formatting a 12.73 Tb disk on ROCKS 5.2

[m.roth at 5-cent.us]

Doll, Margaret Ann wrote:
> This nas is on a ROCKS cluster and I make as few changes as possible as
> active research and classes keep it in constant use.
>
I understand that, but there have been a large number of security flaws
and serious bugs that have been fixed in the what, several years since
5.6.

I've got the same issue, with researchers that have jobs that run days,
sometimes weeks, and production servers that *have* to be up. What I did
was get them to buy into a "maintenance window", where I do the updates
(while it, and they, are running) then get the time it takes to reboot the
system.

       mark

> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote:
>
>> Doll, Margaret Ann wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Jonathan Billings
>> > <jsbillin at umich.edu>wrote:
>> >
>> >> align-check is not supported on the old version of parted in EL5.2.
>> >>
>> > I am running CentOS release 5.6 on this system.
>>
>> Why have you not updated? RHEL 5.x is at 5.9, and there are a lot of bug
>> and security fixes....
>>
>>      mark
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Doll, Margaret Ann
>> >> <margaret_doll at brown.edu>wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > parted align-check optimal /dev/sda1
>> >> > Error: Could not stat device align-check - No such file or
>> directory.
>> >> > Retry/Cancel? cancel
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Doll, Margaret Ann
>> >> > <margaret_doll at brown.edu>wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > The drives are Seagate Constellation disks, 1 Tb apiece.  I have
>> 15
>> >> of
>> >> > > them in the array.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:25 PM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> Doll, Margaret Ann wrote:
>> >> > >> > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:09 PM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote:
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> >> Doll, Margaret Ann wrote:
>> >> > >> >> > The answer came from my vendor at Atipa.
>> >> > >> >> >
>> >> > >> >> > You will need to change the partitioning scheme to use GPT
>> in
>> >> order
>> >> > >> to
>> >> > >> >> > enable greater than 2TB support.
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> >> Which is what I was saying.
>> >> > >> >> >
>> >> > >> >> > # parted -s /dev/sda mklabel gpt
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> >> This is command-line version of what I said - I was giving
>> you
>> >> the
>> >> > >> >> interactive version. I do not understand why the above would
>> >> work,
>> >> > and
>> >> > >> >> what I suggested you do gave you "invalid token".
>> >> > >> >> >
>> >> > >> >> > # parted –s /dev/sda rm 1
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> >> The above removes partition 1.
>> >> > >> >> >
>> >> > >> >> > # parted –s /dev/sda “mkpart primary xfs 1 -1”
>> >> > >> >> >
>> >> > >> >> You've decided to use xfs, yes? And the 1 bothers me, a lot.
>> >> That's
>> >> > >> >> either sector or cylinder... and they did *not* tell you to
>> use
>> >> -a
>> >> > >> optimal for
>> >> > >> >> aligning the partition. If you do parted -l, what do you see?
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> > [root at nas-0-0 ~]# parted -l
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Model: AMCC 9650SE-16M DISK (scsi)
>> >> > >> > Disk /dev/sda: 14.0TB
>> >> > >> > Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
>> >> > >> > Partition Table: gpt
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Number  Start   End     Size    File system  Name     Flags
>> >> > >> >  1      17.4kB  14.0TB  14.0TB  xfs          primary
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > df -h
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > /dev/sda1              13T  8.4G   13T   1% /bigdisk1
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Yup - if this were a single disk, that would not be a good place
>> to
>> >> > start,
>> >> > >> esp. if it was a large disk. I don't know how big the drives in
>> the
>> >> > array
>> >> > >> are, and even though parted says it's 512/512 sector size, most
>> new
>> >> > large
>> >> > >> drives are, in reality, 4k in hardware/firmware. You *might*
>> >> consider
>> >> > >> repartitioning, but start at 2048k, rather than 1. I suspect
>> that
>> >> if
>> >> you
>> >> > >> did
>> >> > >>       parted align-check optimal /dev/sda1
>> >> > >> that it would tell you it was not aligned properly.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>        mark
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> --
>> >> > >> redhat-list mailing list
>> >> > >> unsubscribe
>> >> mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
>> >> > >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > --
>> >> > redhat-list mailing list
>> >> > unsubscribe
>> mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
>> >> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Jonathan Billings <jsbillin at umich.edu>
>> >> College of Engineering - CAEN - Unix and Linux Support
>> >> --
>> >> redhat-list mailing list
>> >> unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
>> >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
>> >>
>> > --
>> > redhat-list mailing list
>> > unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
>> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> redhat-list mailing list
>> unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
>>
> --
> redhat-list mailing list
> unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
>