Jump to content
jbartlett

DiskSpeed, hard drive benchmarking (unRAID 6+), version 2.4

380 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

Hello!

I'm having a problem similar to interwebtech.

 

The web interface never gets past "scanning hard drives"

 

When I look at the docker log (icon on the right in Unraid), I see several Java errors, here's the first one:

 

lucee.runtime.exp.ApplicationException: Error invoking external process

at lucee.runtime.tag.Execute.doEndTag(Execute.java:258)
at scancontrollers_cfm$cf.call_000046(/ScanControllers.cfm:456)
at scancontrollers_cfm$cf.call(/ScanControllers.cfm:455)
at lucee.runtime.PageContextImpl._doInclude(PageContextImpl.java:933)
at lucee.runtime.PageContextImpl._doInclude(PageContextImpl.java:823)
at lucee.runtime.listener.ClassicAppListener._onRequest(ClassicAppListener.java:66)
at lucee.runtime.listener.MixedAppListener.onRequest(MixedAppListener.java:45)
at lucee.runtime.PageContextImpl.execute(PageContextImpl.java:2464)
at lucee.runtime.PageContextImpl._execute(PageContextImpl.java:2454)
at lucee.runtime.PageContextImpl.executeCFML(PageContextImpl.java:2427)
at lucee.runtime.engine.Request.exe(Request.java:44)
at lucee.runtime.engine.CFMLEngineImpl._service(CFMLEngineImpl.java:1090)
at lucee.runtime.engine.CFMLEngineImpl.serviceCFML(CFMLEngineImpl.java:1038)
at lucee.loader.engine.CFMLEngineWrapper.serviceCFML(CFMLEngineWrapper.java:102)
at lucee.loader.servlet.CFMLServlet.service(CFMLServlet.java:51)
at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:729)
at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:292)
at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:207)
at org.apache.tomcat.websocket.server.WsFilter.doFilter(WsFilter.java:52)
at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:240)
at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter(ApplicationFilterChain.java:207)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve.invoke(StandardWrapperValve.java:212)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invoke(StandardContextValve.java:94)
at org.apache.catalina.authenticator.AuthenticatorBase.invoke(AuthenticatorBase.java:492)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostValve.invoke(StandardHostValve.java:141)
at org.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorReportValve.invoke(ErrorReportValve.java:80)
at org.apache.catalina.valves.AbstractAccessLogValve.invoke(AbstractAccessLogValve.java:620)
at org.apache.catalina.valves.RemoteIpValve.invoke(RemoteIpValve.java:684)
at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngineValve.invoke(StandardEngineValve.java:88)
at org.apache.catalina.connector.CoyoteAdapter.service(CoyoteAdapter.java:502)
at org.apache.coyote.http11.AbstractHttp11Processor.process(AbstractHttp11Processor.java:1152)
at org.apache.coyote.AbstractProtocol$AbstractConnectionHandler.process(AbstractProtocol.java:684)
at org.apache.tomcat.util.net.AprEndpoint$SocketWithOptionsProcessor.run(AprEndpoint.java:2464)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1149)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:624)
at org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.TaskThread$WrappingRunnable.run(TaskThread.java:61)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)

There are several more, but I suspect they're all related to this one?

 

I swapped out ScanControllers.cfm for the CreateDebugInfo.cfm as was previously suggested and am emailing the output.   Any ideas?

 

Running unraid 6.6.7 and the latest DiskSpeed container.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Update:

 

Appears to be related to the Floppy Drive that's detected (even though I don't have one).  I updated ScanControllers to skip it and it gets through scanning.

 

David

Share this post


Link to post

Just an update to say I'm not dead. :) Just busy renovating my house and it eats up most of the time I have available after work.

Share this post


Link to post

Boy oh boy do I wish I'd run across this utility years ago.  I'd always read online that unRaid, for all it's positive attributes, was slow.  I took that as gospel, without trying to understand what was normal slow vs. abnormal slow.  I realize now that parity checks and transfers at 20 MB/s were not normal slow, but rather a function of a wonky drive. 

 

Anyway, I have a WD Red with this curve:

 

1303292961_disk5.JPG.11d9a5dde7f28abf09f4a7300bf31432.JPG

 

It took a bunch of tries to even get this drive to complete, as speedgap kept tripping up.  I've removed the drive from my array, and my next parity check ran at 108 MB/s.   

 

My question is this - is there anything to be done about this drive, or should I just chuck it?  I don't know much about drives, so I'm looking for feedback from experts.  The drive itself doesn't show any SMART errors.  However, I've been trying to get an extended SMART test to complete for the last 24+ hours, and it's been stuck at 90% for over 12 hours.  It's 3.5 years old, so RMA is not an option, unfortunately.  I'm pretty sure the drive has been like this since the beginning, considering I've always had slow parity checks.

 

If anyone's curious, here's how my whole my array looks.  All drives are WD Reds:

 

array.JPG.22549ceb0d198382e907a17f83be2dd4.JPG

Edited by bluescale
Fixed grammar

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, bluescale said:

My question is this - is there anything to be done about this drive, or should I just chuck it?

Depends. I definitely wouldn't rely on it to keep data safe, but as a scratch drive, or backup of a backup, something like that, would be ok. It has NO place in the array, as you found out.

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, bluescale said:

The drive itself doesn't show any SMART errors.

WD drives with this problem, topically show a non zero, or even a very high, Raw Read Error Rate, which when they are healthy should be 0, or at least a very low value.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, johnnie.black said:

WD drives with this problem, topically show a non zero, or even a very high, Raw Read Error Rate, which when they are healthy should be 0, or at least a very low value.

 

Raw Read Error Rate for this drive is indeed very high: 7884.  

 

Interestingly, the other drive I purchased at the same time also has a high Raw Read Error Rate, although not nearly as high: 163.  This drive also has 1 Current Pending Sector, and a Multizone Error Rate of 1 (I'm not sure what this means).  That drives performance is perfectly fine (it's disk 3 in the image above), and that pending sector has been there for a long time.  Looking at the SMART report, the Device Error Count is 17.  Almost all the errors listed happened at the same time, about 11,000 hours ago.  I've attached the SMART report if anyone wants to take a look.  Would folks recommend moving this drive out of my array as well?  It's been stable, and it looks to me as if something happened a year or so ago, but nothing since.

 

Incidentally, I have 2 4TB drives arriving today.  I was planning to use one to replace the poor performing drive I've already removed from my array.  I was planning to expand my array with the other drive, but if disk 3 needs to come out of my array in a hurry, I can do that.

WDC_WD30EFRX-68EUZN0_WD-WCC4N0763742-20190410-1056.txt

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, bluescale said:

 and a Multizone Error Rate of 1 (I'm not sure what this means)

Also an attribute to look for on WD drives, but just 1 should be fine, since the errors are old would keep it for now and just keep an eye on it.

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, that is an impressive dip! I know I have logic in place to prevent some wonky benchmarks from being submitted to the online database. I need to find time to review this to see if it would catch this test. Though now that I think of it, I should add a "Wonky" flag to my database to exclude them from the averages so you would still be able to purge the benchmark and restore it later (future DiskSpeed update).

 

If you're willing to consider this a junk drive (I would), I would reimburse you for shipping if you mail it to me so I can use it for app logic testing. PM me if you are interested.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know why I hadn't heard about this docker before.

 

I noticed an immediate write speed bump (with turbo write), after replacing a drive that was on the outs.

 

Very nice docker !

Share this post


Link to post

My older 2TB drives seem to be pretty all over the place. The one higher 2TB is a different brand and seems fine. Something to consider replacing or normal?

 

 

chart.jpeg

chart (1).jpeg

Edited by nerv
image resize

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, nerv said:

Something to consider replacing or normal?

Honestly, the answer is yes, looks fairly normal, but I'd consider replacing anyway.

 

Speed is probably the third criteria I'd use for considering which drive to upgrade. First would be SMART status, second, raw capacity, third, speed.

 

If you don't need more space, don't bother replacing anything until it shows signs of failure.

However, if you want to pro-actively replace stuff, get another 8TB drive, replace the slowest 2TB outright with a rebuild, copy the contents of the other slow 2TB drives to it, and remove them. File system type plays into this as well, if the 2TB drives are ReiserFS the strategy changes.

