Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior.
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2019 17:30:05
Message-Id: 4437418.n6qy7MrAy5@dell_xps
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox, downloading files and odd behavior. by Jack
1 On Monday, 7 January 2019 16:30:41 GMT Jack wrote:
2 > On 2019.01.07 05:46, Dale wrote:
3 > > Peter Humphrey wrote:
4 > > > On Sunday, 6 January 2019 22:13:31 GMT Dale wrote:
5 > > >> Even from my simple setup, LVM adds more benefits to managing data
6 > >
7 > > and
8 > >
9 > > >> drives than it does risk. The biggest thing, placing blame where
10 > >
11 > > it
12 > >
13 > > >> lies. Blaming LVM for a drive dying is placing the blame on
14 > >
15 > > something
16 > >
17 > > >> that wasn't the root of the problem. The dying drive was the
18 > >
19 > > problem,
20 > >
21 > > >> using LVM or not.
22 > > >
23 > > > He isn't doing that, though. As I read it, he recounted the tale of
24 > >
25 > > recovering
26 > >
27 > > > data from a failed drive, then imagined how much worse it would be
28 > >
29 > > if it were
30 > >
31 > > > in an LVM setup. [Reported speech and mixed-up tenses causing me a
32 > >
33 > > problem
34 > >
35 > > > here...]
36 > > >
37 > > > Thanks Gevisz, that was interesting. What we used to call a
38 > >
39 > > cautionary tale.
40 > >
41 > >
42 > > From what I've read, that can be overcome. If you get say a SMART
43 > > message that a drive is failing, just remove that drive or remove the
44 > > whole LVM setup and use something else until a working drive setup can
45 > > be made. Once ready, then move the data, if the drive still works, to
46 > > the new drive. That is basically what I did when I swapped a smaller
47 > > drive for a larger one. I moved the data from one drive to another.
48 > > It
49 > > did it fairly quickly. Someone posted that it may even be faster to
50 > > do
51 > > it with LVM's pvmove than it is with cp or rsync. I don't know how
52 > > true
53 > > that is but from what I've read, it moves the data really
54 > > efficiently.
55 > > If the drive has a very limited time before failure, speed is
56 > > important. If the drive is completely dead, replace the drive and
57 > > hope
58 > > the backups are good. Either way, LVM or not, a failing drive is a
59 > > failing drive. The data has to be moved if the drive still works or
60 > > the
61 > > data is gone if it just up and dies. The biggest thing, watching the
62 > > SMART messages about the health of the drive. In the past when I've
63 > > had
64 > > a drive fail, I got error messages well ahead of time. On one drive,
65 > > I
66 > > removed the drive, set it aside, ordered a replacement drive,
67 > > installed
68 > > both drives and copied the data over. After I did all that, I played
69 > > with the drive until it failed a day or so later. Lucky? Most
70 > > likely.
71 > > Still, it gave me time to transfer things over.
72 > >
73 > > While I get that LVM adds a layer to things, it also adds some options
74 > > as well. Those options can prove helpful if one uses them.
75 > >
76 > > Just my thinking.
77 > >
78 > > Dale
79 >
80 > The only problem with all that is that SMART is far from completely
81 > reliable. I recently had a drive fail, and the resulting fsck on the
82 > next reboot messed up many files. (Not a Gentoo system, although I
83 > don't think that made any difference.) After getting running again, I
84 > did several SMART tests, including the full self-test, and it reported
85 > ZERO errors. A few weeks later, it did the same thing, and shortly
86 > after that, it failed totally. I had done a few more full self-tests
87 > before final failure, and all came back clean. I'd really love to find
88 > out there was something I did wrong in the testing, but I don't think
89 > so. I have not yet completely given up on trying to recover stuff from
90 > that drive, but as time goes on, there is less and less that I haven't
91 > rebuilt or replaced by re-downloading or changing lost passwords, so
92 > it's less and less important. (That was a different drive from the one
93 > I messed up myself, as discussed in another recent thread here.)
94 >
95 > Jack
96
97 Depending on the type of errors reported by SMART, by the time you notice
98 errors in tests the risk of losing data is already quite high. Checking
99 deteriorating trends with smartctl won't hurt though.
100
101 The filesystem problems you were getting may have been coincidental with the
102 impending hardware failure, rather than their cause.
103
104 --
105 Regards,
106 Mick

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature