Tag Info

Hot answers tagged


Use 2.5" disks for enterprise SAS workloads and 3.5" for bulk and high-capacity storage. You've answered your own question. Buy the right type of server for your anticipated workload. If you need high performance drives, optimize for that. If you need a lot of storage, then focus on that. Small-form-factor (2.5") disks are available in the following ...


It is a cost/performance vs capacity question. 2.5" HDD, at the same RPM/rotational delay, have a performance advantage versus their taller brother by the virtue of the smaller platter area. This in turn permit lower seek time (because the head had to travel a physically shorter distance). At the same time, this means that total platter area (read: ...


Oh my... What the heck are you trying to do?!? This is a bit of a square-peg in a round-hole issue. SCSI is not SATA or SAS. Your Dell server is a PowerEdge 1850, which featured parallel SCSI (Ultra-320 SCSI) drives. These disks connected to an 80-pin SCA connector on the drive cage backplane. SATA and Serial-Attached-SCSI (SAS) superseded the old ...


Let us read the manual page for the underlying library call: Programs can use posix_fadvise() to announce an intention to access file data in a specific pattern in the future, thus allowing the kernel to perform appropriate optimizations. The advice applies to a (not necessarily existent) region starting at offset and extending for len bytes (or ...


When ruggedized hard drive purpose-built technologies like RDX exist... This seems silly to worry about the handling of the drive. If it really is a problem, are you sure it's not a people issue? If it DOES require a technological solution, Google "ruggedized hard drive". There are plenty of options in the consumer and enterprise realms for this.


The error decode is Bh/4Bh/0Bh = ABORTED_COMMAND/NAK_RECEIVED. I wrote my own tool to decode these and try to give a basic assessment at http://scsi.ev-en.org/ These errors indicate that you have a bad link somewhere, most often it is a bad cable but it can also be a bad port on either side (drive or slot).


I changed the following option in my *.vmx file: mem.hotadd = "FALSE" By default it is set to "TRUE". I've not seen any issues changing it... I don't have any CentOS VMs running on MS Hyper-V so, dig in and see what options are available to fix this issue.


Another consideration is power usage (which is often billed). While 2.5" use less power per drive than 3.5" drives, because they are not available at higher capacities they use more power per GB.


Since the two disks are exactly the same size and need to contain exactly the same data, you could use dd: dd if=/dev/sdb of=/dev/sda bs=16M You'll need to boot from a live use though. Please check the if(in file) and of(out file) statements from the live usb. Once you start dd(disk destroyer), there's no going back.


There are products for this but they are converters not adapters so are higher priced. One example is: ARS-2320S Ultra320 SCSI-to-SATA II Hard Disk Drive non Hot SWAP As mentioned by others your server and old drive use the SCA 80 pin connector which pre-dates SATA/SAS and was used to provide hotplug support for SCSI drives.


There seems to be a known bug in the dir_index feature (which you should be able to disable) that is caused by hashes of filenames colliding: http://blog.merovius.de/2013/10/20/ext4-mysterious-no-space-left-on.html

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible