[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Signs of hard drive failure?

On Tue 22 Oct 2019 at 19:24:00 (+1000), elvis wrote:
> Lots cut
> On 22/10/19 6:16 pm, Ken Heard wrote:
> >       0  Not_testing
> > Selective self-test flags (0x0):
> >    After scanning selected spans, do NOT read-scan remainder of disk.
> > If Selective self-test is pending on power-up, resume after 0 minute
> > delay.
> > 
> > My comments: is that what is supposed to happen?  I have not done
> > /dev/sdb yet.
> > 
> > "elvis" in an earlier post asked me if I had "tried e2fsck to check
> > the filesystem first?"  According to 'man e2fsk' I have to run that
> > command on an unmounted device.  If the devices in question, /dev/sda
> > and /dev/sdb, comprise the RAID 1, how can I unmount them and still
> > use the computer to run those commands?
> You run e2fsck on the partition. So if your raid is sdb and sda then
> your raid device is /dev/md127 or /dev/kensarray/bigdisk or something
> like that. Then your partition is on top of that.
> Hopefully you have your partition mounted on /mnt/allmydata for
> example and you just umount it and run e2fsck on whatever the block
> device is.
> If you have boot and root on raid, I would boot with a recovery USB
> like  sysrescue and then run the tests offline. It should assemble
> your raid automatically to save stuffing around as well.
> Also make sure you are using the right filesystem checker, I have just
> assumed you are using ext4

Is all this really necessary? I thought one of the benefits of the
extra complication of using initramfs is that the system can check
the root filesystem automatically before it's mounted.

In fact, I've just done it. I typed
# ./check-fs-rebooting-now
which runs   grub-reboot 'fsck>fsck'; reboot
which reboots the machine with   forcefsck   added to the kernel parameters.
After Grub loads the kernel and initrd, the root filesystem gets fsck'd
before any of the normal boot messages appear.

I haven't yet run RAID but am told it's really simple. Is this
going to complicate matters?


Reply to: