Koozali.org: home of the SME Server

disk partitions too small

Offline kevincallan

  • *
  • 34
  • +0/-0
disk partitions too small
« on: May 27, 2014, 03:49:39 PM »
I installed SME 8.0 on a machine with two 1TB hard drives.  The installation set these us in RAID1 mirror configuration.  When I grew a database table too large, MySQL crashed and I realized that the partitions were too small.  What is the best-practices process for allocating more of the unused disk to the partition so that the table can grow larger?
......

Offline janet

  • ****
  • 4,812
  • +0/-0
Re: disk partitions too small
« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2014, 05:09:16 PM »
kevincallan

Unless you changed the partition size at install time, or the disks had pre-existing smaller partitions on them, the installer should have used the maximum disk space available.

I suggest you read the RAID Howto, link at top of forums.
Please search before asking, an answer may already exist.
The Search & other links to useful information are at top of Forum.

Offline kevincallan

  • *
  • 34
  • +0/-0
Re: disk partitions too small
« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2014, 05:38:23 PM »
Thank you for the quick reply.

I actually have read the how to and everything else I could find on RAID and hdd management.  I'm puzzled why so little space was allocated since I started with fresh 1TB drives.

I am rebuilding the server now but I see no place to select partition size.  I'll report back on how it goes.  Is there a way of specifying partition size in setup?
......

Offline Stefano

  • *
  • 10,839
  • +2/-0
Re: disk partitions too small
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2014, 07:25:37 PM »
Thank you for the quick reply.

I actually have read the how to and everything else I could find on RAID and hdd management.  I'm puzzled why so little space was allocated since I started with fresh 1TB drives.

define "so little", thank you

Quote
I am rebuilding the server now but I see no place to select partition size.  I'll report back on how it goes.  Is there a way of specifying partition size in setup?

AFAIK no, but you'd let SME setup your server and then report here the result of
Code: [Select]
df -h
fdisk -l

finally, tell us something about your server (mb, chipset and so on), thank you

Offline kevincallan

  • *
  • 34
  • +0/-0
Re: disk partitions too small
« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2014, 08:31:48 PM »
Thank you, once again, for another quick reply.  After rebuilding the server, I think I am content now.  Before the rebuild, the size of the /dev/mapper/main-root partition size was on the order of the tmpfs partition.  I don't have the exact number any longer.

Now,
Code: [Select]
# df -h
Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/main-root
                      898G  1.5G  850G   1% /
/dev/md1               99M   13M   82M  13% /boot
tmpfs                 2.0G     0  2.0G   0% /dev/shm

and

Code: [Select]
# fdisk -l

Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/sda1   *           1          13      104391   fd  Linux raid autodetect
/dev/sda2              14      121601   976655610   fd  Linux raid autodetect

Disk /dev/sdb: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/sdb1   *           1          13      104391   fd  Linux raid autodetect
/dev/sdb2              14      121601   976655610   fd  Linux raid autodetect

Disk /dev/md2: 1000.0 GB, 1000095219712 bytes
2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 244163872 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes

Disk /dev/md2 doesn't contain a valid partition table

Disk /dev/md1: 106 MB, 106823680 bytes
2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 26080 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes

    Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System

The platform is a Dell T3400 PC which includes on-board hard drive management for assisting with RAID.

Code: [Select]
# lspci
00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation 82X38/X48 Express DRAM Controller
00:01.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82X38/X48 Express Host-Primary PCI Express Bridge
00:06.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82X38/X48 Express Host-Secondary PCI Express Bridge
00:1a.0 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #4 (rev 02)
00:1a.1 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #5 (rev 02)
00:1a.2 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #6 (rev 02)
00:1a.7 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB2 EHCI Controller #2 (rev 02)
00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) HD Audio Controller (rev 02)
00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) PCI Express Port 1 (rev 02)
00:1c.5 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) PCI Express Port 6 (rev 02)
00:1d.0 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #1 (rev 02)
00:1d.1 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #2 (rev 02)
00:1d.2 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB UHCI Controller #3 (rev 02)
00:1d.7 USB controller: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) USB2 EHCI Controller #1 (rev 02)
00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 PCI Bridge (rev 92)
00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation 82801IR (ICH9R) LPC Interface Controller (rev 02)
00:1f.2 SATA controller: Intel Corporation 82801IR/IO/IH (ICH9R/DO/DH) 6 port SATA Controller [AHCI mode] (rev 02)
00:1f.3 SMBus: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) SMBus Controller (rev 02)
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: NVIDIA Corporation G86 [Quadro NVS 290] (rev a1)
04:00.0 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5754 Gigabit Ethernet PCI Express (rev 02)

I have identified no root cause that explains why I had trouble the first time.  The only other clue I have to mention is that when I ran

Code: [Select]
cat /proc/mdstat

the md1 mount always showed [UU_] with a degraded status while md2 was [UU].

On a related topic, when I query the RAID, I get:

Code: [Select]
# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1]
md1 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0]
      104320 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md2 : active raid1 sdb2[1] sda2[0]
      976655488 blocks [2/2] [UU]
      [=========>...........]  resync = 45.4% (444024064/976655488) finish=144.4min speed=61464K/sec

At this time, I cannot backup from workstation backup DAR file since the page is blank.  Do I have to wait for the resync to complete before that will work?

Many thanks.

......

Offline CharlieBrady

  • *
  • 6,918
  • +3/-0
Re: disk partitions too small
« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2014, 11:00:32 PM »
I have identified no root cause that explains why I had trouble the first time.  The only other clue I have to mention is that when I ran

Code: [Select]
cat /proc/mdstat

the md1 mount always showed [UU_] with a degraded status while md2 was [UU].

Perhaps you had a (small) removable device attached when you did your first installation.

Quote
On a related topic, when I query the RAID, I get:

Code: [Select]
# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1]
md1 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0]
      104320 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md2 : active raid1 sdb2[1] sda2[0]
      976655488 blocks [2/2] [UU]
      [=========>...........]  resync = 45.4% (444024064/976655488) finish=144.4min speed=61464K/sec

At this time, I cannot backup from workstation backup DAR file since the page is blank.  Do I have to wait for the resync to complete before that will work?

I don't know anything about DAR backup or what page is blank. But you don't need to wait for resync to complete before you can use the server.

Offline kevincallan

  • *
  • 34
  • +0/-0
Re: disk partitions too small
« Reply #6 on: May 28, 2014, 12:25:20 AM »
Thank you all.
......