Hello, On Sat, 22 Jul 2017, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2017-07-22 11:02, gumb wrote:
Following on from my post last night in another thread of mine: https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse/2017-07/msg00853.html
This is a new problem so I don't want that post going off-topic. I just wonder if anyone else has experience with this drive model, or more general thoughts.
I have a Transcend Storejet 25M3 2TB external SATA USB drive, which contains a Seagate Samsung SpinPoint M9T, model ST2000LM003 HN-M201RAD inside. Here's some details on it: https://us.transcend-info.com/Products/No-284
I'm partial to buying the HD and box separately, then I assemble them together.
Or buy a disk boxed (if it's exactly specified which), unbox it and use it internally ;) BTDT. $ df -hT | sort | awk \ 'BEGIN{print "Filesystem Type Size";}\ $2 !~ /tmp|rootfs|^Type/ && ! s[$1] { \ printf("%s %10s %s\n", $1, $2, $3); s[$1]++; }' ### the s[$1] stuff is because of bind-mounts Filesystem Type Size /dev/loop0 reiserfs 8.0G - looped newsspool /dev/loop1 reiserfs 4.0G - looped for a gentoo portage-tree /dev/sda1 ext4 52G - SSD suse /, ~46G used, stuff linked out /dev/sda2 ext4 52G - SSD gentoo /, ~40G used, stuff linked out /dev/sdb1 ext3 30G \ /dev/sdb3 ext3 30G | /dev/sdb5 ext3 1.8T | /dev/sdc1 ext3 1.9T | /dev/sdd1 ext3 1.9T | /dev/sde1 ext3 3.6T | /dev/sdf1 ext3 3.6T | DATA /dev/sdg2 ext3 9.9G | /dev/sdg3 ext3 1.9T | /dev/sdh1 ext3 40G | /dev/sdh2 ext3 40G | /dev/sdh3 ext3 15G | /dev/sdh5 ext3 5.0G | /dev/sdh6 ext3 1.8T / $ df -T | awk '$1 ~ /^\/dev\/sd/ && ! s[$1] { sum+=$3; s[$1]++; } \ END{printf("%.2f TiB\n", sum/1024/1024/1024); }' 16.35 TiB (again, the s[$1] is for pruning bind-mounts). Anyone see a pattern? :) Got some more external drives too, from 750G to 8T, all ext3. But, yes, it's now been some years that I've been using ext4, and I do trust it by now. Though it's not been tortured as some of my ext3 FSen when I had HW problems (hard shutdown by holding the powerbutton, even sysrq didn't work anymore or even the box just rebooting "spontaneously").
ext4 instead. Using the router's built-in partition verification tool (non-destructive), the first ext4 partition check passed in under a minute, but the second xfs partition just hangs and grinds away at the drive for hours, eventually forcing me to disconnect using the router's front panel display and reboot.
xfs check is very slow, when forced to do it. It checks everything. The ext4 test is fast because it only does a superficial test, and because the partition is smaller.
Ah, yes, I forgot in my other mail: XFS also needs _oodles_ of RAM for the check. ISTR at least 1GiB RAM per TiB on the FS. Anyway, I tried XFS once. Formatted a partition, tried xfs_repair and it barfed out on "not enough RAM". I neither have enough RAM nor enough free space on disk for swapping. Ahh, yes, not that but something: http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_Which_factors_influence_the_memory_usage... http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2010-05/msg00221.html
From the latter (yes, it's old, but AFAIK xfs_repair still needs tons of RAM):
"I just ran xfs_check on an empty 51TB filesystem w/ 821 AGs to get an idea of how much RAM an older xfs_repair will use (as it have 3.1.2 installed on my test machines). It is allocating about 115GB of virtual memory space before consuming all the RAM+swap in the machine before being OOM-killed." Thus XFS went down the drain for my box and purposes ;) Anyone got recent Mem-usage data on xfs_repair on a fullish, say, 4T volume? Lots of disk but little (non-ECC) RAM is not a use-case XFS (nor ZFS) were intended for... -dnh -- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org