WD EARS with jumper 7-8 ==> unraid won't start

[Gog]

I have a new 1.5T WD drive as parity, one of the new EARS, and I'm not impressed with it's performance.  I know that putting a green drive for parity is going to have a price but I gave it a shot.

 

Moving a big file from one drive to another goes around  9MB/s and one SD stream has hiccups so I'm not happy.

 

I learned of the jumper 7-8 after the parity was done but now I had some time to remove the disk, add the jumper and restart everything.

 

when the jumper is in, the boot sequence is full of hard drive errors and unraid doesn't come up.  The box doesn't even get an IP...

 

This is on a Asus P5B-VM DO and I tried it on both on-board SATA controllers.

 

Now I'm wondering if I should RMA the drive or if it could be another issue.

 

Any ideas ?

 

Thanks

 

Gog

[purko]

Try this:

1. Disconnect your new disk.

2. Power up unRAID.

3. In the Devices page, unassign the parity disk.

4. In the Main page, press "Restore" so it remembers its new configuration without a parity disk.

5. Shut it down, reconnect your new disk, power the server up.

If it boots up normally, you can go to the Devices page and assign the new parity disk.

 

[Gog]

Hi

 

I did what you suggested, the array came online, I added the @new@ parity disk with the 7-8 jumper and it started a parity check.

 

BUT  the parity check is going at 60K/s (yes, I wrote the right units, no 0s missing) and all my drives show up as unformatted...

 

I'm very temped to stop that and remove the drive, but I'm a bit scared with 7 data drives in play...

 

snippet of syslog attached

 

Gog

syslog.txt

[Gog]

ok, did a stop start, now the data shows up and parity speed is picking up.  It was at 22 000kB/s, now around 53 000, closing in to my "normal" of 60 000KB/s

[purko]

Hi

 

I did what you suggested, the array came online, I added the @new@ parity disk with the 7-8 jumper and it started a parity check.

 

BUT  the parity check is going at 60K/s (yes, I wrote the right units, no 0s missing) and all my drives show up as unformatted...

 

I'm very temped to stop that and remove the drive, but I'm a bit scared with 7 data drives in play...

 

snippet of syslog attached

 

Gog

 

Your syslog is full of errors.  Your parity disk (sdh) WDC WD15EARS-00Z5B1 WD-WMAVU1300432 is constandly being reset.

That most likely means bad cables.  Stop the parity build, and address this issue!  Replace the cables, and see if you can maybe plug it to a different sata slot.  See what SMART has to say about that disk.  No sense proceeding with parity build before you can come up with a clean syslog.

 

 

[Gog]

I went to bed before I read your last message so the parity check is mostly done.  I'll let it finish. The last disk error was this:

 

Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: ata10.00: BMDMA stat 0x24
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: ata10.00: cmd 25/00:01:2f:7b:a8/00:00:ae:00:00/e0 tag 0 dma 512 in
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: res 51/01:00:2f:7b:a8/01:00:ae:00:00/e0 Emask 0x1 (device error)
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: ata10.00: status: { DRDY ERR }
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: ata10.00: configured for UDMA/33
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: sd 10:0:0:0: [sdh] Unhandled sense code
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: sd 10:0:0:0: [sdh] Result: hostbyte=0x00 driverbyte=0x08
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: sd 10:0:0:0: [sdh] Sense Key : 0x3 [current] [descriptor]
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: Descriptor sense data with sense descriptors (in hex):
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: 72 03 13 00 00 00 00 0c 00 0a 80 00 00 00 00 00
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: ae a8 7b 2f
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: sd 10:0:0:0: [sdh] ASC=0x13 ASCQ=0x0
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: end_request: I/O error, dev sdh, sector 2930277167
Mar 5 23:41:08 Tower kernel: Buffer I/O error on device sdh1, logical block 2930277104

 

so 7 hours ago (I'm in the eastern timezone)

 

It looks like the errors only happen at init.

 

I'll do a reboot tonight and post a fresh syslog.

 

I have doubts about the SATA channel though.  I use a tray system and that slot was used by a data disk until last night.  No problem there.  I changed slot to test if it was a SATA controller issue.  I can switch it back to it's original slot tonight if the error are still there.

 

Oh, and I found the stuttering errors: I had inserted a cheap switch to temporarily add another ethernet port in the basement...

