Hi! On Thu 06 November 2008 02:37, Francesco Pietra wrote: > Hi all: > The story continues, unfortunately. > > After the last kind mail below, I could carry out several long > parallel computations on all 4 physical (8 logical) dual-opteron 875 > processors , or a fraction of them(amd6a lenny; H8QCE Supermicro > motherboard; two WD Raptor HD (ext3 file syst) under Linux raid1 as > previously described; 24GB ram registered ECC Kingston 400 MHz). The > last computation with 8 processor finished regularly and the computer > was also regularly shut down (shutdown -h now). No overheating during > the computations, the machine is very well ventilated and there is > partial control from "sensors" (Supermicro never provided data to > fully set up sensors). The booting procedure is set up so as to end at > the terminal screen. If I want the X sytem (which I use on rare > occasions) I have to command as user "startx". > ================================= > > This morning, trying to start the computer, the kernel seems to be > loaded but the procedure did not end successfully. On the last part of > the screen output: > > RPB 000... > R10 000.. > IP13 000... > FS > CS > CR2 > DR0 000 DR1 000 DR! 000 > DR3 > > Call Trace > ffff.. down_read_trylock > ffff... do_page_default > fff... vma_link > fff... error_exit > fff clear_user > fff pad_zero > fff load_elf_library > fff get_arg_page > fff .. copy_strings > fff ... search_binary_handler > fff.. do_execve > fff.. stub_execve > > > As the procedure did no proceed farther than this, the computer was > reset from the "RESET" button, whereby re-booting occurred and the > screen - unlike the above - showed (inter alia): > > PCI found disabled HT MSI Mapping on 0000... > > Assign interrupt mode Found MSI capability > > Real Time Clock Driver v1.12ac > > input MacIntosch mouse button emulation > > Freeing unused kernel memory: 316k > > input: AT translated Set 2 keyboard as /class/input/input1 > > (the procedure halted here. Retrying, same sequence of events. > =========================== > > > Knoppix 5.3 loaded correctly, as far as I could see. All memory and > all 8 logical processors and the MacIntosh type mouse were loaded. > However, clicking on either "sda" or "sdb" on the screen: > > Could not mount. Could not determine the file system type and no one > was specified.
Francesco, You would not be able to mount either /dev/sda or /dev/sdb. They designate your entire hard drives, not valid partitions. Looking back to your earlier posts, your output from `cat /proc/mdstat` shows that your valid partitions are: sd[ab]1, sd[ab]2, ..., sd[ab]8. You should be able to mount any one of these partitions. If you do mount one of these partitions, you should it as read-only, otherwise you'll upset your raid-1 device. If you want write capability, then I would use mdadm to start the appropriate raid device (md0, md1, ..., md7) and then mount the raid device. > On the terminal, /home is knoppix. Cd to /mnt showed sda and sdb but > on cd to these two directories, ls did not show anything. (Problem > with the HDD?). The computer was shut down from Knoppix. Knoppix is just confused about your partitions. I can't remember, but are the partition types set to 'Linux Raid Autodetect'? > Waiting for some general advice or specific direction as to what > should be checked. When trying to diagnose Linux software raid, mdadm is your other friend. Think of it as a Swiss Army knife. With it, you can create, assemble & manage md devices. It's pretty intimidating at first, but not that difficult to use. Check out: http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Software-RAID-HOWTO.html > Thanks > > francesco > > > I HTH cmr > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 6:58 PM, C M Reinehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Francesco, > > > > On Thu 30 October 2008 04:14, Francesco Pietra wrote: > >> Then, let me ask about a raid1 devised mainly for the system than the > >> data (once a calculation is finished, all files are sent to a desktop; > >> no data remain in my home. This also because I need fast HDDs, while > >> space on WD Raptor is very limited: 150GB each HDD). With so many > >> applications that require a long compilation, a fault in the system is > >> a terrible waste of time. It occurred to me, at the time I had raid1 > >> with two cheap HDDs. that one HHD suffered mechanical failure. > >> Replaced, the system on raid1 was automatically restored. > >> > >> Which one of the kindly offered recipes for raid1 is the most suited > >> to the above case? (that, I guess, is quite common - if not the norm - > >> in computational chemistry, biology, etc). > > > > From your point of view, I don't think it matters. Each method, with or > > without LVM, is equally reliable. The advantage of LVM is just that it > > gives you more administrative flexibility. Should you subsequently decide > > that one volume (partition) is too small and another too large, you can > > resize them on the fly--rather than having to backup the partitions, > > resize them, & then restore the contents. Also, as someone on another > > group observed. Raid-1 provided redundancy and LVM adds striping. > > > > Cheers! > > > > cmr/anonymous > > > >> Thanks > >> francesco > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 4:01 AM, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:07:36AM -0500, C M Reinehr wrote: > >> >> Francesco, > >> >> > >> >> On Wed 29 October 2008 06:16, Francesco Pietra wrote: > >> >> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 08:24:55AM +0100, Francesco Pietra wrote: > >> >> > >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 7:06 AM, Douglas A. Tutty > >> >> > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 05:44:31AM +0100, Francesco Pietra > >> >> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > [snip] > >> > > >> >> PS I agree with Alex regarding LVM2. I have only two partitions > >> >> defined on my hard drives, one each for two md arrays. The first md > >> >> device is for my boot partition. The second for everything else. The > >> >> everything else, then, is managed by LVM2 with logical volumes for > >> >> each seperate file system. LVM2 is a little intimidating but once up > >> >> & running is much easier to manage. > >> > > >> > I usually go with 3 > >> > > >> > 1 - 500M /boot > >> > 2 - 20G for / > >> > 3 - the rest for lvm. > >> > > >> > I like keeping the / fs on something simple especially if I have to > >> > rescue it > >> > > >> >> -- > >> >> Debian 'Etch' - Registered Linux User #241964 > >> >> -------- > >> >> "More laws, less justice." -- Marcus Tullius Ciceroca, 42 BC > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > >> > -- > >> > "I need to be able to move the right people to the right place at the > >> > right time to protect you, and I'm not going to accept a lousy bill > >> > out of the United Nations Senate." > >> > > >> > - George W. Bush > >> > 10/31/2002 > >> > South Bend, IN > >> > > >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > >> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > >> > > >> > iEYEARECAAYFAkkJI6IACgkQkZz88chpJ2MI7gCg0lbsxErdXiAigCJX5IExjEQe > >> > A4QAnjCjRrIskHRn/YW8nynxFnXBBa2Y > >> > =V9OO > >> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > -- > > Debian 'Etch' - Registered Linux User #241964 > > -------- > > "More laws, less justice." -- Marcus Tullius Ciceroca, 42 BC > > > > > > -- > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Debian 'Etch' - Registered Linux User #241964 -------- "More laws, less justice." -- Marcus Tullius Ciceroca, 42 BC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
