On 2/17/24 13:45, Roy J. Tellason, Sr. wrote:
On Friday 16 February 2024 04:42:12 pm Gremlin wrote:
On 2/16/24 13:56, Roy J. Tellason, Sr. wrote:
On Friday 16 February 2024 04:52:22 am David Christensen wrote:
I think the Raspberry Pi, etc., users on this list live with USB storage
and have
On Friday 16 February 2024 04:42:12 pm Gremlin wrote:
> On 2/16/24 13:56, Roy J. Tellason, Sr. wrote:
> > On Friday 16 February 2024 04:52:22 am David Christensen wrote:
> >> I think the Raspberry Pi, etc., users on this list live with USB storage
> >> and have found it to be reliable enough for
On 2/16/24 13:56, Roy J. Tellason, Sr. wrote:
On Friday 16 February 2024 04:52:22 am David Christensen wrote:
I think the Raspberry Pi, etc., users on this list live with USB storage
and have found it to be reliable enough for personal and SOHO network use.
I have one, haven't done much
On 2/16/24 10:56, Roy J. Tellason, Sr. wrote:
On Friday 16 February 2024 04:52:22 am David Christensen wrote:
I think the Raspberry Pi, etc., users on this list live with USB storage
and have found it to be reliable enough for personal and SOHO network use.
I have one, haven't done much
On Friday 16 February 2024 04:52:22 am David Christensen wrote:
> I think the Raspberry Pi, etc., users on this list live with USB storage
> and have found it to be reliable enough for personal and SOHO network use.
I have one, haven't done much with it. Are there any alternative ways to
On 2/15/24 07:41, The Wanderer wrote:
On 2024-02-15 at 03:09, David Christensen wrote:
On 2/14/24 18:54, The Wanderer wrote:
On 2024-01-09 at 14:22, The Wanderer wrote:
On 2024-01-09 at 14:01, Michael Kjörling wrote:
On 9 Jan 2024 13:25 -0500, from The Wanderer
I've ordered a 22TB external
On 15 Feb 2024 10:41 -0500, from wande...@fastmail.fm (The Wanderer):
>> 65,000 hard links seems to be an ext4 limit:
>>
>> https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-kernel-70/max-hard-link-per-file-on-ext4-4175454538/#post4914624
>
> That sounds right.
>
>> I believe ZFS can do more hard
On 2024-02-15 at 01:18, songbird wrote:
> The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> TL;DR: It worked! I'm back up and running, with what appears to be
>> all my data safely recovered from the failing storage stack!
>
> i'm glad you got it back up and running and i hope all your data is
> intact. :)
Thank you.
On 2024-01-11 at 15:25, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> manufacturers in different memory banks, but since it's always
>> possible to power down, replace or just remove memory, and power up
>> again,
>
> Hmm... "always"? What about long running computations like that
> simulation (or LLM training)
On 2024-02-15 at 03:09, David Christensen wrote:
> On 2/14/24 18:54, The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> TL;DR: It worked! I'm back up and running, with what appears to be
>> all my data safely recovered from the failing storage stack!
>
> That is good to hear. :-)
>
>> On 2024-01-09 at 14:22, The
On 2024-02-15 at 07:14, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:
> The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> It turns out that there is a hard limit of 65000 hardlinks per
>> on-disk file;
>
> That's a filesystem dependent value. That's the value for ext4.
I think I recall reading that while I was flailing over
The Wanderer wrote:
> It turns out that there is a hard limit of 65000
> hardlinks per on-disk file;
That's a filesystem dependent value. That's the value for ext4.
XFS has a much larger limit I believe. As well as some other helpful
properties for large filesystems.
btrfs has different
On 2/14/24 18:54, The Wanderer wrote:
TL;DR: It worked! I'm back up and running, with what appears to be all
my data safely recovered from the failing storage stack!
That is good to hear. :-)
On 2024-01-09 at 14:22, The Wanderer wrote:
On 2024-01-09 at 14:01, Michael Kjörling wrote:
The Wanderer wrote:
> TL;DR: It worked! I'm back up and running, with what appears to be all
> my data safely recovered from the failing storage stack!
...
i'm glad you got it back up and running and i hope all your
data is intact. :)
which SSDs did you use?
songbird
TL;DR: It worked! I'm back up and running, with what appears to be all
my data safely recovered from the failing storage stack!
On 2024-01-09 at 14:22, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2024-01-09 at 14:01, Michael Kjörling wrote:
>
>> On 9 Jan 2024 13:25 -0500, from wande...@fastmail.fm (The
>>
Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > manufacturers in different memory banks, but since it's always
> > possible to power down, replace or just remove memory, and power
> > up again,
>
> Hmm... "always"? What about long running computations like that
> simulation (or LLM training) launched a month ago and
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 03:25:51PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
manufacturers in different memory banks, but since it's always
possible to power down, replace or just remove memory, and power
up again,
Hmm... "always"? What about long running computations like that
simulation (or LLM
> manufacturers in different memory banks, but since it's always
> possible to power down, replace or just remove memory, and power
> up again,
Hmm... "always"? What about long running computations like that
simulation (or LLM training) launched a month ago and that's expected to
finish in
David Christensen wrote:
> On 1/11/24 05:50, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > David Christensen wrote:
> STFW the Dell PowerEdge 6850 (circa 2004) featured "hot plug" disk drives,
> expansion slots, memory risers, power supplies, and system cooling fans:
>
>
On 1/11/24 05:50, Dan Ritter wrote:
David Christensen wrote:
dual network interfaces, and dual power supplies come to mind. I am
unclear about dual processors and/or dual memory banks.