 

Gog

[qrismac]

Guys please help 

I thought I was successful putting jumpers on my EARS drives - problem was: I added the drives to the array already before I found out about 7-8 jumpering -> without the jumpers.

 

What I did is move all the data from one EARS drive to another, unassign, powerdown, etc., put jumper on, re-assign, etc. - all seemed to work fine with one drive right away. I was even trying to write a step-by-step guide for others who might be in the same position ... but:

With the 2nd EARS drive jumpered the unraid wouldn't start so after several unsuccessful reboots I took it out and formatted it and put a partition on it - MSDOS (FAT)- was that the mistake? It was possible to get everything up and running after that. (I'm on a Mac).

 

but now my syslog is full of errors

 

please help me out - here is my (colored) syslog: click

 

the other thing is - I get a "can't find" when I power down (see last line):

INIT: Switching to runlevel: 6

INIT: Sending processes the TERM signal

Running shutdown script /etc/rc.d/rc.6

Saving system time to the hardware clock (UTC).

Unmounting remote filesystems.

r8169: eth0: link up

Saving random seed from /dev/urandom in /etc/random-seed.

Turning off swap.

Unmounting local file systems.

nfsd umounted

/dev/sde1 umounted

usbfs umounted

fusectl umounted

Remounting root filesystem read-only.

mount: can't find / in /etc/fstab or /etc/mtab

syslog-2010-03-25_06-37.txt

[qrismac]

I think I'll buy 2TB EADS today, move all EARS data onto that drive and remove, format and add the EARS again after that.

 

Strangely enough using 4.5.3 showed the jumpered EARS drives as unformatted whereas with 4.5.1 I can run the array - I just have these syslog errors and it takes ages to start.

 

How should I format the EARS drives - FAT? With the jumpers already in place I guess ...

 

p.s. I think I hate EARS now ...

[fitbrit]

I don't mean this as an insult, so please don't take offence. It's been done before by many people:

 

Are you sure 7-8 are jumpered and not 1-2?

[One2go]

I am a newb at this UnRaid thingy myself, but I used 2TB Samsung HDDs. Installed them in the Antec 1200, hooked them up with 10" cables to the mobo ports, pre-cleared them and that was the last that I had to worry about drives. Why in this day and age do you have to jumper drives. I was toying with the idea of introducing a different brand of HDDs but after reading your experience I think I stay with 2TB Samsungs for all 16 drives.

[Rajahal]

Why in this day and age do you have to jumper drives.

 

Because we are transitioning from one format to another.  Think of it as going from DVD to BluRay.  The formats more or less look the same (they are both optical discs of the same physical size), but they are fundamentally different.  Same thing is happening here, except that instead of forcing you to buy all new hardware (replace your DVD player with a BluRay player), we have the option of 'patching' the new technology with a jumper to make it work with the old.  Imagine if you could play a BluRay movie on a standard DVD player (at DVD quality) just by putting it in a special sleeve or something - wouldn't that be nice?  I consider us somewhat lucky that the hard drive manufacturers didn't make us all go out and buy new hardware.  Within a few months or years (though hopefully not that long), these 'jumper woes' should all be in the past.

[Joe L.]

Why in this day and age do you have to jumper drives.

 

Because we are transitioning from one format to another.  Think of it as going from DVD to BluRay.  The formats more or less look the same (they are both optical discs of the same physical size), but they are fundamentally different.  Same thing is happening here, except that instead of forcing you to buy all new hardware (replace your DVD player with a BluRay player), we have the option of 'patching' the new technology with a jumper to make it work with the old.  Imagine if you could play a BluRay movie on a standard DVD player (at DVD quality) just by putting it in a special sleeve or something - wouldn't that be nice?  I consider us somewhat lucky that the hard drive manufacturers didn't make us all go out and buy new hardware.  Within a few months or years (though hopefully not that long), these 'jumper woes' should all be in the past.

Besides, you are not forced to install the jumpers at all.  However.. you can get better performance if you do...  I honestly doubt you'd notice the difference in day to day use of the server.  Yes, parity calcs might take longer, but not as long as us with older drives and a PCI bus.

 

Joe L.

[One2go]

Just did a scan on the reviews @ newegg.com and I now see what you mean about new technology.

 

This line of Western Digital drives is the first using their new "Advanced Format," which changes the sector size from 512B to 4KB. The more modern operating systems work fine with this.

 

Does UnRaid take advantage of this new tech or does it not matter?

[gabbott]

Just did a scan on the reviews @ newegg.com and I now see what you mean about new technology.

 

This line of Western Digital drives is the first using their new "Advanced Format," which changes the sector size from 512B to 4KB. The more modern operating systems work fine with this.

 

Does UnRaid take advantage of this new tech or does it not matter?

 

No, not currently, hence why using the jumper on pins 7-8. But by the sounds of things, that could change in future releases.

[qrismac]

Are you sure 7-8 are jumpered and not 1-2?

Well, I had to try heaps of things and it took ages since I had to move terabytes between every step.

I have no clue what those errors meant but the way I see it is as follows:

 

- using 4.5.3 the unRAID wouldn't start, using 4.5.1 I was able to start the array but syslog was full of errors

- taking off the jumper(s) off 7-8 let's me start the unRAID without an error (- yes, I put the jumper onto 7-8 and not 1-2)

- I suspect that 4.5.3 might just support EARS advanced thingamabob resp. jumpering is a problem in 4.5.3

 

 	Model / Serial No.		Temperature	Size		Free		Reads	Writes	Errors
...
disk3	WDC_WD15EARS-00Z_WD-WMAVU20*	27°C		1,465,138,552	Clearing	-	-	-
disk4	WDC_WD15EARS-00Z_WD-WMAVU20*	27°C		1,465,138,552	Clearing	-	-	-

 

... so right now I'm clearing those EARS drives (again  ) and hope their performance is not a problem - unless someone advises me to put those jumpers on again e.g. after clearing has finished ...

I seem to be the only one in despair on this one ...

[purko]

Other people here are using their EARS disks with pins 7-8 jumpred without a problem.

So what you are describing here points to a defective disk.  You have a good reason to RMA that disk.

 

[boof]

Other people here are using their EARS disks with pins 7-8 jumpred without a problem.

So what you are describing here points to a defective disk.  You have a good reason to RMA that disk.

 

 

I installed a 2TB EARS disk over the weekend as a new parity disk.

 

Jumpered it and it worked fine. Installed and rebuilt parity without so much as a hiccup.

[xamindar]

Other people here are using their EARS disks with pins 7-8 jumpred without a problem.

So what you are describing here points to a defective disk.  You have a good reason to RMA that disk.

 

As well, I have two 1tb EARS jumpered in my unraid and they have performed perfectly.

[captain_video]

I've got two of the 1.5TB EARS discs.  I originally installed one without the jumper and the array seemed to work fine except that it would hang on large file transfers and then crap out.  I tried it with the jumper installed but unRAID refused to boot.  I then tried to perform a preclear but I couldn't get the array to boot even with it in an unassigned slot.  I ran a low level format on the drive and then it let me preclear it.  The 2nd drive precleared with the jumper installed right off the bat. 

 

When I installed the 1st drive in place of a smaller one the array refused to start.  The 2nd drive replacement went like clockwork.  I've run the diagnostics on the 1st drive and it passed so I'm at an impasse with regards to using it in the unRAID array.  I'll probably run some more tests and hope it actually fails so I can RMA the darned thing.

[qrismac]

thx purko, I think I slowly start to understand what was going on in my case.

Just like captain_video I bought two 1.5TB EARS and installed them - first without the jumpers - then I ran pretty much into the same problems. Didn't notice them to begin with, also didn't check the syslogs at that time.

When I found out about the jumpering I did that on one drive and since all went well I wanted to jumper the 2nd drive as well. But - as written above - problems started to increase and I got more and more confused.

 

In the end booting with either drive unplugged I could confirm purko's suspicion. One drive must have been faulty (and I got that one replaced today) right from the start. The replacement (1.5TB EARS again - this time jumpered beforehand) is being added to the array right now (clearing).

What I don't get is - why does the system boot (with errors) using 4.5.1 and not at all with 4.5.3 ...

Why did everything seem to be o.k. without the jumpers ...

 

whatever - now I can finally dig deeper into other things, add on's, etc. ... 

 

[Brandnewfatboy]

I’m in something of a dilemma with these EARS drives.

 

I have two WD 1.5Tb EARS, one as parity and one as data. And I’m now ready to buy a bunch of new discs to expand the array. In particular because the price of 2Tb EARS has dropped from £140 to £109 over the last couple of weeks.

