FedoraThis forum is for the discussion of the Fedora Project.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Having some problems with one of our production systems,
sadly i was around when this system was installed in 2005 and i havent figured out the complete setup, but this is what problems i get.
[root@app1 ~]# df
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
df: `DEVNO="0x0801"': No such file or directory
df: `DEVNO="0x0811"': No such file or directory
df: `DEVNO="0x0812"': No such file or directory
df: `DEVNO="0x0900"': No such file or directory
/dev/shm 1037348 0 1037348 0% /dev/shm
[root@app1 ~]#
This dosnt look very good, i then look in the /etc/mtab file
in this is what it shows.
I have no idea why its looking like that, but it havent always that im sure of.
and just running "mount" gives me this.
[root@app1 ~]# mount
[mntent]: line 1 in /etc/mtab is bad
[mntent]: line 2 in /etc/mtab is bad
[mntent]: line 3 in /etc/mtab is bad
[mntent]: line 4 in /etc/mtab is bad
/dev/shm on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw)
[root@app1 ~]#
I think the server is running a raid1 with the help of mdadm
/dev/md0 is mounted as / . that i know
running mdadm --details /dev/md0 gives me this
[root@app1 ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 00.90.01
Creation Time : Wed Aug 3 12:55:39 2005
Raid Level : raid1
Array Size : 155195776 (148.01 GiB 158.92 GB)
Device Size : 155195776 (148.01 GiB 158.92 GB)
Raid Devices : 2
Total Devices : 1
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Update Time : Mon Nov 19 21:39:15 2007
State : clean, degraded
Active Devices : 1
Working Devices : 1
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 1 0 active sync /dev/sda1
1 0 0 - removed
[root@app1 ~]#
One of the discs is broken that i know, and it has been removed from the raidsetup as you can see above until i can replace it, though should this have any affect that i cant do a "df" on the system ?
Having some problems with one of our production systems,
sadly i was around when this system was installed in 2005 and i havent figured out the complete setup, but this is what problems i get.
[root@app1 ~]# df
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
df: `DEVNO="0x0801"': No such file or directory
df: `DEVNO="0x0811"': No such file or directory
df: `DEVNO="0x0812"': No such file or directory
df: `DEVNO="0x0900"': No such file or directory
/dev/shm 1037348 0 1037348 0% /dev/shm
[root@app1 ~]#
This dosnt look very good, i then look in the /etc/mtab file
in this is what it shows.
I have no idea why its looking like that, but it havent always that im sure of.
and just running "mount" gives me this.
[root@app1 ~]# mount
[mntent]: line 1 in /etc/mtab is bad
[mntent]: line 2 in /etc/mtab is bad
[mntent]: line 3 in /etc/mtab is bad
[mntent]: line 4 in /etc/mtab is bad
/dev/shm on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw)
[root@app1 ~]#
I think the server is running a raid1 with the help of mdadm
/dev/md0 is mounted as / . that i know
running mdadm --details /dev/md0 gives me this
[root@app1 ~]# mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 00.90.01
Creation Time : Wed Aug 3 12:55:39 2005
Raid Level : raid1
Array Size : 155195776 (148.01 GiB 158.92 GB)
Device Size : 155195776 (148.01 GiB 158.92 GB)
Raid Devices : 2
Total Devices : 1
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent
Update Time : Mon Nov 19 21:39:15 2007
State : clean, degraded
Active Devices : 1
Working Devices : 1
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 1 0 active sync /dev/sda1
1 0 0 - removed
[root@app1 ~]#
One of the discs is broken that i know, and it has been removed from the raidsetup as you can see above until i can replace it, though should this have any affect that i cant do a "df" on the system ?
I appreciate any intell on this,
Kind regards, Jonas
Do you know what raid level it is set at or did I miss it in the test above?
Hi,
as --details output from above its raidlevel 1, though i fixed this by rebooting the system. But i have still no idea what caused the problem,
but after the reboot it worked, the mtab file was looking good and df was working without a problem. But it was a nervous couple of mins when i rebooted the system remote. Still would be nice if some1 actually knew why or how this was caused.
Hi,
as --details output from above its raidlevel 1, though i fixed this by rebooting the system. But i have still no idea what caused the problem,
but after the reboot it worked, the mtab file was looking good and df was working without a problem. But it was a nervous couple of mins when i rebooted the system remote. Still would be nice if some1 actually knew why or how this was caused.
I have worked with production raid systems and they have done some strange things as in not being found upon boot up and having to power down the system to 'reseat' a drive and it worked just fine.
I would do the mdadm --display command and verify everything is working ok, and physically check out the machine maybe one of the drives is not seated correctly or loose. Just a starting point to rule out a lot of variables, otherwise it is a needle in a haystack type of deal.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.