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/18/2019 at 7:22 AM, jonathanm said:

Honestly, the answer is yes, looks fairly normal, but I'd consider replacing anyway.

 

Speed is probably the third criteria I'd use for considering which drive to upgrade. First would be SMART status, second, raw capacity, third, speed.

 

If you don't need more space, don't bother replacing anything until it shows signs of failure.

However, if you want to pro-actively replace stuff, get another 8TB drive, replace the slowest 2TB outright with a rebuild, copy the contents of the other slow 2TB drives to it, and remove them. File system type plays into this as well, if the 2TB drives are ReiserFS the strategy changes.

Ack. I picked up a bunch of drives today with the absurd amazon sales. If not cancelled, I'll likely do this. I think I'll hold on to them to play with in a ZFS array someday.

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/17/2019 at 8:02 PM, nerv said:

My older 2TB drives seem to be pretty all over the place. The one higher 2TB is a different brand and seems fine. Something to consider replacing or normal?

I wouldn't replace them right away. Run a benchmark on the drives with the speed variations every 1-3 weeks to see if those variations are steady or not. If they're steady, it may just be how that drive has been mapped out at the factory. There could be more factory mapped bad spots in those regions or some weirdness with drive geometry.

 

If they're Seagates, I've noticed that many of the drives have a slow area at the start of the drive. It's consistent enough across drives that I switched to Western Digital.

Share this post


Link to post

I recently ran a benchmark after seeing my parity check take a lot longer than normal. All my drives have been precleared and are less than 1 years old. My parity especially is less than 2 months old and it's shucked so I can't simply RMA it. Is there something I can do? I'm not sure why the speeds suddenly drop so much.

 

 image.thumb.png.b0b81519f408f946f60d22f5d51b141c.png

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, bobokun said:

Please see attached

Both look fine, and graphs look strange for a disk problem, grab diags during the next parity check and post then, better on a new thread.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, bobokun said:

Is there something I can do? I'm not sure why the speeds suddenly drop so much.

Have you ran more than one benchmark and are the drops repeatable?

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/30/2019 at 4:35 PM, jbartlett said:

Have you ran more than one benchmark and are the drops repeatable?

Yes I tried running it multiple times and the outcome is the same

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, bobokun said:

Yes I tried running it multiple times and the outcome is the same

That tells me that an external process wasn't causing the issue. Try replacing the cables and trying different ports. If it keeps happening, your only option is to replace the drives.

 

I wouldn't use shucked drives for anything critical. They're not the highest quality in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, jbartlett said:

That tells me that an external process wasn't causing the issue. Try replacing the cables and trying different ports. If it keeps happening, your only option is to replace the drives.

 

I wouldn't use shucked drives for anything critical. They're not the highest quality in my opinion.

Disk4 isn't a shucked drive. I tried to replace the sata cable for disk4 and parity and connect it directly to the motherboard instead of the DELL H310 controller but now when I run diskSpeed it hangs on disk5 with the message below. Now I'm wondering if there is an issue with my H310 card or if it's my SAS to SATA cables.

 

SAS2008 PCI-Express Fusion-MPT SAS-2 [Falcon]: Scanning Disk 5 (sdd) at 9 TB (90%) - 0|9999999999|0 (64)

image.png.5cc933a407745d3d9b262e887c7daa5b.png

 

Not sure if this helps?

image.png.9b8467d1b2134963f389cd6c61a9ff9f.png

Edited by bobokun

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, bobokun said:

SAS2008 PCI-Express Fusion-MPT SAS-2 [Falcon]: Scanning Disk 5 (sdd) at 9 TB (90%) - 0|9999999999|0

It's detecting an error of some kind. The number breaks down to "Avg Speed|Min Read Speed|MaxReedSpeed" - so this particular scenario should not be possible.

 

Please click the "Create Debug File" link at the bottom of the page and then click on "Create Debug File".

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, jbartlett said:

It's detecting an error of some kind. The number breaks down to "Avg Speed|Min Read Speed|MaxReedSpeed" - so this particular scenario should not be possible.

 

Please click the "Create Debug File" link at the bottom of the page and then click on "Create Debug File".

Sent you a PM with the debug file. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.