 

But, the write speed to my unjumpered array, is unimpressive. Using unscientific tests (which, as a scientist, offend me!), I estimate write speeds approx 8MB/sec. Which seems below par. Performance issues with unjumpered EARS that I’ve seen discussed makes them a candidate, although the fact I’m using a slow network – 100BaseT at the mo – may be more significant.

 

But, is it worth going to the trouble of swapping these drives for new, jumpered EARS drives, then jumpering the 1.5Tbs, preclearing them and reformatting them (presumably), and adding them back in?

 

Or maybe I just won’t worry, add the new drives in anyway, and wait for an update to unRAID that might play nicely with unjumpered drives. Maybe I’ll get a magic increase in speed.

 

Hmmm. Quandary. Perhaps more importantly, is jumpered really a word?!!

 

[Joe L.]

But, the write speed to my unjumpered array, is unimpressive. Using unscientific tests (which, as a scientist, offend me!), I estimate write speeds approx 8MB/sec. Which seems below par. Performance issues with unjumpered EARS that I’ve seen discussed makes them a candidate, although the fact I’m using a slow network – 100BaseT at the mo – may be more significant.

It is the network that is slowing you down.

 

To see the disk speed, without other factors as networking, type this command:

hdparm -tT /dev/sdX

 

where sdX = the device of your disk.

But, is it worth going to the trouble of swapping these drives for new, jumpered EARS drives, then jumpering the 1.5Tbs, preclearing them and reformatting them (presumably), and adding them back in?

 

Or maybe I just won’t worry, add the new drives in anyway, and wait for an update to unRAID that might play nicely with unjumpered drives. Maybe I’ll get a magic increase in speed.

Sorry to say, any change to unRAID to have it start the first partition on a 4K boundary would still require you to re-partition the drive, and re-format it.  So, either do it electrically now (by adding the jumper) or do it later.  You'll still need to go through the exact same exercise.  (Today it starts the partition on sector 63, a change would have it start the partition on sector 64.)  Other than that, everything else would remain the same.  unRAID would then have to recognize partitions starting at either sector 63 or 64 as valid unRAID partitions.

Hmmm. Quandary. Perhaps more importantly, is jumpered really a word?!!

If it is not, then un-jumpered does not stand a chance of being in the dictionary.

 

Easiest way to perform the jumpering

Do a full parity check.  If any errors, resolve the cause before going further.  Don't want to be messing with drives if problems exist elsewhere.

 

Then:

Stop the array

Un-assign disk to be jumpered

Power down

Add the jumper

Power up

Press the "Start" button to Start the array with the disk un-assigned.    It will appear as "red" and "missing" but you'll still be able to get to all of its files via the simulation of its contents from parity and all the other data drives.

Stop the array

Re-assign the drive

Press "Start" to re-construct the contents of the old drive onto the "new" (UnRAID will think it is new because you has previously un-assigned it and started the array without it being assigned.)

 

Make absolutely certain NOT TO PRESS THE BUTTON LABELED as "restore"  It immediately invalidates the parity needed for the re-construction. You would not be happy if you asked it to forget all the data it had on the disk being jumpered.   

 

Remember, always press "Start" to re-construct the contents of the old pre-jumpered drive onto the new post-jumpered drive.

 

You do not need to pre-clear the drive again, nor format it, nor partition it.  The re-construction process will take care of all that for you.  It will write to the entire drive.  When the re-construction is complete you can perform another parity check to be certain it can all be read, but that is probably pretty likely, since you read the entire drive during the initial parity check when you started the whole process.

 

All that said, you'll probably not notice any difference in performance when using that 100 MB LAN... but you'll feel better.

 

Joe L.

[fortytwo]

I recently bought and installed an EARS drive and put it in the array without reading about this jumper issue.  The array built fine and I haven't been having any problems so far.  If the only difference is a slight performance loss, I'm not too worried.  Is there any dire reason why I need to take action to add the jumper?  What kind of performance difference are we talking about if it's left on?

[BRiT]

IIRC, generally it's 30% or more with some conditions being 300% performance loss.

[fortytwo]

Wow, are these rare scenarios?  With this new drive I've got 7.25TB, and after putting the disk in it only took about 10 hours before the array was back up with parity built, which I didn't think was too bad.  Maybe my expectations are low...

 

EDIT: Sucked it up and jumpered the drive.