There are no systems that I'm aware of which allow you to use 2
or more processors of different models;
David Christensen wrote:
> On 1/10/24 09:07, Curt wrote:
> > On 2024-01-10, David Christensen wrote:
>
> dual network interfaces, and dual power supplies come to mind. I am unclear
> about dual processors and/or dual memory banks. Moving beyond one computer,
There are no systems that I'm
On 1/10/24 09:30, Michael Kjörling wrote:
My understanding is that it's even relatively common, at least
for flight-critical components, to use totally different
implementations (of both hardware and software), not just sourced from
different vendors, resellers or batches, such that the same
On 1/10/24 09:07, Curt wrote:
On 2024-01-10, David Christensen wrote:
Given the OP's situation -- 8 consumer SSD's, same make and model,
possibly from a defective manufacturing batch, all purchased at the same
time, all deployed in the same RAID-6, all run 2.5 years 24x7, and all
suddenly
Curt wrote:
> On 2024-01-10, David Christensen wrote:
> >
> >
> > Given the OP's situation -- 8 consumer SSD's, same make and model,
> > possibly from a defective manufacturing batch, all purchased at the same
> > time, all deployed in the same RAID-6, all run 2.5 years 24x7, and all
> >
On 10 Jan 2024 17:07 -, from cu...@free.fr (Curt):
> It's curious, but I just heard something on French TV from a journalist
> that's relevant to this. She said she'd covered the aeronautics field in
> the past and mentioned the *principe de dissemblance* (dissimilarity
> principle). Critical
On 2024-01-10, David Christensen wrote:
>
>
> Given the OP's situation -- 8 consumer SSD's, same make and model,
> possibly from a defective manufacturing batch, all purchased at the same
> time, all deployed in the same RAID-6, all run 2.5 years 24x7, and all
> suddenly showing lots of SMART
On 1/10/24 01:35, Michael Kjörling wrote:
On 9 Jan 2024 14:34 -0800, from dpchr...@holgerdanske.com (David Christensen):
I don't know how to interpret the "Pre-fail" notation for the other
attributes.
AIUI "Pre-fail" indicates the drive is going to fail soon and should be
replaced.
Only if
On 9 Jan 2024 14:34 -0800, from dpchr...@holgerdanske.com (David Christensen):
>> I don't know how to interpret the "Pre-fail" notation for the other
>> attributes.
>
> AIUI "Pre-fail" indicates the drive is going to fail soon and should be
> replaced.
Only if the attribute hits the "failure"
On 1/9/24 14:34, David Christensen wrote:
You can always run smartctl manual ...
Correction: manually
To get protection against two-device failure, you need 3-day mirrors ...
Correction: 3-way
Perhaps other readers with madm, ...
Correction: mdadm
David
On 1/9/24 05:11, The Wanderer wrote:
I have an eight-drive RAID-6 array of 2TB SSDs, built
back in early-to-mid 2021.
Within the past few weeks, I got root-mail notifications from smartd
that the ATA error count on two of the drives had increased ...
On Sunday (two days ago), I got
On 2024-01-09 at 14:01, Michael Kjörling wrote:
> On 9 Jan 2024 13:25 -0500, from wande...@fastmail.fm (The Wanderer):
>
Within the past few weeks, I got root-mail notifications from
smartd that the ATA error count on two of the drives had
increased - one from 0 to a fairly low
On 9 Jan 2024 13:25 -0500, from wande...@fastmail.fm (The Wanderer):
>>> Within the past few weeks, I got root-mail notifications from
>>> smartd that the ATA error count on two of the drives had increased
>>> - one from 0 to a fairly low value (I think between 10 and 20), the
>>> other from 0 to
On 9 Jan 2024 10:21 -0500, from wande...@fastmail.fm (The Wanderer):
>>> Model Family: Samsung based SSDs
>>> Device Model: Samsung SSD 870 EVO 2TB
>>
>> These may or may not be under warranty,
>
> I would be surprised if there were warranty coverage at
> this point, but might look a bit
On 2024-01-09 at 11:21, Michael Kjörling wrote:
> On 9 Jan 2024 08:11 -0500, from wande...@fastmail.fm (The Wanderer):
>
>> Within the past few weeks, I got root-mail notifications from
>> smartd that the ATA error count on two of the drives had increased
>> - one from 0 to a fairly low value (I
On 2024-01-09 at 11:12, Curt wrote:
> On 2024-01-09, The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> My default plan is to identify an appropriate model and buy a pair
>> of replacement drives, but not install them yet; buy another two
>> drives every six months, until I have a full replacement set; and
>> start
On 9 Jan 2024 08:11 -0500, from wande...@fastmail.fm (The Wanderer):
> Within the past few weeks, I got root-mail notifications from smartd
> that the ATA error count on two of the drives had increased - one from 0
> to a fairly low value (I think between 10 and 20), the other from 0 to
> 1. I
On 2024-01-09, The Wanderer wrote:
>
> My default plan is to identify an appropriate model and buy a pair of
> replacement drives, but not install them yet; buy another two drives
> every six months, until I have a full replacement set; and start failing
> drives out of the RAID array and
On 2024-01-09 at 09:38, Dan Ritter wrote:
> The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> So... as the Subject asks, should I be worried? How do I interpret
>> these results, and at what point do they start to reflect something
>> to take action over? If there is not reason to be worried, what
>> *do* these alerts
The Wanderer wrote:
> So... as the Subject asks, should I be worried? How do I interpret these
> results, and at what point do they start to reflect something to take
> action over? If there is not reason to be worried, what *do* these
> alerts indicate, and at what point *should* I start to be
This is not directly Debian-related, except insofar as the system
involved is running Debian, but we've already had a somewhat similar
thread recently and this forum is as likely as any I'm aware of to have
people who might have the experience to address the question(s). I would
be open to
40 matches
Mail list logo
