0

I've got a 7-disk RAID-5 (3TB each), on a CentOS 5.5 box.

Today I was doing regular checkups on my system and found this weird bug(?):

enter image description here

How is this possible? This filesystem is formatted as XFS and is still mounted. I haven't done much on it out of fear of compromising anything. The entire directory structure is there, and so are the files, but those files are all empty.

Any ideas on how this can be? I've yet to decide on how to proceed with this.

p.s.: I've got everything backed up.

victorantunes
  • 141
  • 7
  • 4
    R5...using 3TB disks...you must hate your data – Chopper3 Jan 08 '18 at 14:20
  • @Chopper3 I'm not in control of those decisions, heh. I currently don't have the power to change that. – victorantunes Jan 08 '18 at 15:02
  • It might be being changed as we type ... Kudos on the backup – Colt Jan 08 '18 at 17:46
  • @Colt I'm lost as to why/how that happened, but I've ran `smartctl -t short` on all the disks and they came back OK. So I recreated the RAID and am restoring from backup. Since it's a very rarely used storage, I have no issues with downtime, so I guess I'll see what happens. – victorantunes Jan 08 '18 at 18:36
  • Seriously, though, those disks are too big for RAID5, [as pointed out a decade ago](http://www.zdnet.com/article/why-raid-5-stops-working-in-2009/). If you are just going to rely on backup anyway, then maintaing the RAID 5 just seems like extra work for nothing. If you want _any_ benefit of RAID, though, you should be using a different level. – Colt Jan 08 '18 at 19:21
  • @Colt you are right, yes. AFAIK, this should be R10, yes? – victorantunes Jan 08 '18 at 19:53
  • Can do 10, or 6 with nominally same capacity as 10. 10 will have read speed bonus. With either, you will have 2/3 capacity as with 5 (but, again, with 5 you really get "nothing" in the event of a failure). – Colt Jan 08 '18 at 20:00

0 Answers0