which was an issue for me for a while and not since I did the upgrade. So, no idea what was causing that either. Attached the diag. Plucked all the "errors" out. Maybe they have something to do with it? Line 745: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 754: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 755: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 769: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 770: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 771: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 784: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 785: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 786: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 787: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 801: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 802: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 803: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 804: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 805: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:4: dev error handler Line 819: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 820: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 821: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 822: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 823: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:4: dev error handler Line 824: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-1:5: dev error handler Line 841: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 842: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 843: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 844: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 845: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:4: dev error handler Line 846: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-1:5: dev error handler Line 847: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata13: end_device-1:6: dev error handler Line 862: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 863: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 864: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 865: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 866: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:4: dev error handler Line 867: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-1:5: dev error handler Line 868: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata14: end_device-1:7: dev error handler Line 869: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata13: end_device-1:6: dev error handler Line 908: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata15: end_device-8:0: dev error handler Line 921: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata15: end_device-8:0: dev error handler Line 922: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata16: end_device-8:1: dev error handler Line 935: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata15: end_device-8:0: dev error handler Line 936: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata16: end_device-8:1: dev error handler Line 937: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata17: end_device-8:2: dev error handler Line 950: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata15: end_device-8:0: dev error handler Line 951: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata16: end_device-8:1: dev error handler Line 952: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata17: end_device-8:2: dev error handler Line 953: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata18: end_device-8:3: dev error handler Line 1251: Sep 26 23:53:30 Zion logger: # calls and dumping the information to the standard error. System Line 1323: Sep 26 23:53:31 Zion logger: # is reliable, that is any non-fatal error is ignored and the operation Line 1431: Sep 26 23:53:33 Zion kernel: xhci_hcd 0000:00:14.0: ERROR Transfer event TRB DMA ptr not part of current TD ep_index 2 comp_code 1 Line 2459: Sep 27 10:42:46 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2463: Sep 27 10:43:31 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2463: Sep 27 10:43:31 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2466: Sep 27 10:44:01 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2466: Sep 27 10:44:01 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2469: Sep 27 10:45:17 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2469: Sep 27 10:45:17 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2471: Sep 27 10:45:47 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2471: Sep 27 10:45:47 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2480: Sep 27 10:49:03 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2483: Sep 27 10:49:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2483: Sep 27 10:49:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2485: Sep 27 10:50:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2485: Sep 27 10:50:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2487: Sep 27 10:50:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2487: Sep 27 10:50:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2490: Sep 27 10:51:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2490: Sep 27 10:51:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2491: Sep 27 10:51:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2491: Sep 27 10:51:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2493: Sep 27 10:52:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2493: Sep 27 10:52:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2495: Sep 27 10:52:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2495: Sep 27 10:52:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2498: Sep 27 10:53:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2498: Sep 27 10:53:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2499: Sep 27 10:53:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2499: Sep 27 10:53:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2501: Sep 27 10:54:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2501: Sep 27 10:54:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2503: Sep 27 10:54:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2503: Sep 27 10:54:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2512: Sep 27 10:55:54 Zion hp[282]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2513: Sep 27 10:55:55 Zion hpcups[281]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2513: Sep 27 10:55:55 Zion hpcups[281]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2514: Sep 27 10:55:55 Zion hpcups[281]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2514: Sep 27 10:55:55 Zion hpcups[281]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2523: Sep 27 10:59:50 Zion hp[323]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2524: Sep 27 10:59:51 Zion hpcups[322]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2524: Sep 27 10:59:51 Zion hpcups[322]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2525: Sep 27 10:59:51 Zion hpcups[322]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2525: Sep 27 10:59:51 Zion hpcups[322]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2532: Sep 27 11:01:30 Zion hp[357]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2533: Sep 27 11:01:31 Zion hpcups[356]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2533: Sep 27 11:01:31 Zion hpcups[356]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2534: Sep 27 11:01:31 Zion hpcups[356]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2534: Sep 27 11:01:31 Zion hpcups[356]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 3769: Oct 2 10:14:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3770: Oct 2 10:15:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3771: Oct 2 10:16:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3772: Oct 2 10:17:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3773: Oct 2 10:18:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3774: Oct 2 10:19:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3775: Oct 2 10:20:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3776: Oct 2 10:21:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3777: Oct 2 10:22:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3778: Oct 2 10:23:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3779: Oct 2 10:24:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3780: Oct 2 10:25:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3781: Oct 2 10:26:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3782: Oct 2 10:27:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3783: Oct 2 10:28:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3784: Oct 2 10:29:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed.
October 4, 201510 yr I wouldn't trust refurbished electronics. May as well spend the extra $15-$20 for a new card. I also like the Dell cards better (for my system) because the SAS ports in the back of the card and not the top. Much easier for me to plug in then if they were on the top. Here are brand new H310's. http://www.ebay.com/itm/201391927743?_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT Thanks for the link. I had looked at the Dells as they are significantly cheaper than the m1015s and are basically the same card. Not sure how much of a warranty I can expect from Dell w/ a new card bought on eBay though. I think I'll see how things are going in 3-4 months. By then I'll have my refurb m1015 in my ESXi box for a fair amount of time and I can check back with you to confirm you've had no issues with the Dells. I'll make my decision then. How long have you been running them w/o issue? What firmware version have you flashed? Thanks
October 4, 201510 yr SIGH. Wish I had seen this earlier. Just got the 2s and my parity check just dipped to 1.5... Suggestions on new cards? I have the SASLPs still, so I will put those back in for now. Ugh...as I was typing this out, I went and looked at the GUI: Total size: 4 TB Elapsed time: 1 day Current position: 384 GB (9.6 %) Estimated speed: 1.3 MB/sec Estimated finish: 31 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes The m1015 seems to have the least amount of problems from what I've read. This is the one I'm getting: http://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-SERVERAID-M1015-ADAPTER-PCI-E-2-0-X8-RAID-CONTROLLER-CARD-46M0861-LOW-P-/311412447947?hash=item4881a0dacb That's great, thanks so much. I wonder why mine seems even worse than anyone else's. I was all excited to have upgraded to the SAS2LP because I started getting really good read speeds compared to the SASLP. Then a parity check kicked on and I couldn't understand what was happening. After nearly 5 years of unRAID, I just put in 32GB of RAM and an i7 3.4GHz with hyper-threading in the hopes I'd never open that thing again. Ha. Maybe after the M1015s, I won't have to. Thanks again for the suggestion. Since those speeds are so abysmally slow, it would be wise to post your diagnostics, as there may be something else going on here. (IE: since you had to play with the cables, any chance you didn't plug them in all the way, or disturbed the SATA ends (if not using a SAS backplane) or power connectors to the drives? A diagnostic might point in the correct direction Thanks for the help. Even if it takes 24 hours to get a parity check done, I can live with that over the 28 days it was going to take. The cables are all plugged in all the way. There are no errors, which was an issue for me for a while and not since I did the upgrade. So, no idea what was causing that either. Attached the diag. Plucked all the "errors" out. Maybe they have something to do with it? Line 745: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 754: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 755: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 769: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 770: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 771: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 784: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 785: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 786: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 787: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 801: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 802: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 803: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 804: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 805: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:4: dev error handler Line 819: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 820: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 821: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 822: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 823: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:4: dev error handler Line 824: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-1:5: dev error handler Line 841: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 842: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 843: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 844: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 845: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:4: dev error handler Line 846: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-1:5: dev error handler Line 847: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata13: end_device-1:6: dev error handler Line 862: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-1:0: dev error handler Line 863: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler Line 864: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-1:2: dev error handler Line 865: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-1:3: dev error handler Line 866: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-1:4: dev error handler Line 867: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-1:5: dev error handler Line 868: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata14: end_device-1:7: dev error handler Line 869: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata13: end_device-1:6: dev error handler Line 908: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata15: end_device-8:0: dev error handler Line 921: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata15: end_device-8:0: dev error handler Line 922: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata16: end_device-8:1: dev error handler Line 935: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata15: end_device-8:0: dev error handler Line 936: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata16: end_device-8:1: dev error handler Line 937: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata17: end_device-8:2: dev error handler Line 950: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata15: end_device-8:0: dev error handler Line 951: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata16: end_device-8:1: dev error handler Line 952: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata17: end_device-8:2: dev error handler Line 953: Sep 26 23:53:25 Zion kernel: sas: ata18: end_device-8:3: dev error handler Line 1251: Sep 26 23:53:30 Zion logger: # calls and dumping the information to the standard error. System Line 1323: Sep 26 23:53:31 Zion logger: # is reliable, that is any non-fatal error is ignored and the operation Line 1431: Sep 26 23:53:33 Zion kernel: xhci_hcd 0000:00:14.0: ERROR Transfer event TRB DMA ptr not part of current TD ep_index 2 comp_code 1 Line 2459: Sep 27 10:42:46 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2463: Sep 27 10:43:31 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2463: Sep 27 10:43:31 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2466: Sep 27 10:44:01 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2466: Sep 27 10:44:01 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2469: Sep 27 10:45:17 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2469: Sep 27 10:45:17 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2471: Sep 27 10:45:47 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2471: Sep 27 10:45:47 Zion hp[86]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2480: Sep 27 10:49:03 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2483: Sep 27 10:49:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2483: Sep 27 10:49:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2485: Sep 27 10:50:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2485: Sep 27 10:50:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2487: Sep 27 10:50:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2487: Sep 27 10:50:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2490: Sep 27 10:51:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2490: Sep 27 10:51:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2491: Sep 27 10:51:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2491: Sep 27 10:51:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2493: Sep 27 10:52:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2493: Sep 27 10:52:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2495: Sep 27 10:52:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2495: Sep 27 10:52:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2498: Sep 27 10:53:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2498: Sep 27 10:53:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2499: Sep 27 10:53:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2499: Sep 27 10:53:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2501: Sep 27 10:54:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2501: Sep 27 10:54:18 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2503: Sep 27 10:54:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2503: Sep 27 10:54:48 Zion hp[183]: prnt/backend/hp.c 611: ERROR: 1009 media-empty-error; will retry in 30 seconds... Line 2512: Sep 27 10:55:54 Zion hp[282]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2513: Sep 27 10:55:55 Zion hpcups[281]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2513: Sep 27 10:55:55 Zion hpcups[281]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2514: Sep 27 10:55:55 Zion hpcups[281]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2514: Sep 27 10:55:55 Zion hpcups[281]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2523: Sep 27 10:59:50 Zion hp[323]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2524: Sep 27 10:59:51 Zion hpcups[322]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2524: Sep 27 10:59:51 Zion hpcups[322]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2525: Sep 27 10:59:51 Zion hpcups[322]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2525: Sep 27 10:59:51 Zion hpcups[322]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2532: Sep 27 11:01:30 Zion hp[357]: prnt/backend/hp.c 559: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2533: Sep 27 11:01:31 Zion hpcups[356]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2533: Sep 27 11:01:31 Zion hpcups[356]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 66: Error: dBus Connection Error (Failed to connect to socket /var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket: No such file or directory)! Line 2534: Sep 27 11:01:31 Zion hpcups[356]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 2534: Sep 27 11:01:31 Zion hpcups[356]: prnt/hpcups/dbuscomm.cpp 72: Error: dBus Connection Error ((null))! Line 3769: Oct 2 10:14:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3770: Oct 2 10:15:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3771: Oct 2 10:16:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3772: Oct 2 10:17:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3773: Oct 2 10:18:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3774: Oct 2 10:19:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3775: Oct 2 10:20:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3776: Oct 2 10:21:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3777: Oct 2 10:22:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3778: Oct 2 10:23:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3779: Oct 2 10:24:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3780: Oct 2 10:25:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3781: Oct 2 10:26:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3782: Oct 2 10:27:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3783: Oct 2 10:28:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. Line 3784: Oct 2 10:29:59 Zion sshd[7514]: error: connect_to 192.168.150.110 port 8013: failed. For the: "Zion kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-1:1: dev error handler" errors, Robj indicate that those are fine in: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=34799.15 I can't figure out why sshd needs 8013. Any thoughts on that? I don't have any dockers or anything else using 8013 and NMAP says it's closed. Netstat says it isn't listening or connected to anything using 8013. Can't imagine this is the root cause, but it seems weird. I am ssuming that printing/CUPS couldn't severely affect disks like this either. Any thoughts on my assumptions? (Sidenote: scrolling back through I realized that "media-empt-error" was when I tried to print something with no paper in the printer..so...at least I have one figured out.)
October 4, 201510 yr I wouldn't trust refurbished electronics. May as well spend the extra $15-$20 for a new card. I also like the Dell cards better (for my system) because the SAS ports in the back of the card and not the top. Much easier for me to plug in then if they were on the top. Here are brand new H310's. http://www.ebay.com/itm/201391927743?_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT Thanks for the link. I had looked at the Dells as they are significantly cheaper than the m1015s and are basically the same card. Not sure how much of a warranty I can expect from Dell w/ a new card bought on eBay though. I think I'll see how things are going in 3-4 months. By then I'll have my refurb m1015 in my ESXi box for a fair amount of time and I can check back with you to confirm you've had no issues with the Dells. I'll make my decision then. How long have you been running them w/o issue? What firmware version have you flashed? Thanks I've been burned by buying refurbs, so that's why I don't recommend them. Dell's PowerEdge cards are very good cards, reliable and stable and a lot of their models have their own IT firmware from Dell. They have a 5 year warranty if purchased new and Dell does honor it if you provide a real proof of purchase. I was fortunate enough to have some PowerEdge cards available from where I work. We have over 100 Dell servers. These are solid state, so usually if the card has been running normally for 90 days most of the time it will last until it just dies. I'm eyeballing some H330's that are just laying around in anti-static bags just to fool around with. I know they will never increase my performance. They run the SAS3008 chipset. I know the IBM cards are popular with IT CREATIONS on Ebay but I've gotten faulty cards from them several times in the past. As long as we step away from the SAS2LP cards is key. http://accessories.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=405-AADW
October 6, 201510 yr It is getting silent here..am I the only one left with this controller? As reported earlier my issue are not around slow parity sync but data errors. I was starting 2x parity sync run's yesterday. 127 errors were reported and in both check's the same sectors were shown (NONCORRECT option). This would usually mean that the data is indeed incorrect and I should run another parity sync this time using the CORRECT option. However, parity errors never showed up on my backup server but since I moved mobo and the SAS2LP from my main server (where I had these errors before) I'm skeptical. What is the meaning of the last line? Are there more errors but just not shown? md: parity incorrect, stopped logging What should I do? First Parity Check: Oct 5 11:54:31 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=40251856 Oct 5 11:54:35 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=40846040 Oct 5 11:54:38 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=41276448 Oct 5 11:54:40 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=41716552 Oct 5 11:54:52 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=43715736 Oct 5 11:54:53 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=43790136 Oct 5 11:55:27 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=49616880 Oct 5 11:59:39 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=91347880 Oct 5 11:59:55 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=93777184 Oct 5 12:00:11 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=96285768 Oct 5 12:04:48 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=141562944 Oct 5 12:05:12 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=145429336 Oct 5 12:08:41 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=179681384 Oct 5 12:08:45 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=180479600 Oct 5 12:08:52 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=181686168 Oct 5 12:08:54 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=181970792 Oct 5 12:09:23 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=186914576 Oct 5 12:09:38 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=189504384 Oct 5 12:09:53 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=191971296 Oct 5 12:22:24 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=316030600 Oct 5 12:22:36 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=317859952 Oct 5 12:23:03 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=322494152 Oct 5 13:23:53 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=977033648 Oct 5 13:23:53 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=977033656 Oct 5 16:28:42 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2864723360 Oct 5 16:28:58 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2867057920 Oct 5 16:37:37 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2943055760 Oct 5 16:38:21 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2949386840 Oct 5 16:40:07 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2964708576 Oct 5 16:40:29 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2967908944 Oct 5 16:40:30 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2968017872 Oct 5 16:43:10 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2990700448 Oct 5 16:43:13 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2991084016 Oct 5 17:15:43 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3261649264 Oct 5 17:17:19 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3274113248 Oct 5 17:22:39 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3314086976 Oct 5 17:33:20 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3395557232 Oct 5 17:36:57 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3422725544 Oct 5 17:37:42 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3428332432 Oct 5 17:40:10 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3446555056 Oct 5 17:40:17 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3447396048 Oct 5 17:41:16 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3454750176 Oct 5 17:41:27 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3456053680 Oct 5 17:41:52 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3459048448 Oct 5 17:41:56 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3459549096 Oct 5 17:42:06 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3460756320 Oct 5 17:42:44 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3465408896 Oct 5 17:43:20 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3469899976 Oct 5 17:43:32 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3471320312 Oct 5 17:43:48 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3473359560 Oct 5 17:49:28 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3514361336 Oct 5 17:49:32 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3514789184 Oct 5 17:49:34 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3514992584 Oct 5 17:49:38 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3515545024 Oct 5 17:49:42 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3516005032 Oct 5 17:49:59 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3517965264 Oct 5 17:50:21 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3520559328 Oct 5 17:50:49 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3523935688 Oct 5 17:51:14 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3526904336 Oct 5 17:51:15 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3526952312 Oct 5 17:51:30 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3528818336 Oct 5 17:52:04 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3532855136 Oct 5 17:52:06 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3533062136 Oct 5 17:53:47 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3545031792 Oct 5 17:54:59 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3553389040 Oct 5 17:55:19 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3555791112 Oct 5 17:55:20 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3555848088 Oct 5 17:55:44 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3558654592 Oct 5 17:55:45 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3558789152 Oct 5 17:56:04 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3561053960 Oct 5 17:56:21 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3563046464 Oct 5 17:57:20 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3570041816 Oct 5 17:57:49 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3573376256 Oct 5 17:58:11 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3575937696 Oct 5 17:58:18 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3576795696 Oct 5 17:58:43 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3579667544 Oct 5 17:59:06 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3582364792 Oct 5 17:59:08 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3582674208 Oct 5 17:59:25 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3584638376 Oct 5 18:00:19 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3590973920 Oct 5 18:00:24 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3591578352 Oct 5 18:01:09 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3596807504 Oct 5 18:02:08 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3603740312 Oct 5 18:02:17 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3604748848 Oct 5 18:02:31 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3606385168 Oct 5 18:02:35 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3606806288 Oct 5 18:03:02 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3609802576 Oct 5 18:03:10 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3610755328 Oct 5 18:10:42 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3661210504 Oct 5 18:11:52 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3668877408 Oct 5 18:12:39 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3674102232 Oct 5 18:14:34 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3686748904 Oct 5 18:16:08 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3697118496 Oct 5 18:16:31 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3699248016 Oct 5 18:17:42 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3707076880 Oct 5 18:17:44 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3707288072 Oct 5 18:19:45 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3720398976 Oct 5 18:20:59 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3728242888 Oct 5 18:21:55 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3734365808 Oct 5 18:22:08 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3735794824 Oct 5 18:27:41 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, stopped logging Second Parity Check: Oct 5 21:24:42 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=40251856 Oct 5 21:24:45 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=40846040 Oct 5 21:24:48 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=41276448 Oct 5 21:24:50 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=41716552 Oct 5 21:25:00 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=43715736 Oct 5 21:25:01 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=43790136 Oct 5 21:25:32 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=49616880 Oct 5 21:29:18 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=91347880 Oct 5 21:29:32 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=93777184 Oct 5 21:29:46 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=96285768 Oct 5 21:33:53 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=141562944 Oct 5 21:34:14 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=145429336 Oct 5 21:37:20 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=179681384 Oct 5 21:37:24 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=180479600 Oct 5 21:37:31 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=181686168 Oct 5 21:37:32 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=181970792 Oct 5 21:37:58 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=186914576 Oct 5 21:38:12 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=189504384 Oct 5 21:38:25 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=191971296 Oct 5 21:49:24 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=316030600 Oct 5 21:49:34 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=317859952 Oct 5 21:49:58 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=322494152 Oct 5 22:47:33 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=977033648 Oct 5 22:47:33 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=977033656 Oct 6 01:49:16 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2864723360 Oct 6 01:49:30 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2867057920 Oct 6 01:57:28 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2943055760 Oct 6 01:58:08 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2949386840 Oct 6 01:59:47 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2964708576 Oct 6 02:00:07 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2967908944 Oct 6 02:00:08 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2968017872 Oct 6 02:02:35 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2990700448 Oct 6 02:02:38 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=2991084016 Oct 6 02:33:03 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3261649264 Oct 6 02:34:32 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3274113248 Oct 6 02:39:25 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3314086976 Oct 6 02:49:25 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3395557232 Oct 6 02:52:51 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3422725544 Oct 6 02:53:34 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3428332432 Oct 6 02:55:55 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3446555056 Oct 6 02:56:01 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3447396048 Oct 6 02:56:58 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3454750176 Oct 6 02:57:08 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3456053680 Oct 6 02:57:31 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3459048448 Oct 6 02:57:35 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3459549096 Oct 6 02:57:45 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3460756320 Oct 6 02:58:21 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3465408896 Oct 6 02:58:55 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3469899976 Oct 6 02:59:06 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3471320312 Oct 6 02:59:22 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3473359560 Oct 6 03:04:46 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3514361336 Oct 6 03:04:49 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3514789184 Oct 6 03:04:51 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3514992584 Oct 6 03:04:55 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3515545024 Oct 6 03:04:59 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3516005032 Oct 6 03:05:15 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3517965264 Oct 6 03:05:36 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3520559328 Oct 6 03:06:04 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3523935688 Oct 6 03:06:28 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3526904336 Oct 6 03:06:28 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3526952312 Oct 6 03:06:43 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3528818336 Oct 6 03:07:16 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3532855136 Oct 6 03:07:18 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3533062136 Oct 6 03:08:55 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3545031792 Oct 6 03:10:03 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3553389040 Oct 6 03:10:22 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3555791112 Oct 6 03:10:23 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3555848088 Oct 6 03:10:46 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3558654592 Oct 6 03:10:47 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3558789152 Oct 6 03:11:05 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3561053960 Oct 6 03:11:22 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3563046464 Oct 6 03:12:18 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3570041816 Oct 6 03:12:46 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3573376256 Oct 6 03:13:07 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3575937696 Oct 6 03:13:13 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3576795696 Oct 6 03:13:37 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3579667544 Oct 6 03:13:59 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3582364792 Oct 6 03:14:02 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3582674208 Oct 6 03:14:18 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3584638376 Oct 6 03:15:10 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3590973920 Oct 6 03:15:15 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3591578352 Oct 6 03:15:58 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3596807504 Oct 6 03:16:55 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3603740312 Oct 6 03:17:04 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3604748848 Oct 6 03:17:17 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3606385168 Oct 6 03:17:21 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3606806288 Oct 6 03:17:46 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3609802576 Oct 6 03:17:54 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3610755328 Oct 6 03:25:08 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3661210504 Oct 6 03:26:15 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3668877408 Oct 6 03:27:01 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3674102232 Oct 6 03:28:51 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3686748904 Oct 6 03:30:21 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3697118496 Oct 6 03:30:40 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3699248016 Oct 6 03:31:49 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3707076880 Oct 6 03:31:51 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3707288072 Oct 6 03:33:48 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3720398976 Oct 6 03:34:58 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3728242888 Oct 6 03:35:53 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3734365808 Oct 6 03:36:05 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, sector=3735794824 Oct 6 03:41:28 Tower2 kernel: md: parity incorrect, stopped logging
October 6, 201510 yr I was starting 2x parity sync run's yesterday. 127 errors were reported and in both check's the same sectors were shown (NONCORRECT option). This would usually mean that the data is indeed incorrect and I should run another parity sync this time using the CORRECT option. However, parity errors never showed up on my backup server but since I moved mobo and the SAS2LP from my main server (where I had these errors before) I'm skeptical. I agree. Normally I too would have said correct the parity, but this is suspicious. Is there any way you can move all of the drives off the SAS2LP and check again? What is the meaning of the last line? Are there more errors but just not shown? md: parity incorrect, stopped logging Yes, it only reports the first 100 or so (cutoff used to be 100, may have changed). Syslogs used to fill up and run out of memory with tens of thousands of errors reported, so it's now limited to only reporting the first ones. At that point, it's obvious there's a problem, showing more won't make it any more obvious!
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.