How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?
-
@scottalanmiller said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
It seems, you are suggesting here like below scenario?
have a server which takes more hard drives, let it be lower end server
install hardware raid controller
insert as many hard drives the raid controller or server supports
install linux on top (prefably) CentOS, and run SMB SharesIf yes, I have similar plans with Dell PE T310 older server I have.
Hardware RAID is an option. But MD RAID is free and comes with Linux and it was fine for you to use when you had the lower grade QNAP, so should be even better now. So while hardware RAID is great, it's also not free. MD RAID is free and 100% acceptable.
As someone said above, not as many drives as you can, there is a "right number of drives" and that might be two, four, six, or maybe more than the box will support. But don't just assume that more is better, there are some big benefits to RAID 1 with just two drives if they are big enough and fast enough for you.
But yes, in general, this is the advised path. A NAS is nothing more than this, but typically with a nearly pointless web interface added on and cheaper consumer hardware underneath. A NAS only means it's a "limited server", nothing more. A QNAP is considered a consumer level device, so several steps below an entry level general purpose server. And file serving is the most common function of a server traditionally.
NOthing wrong with a NAS but it offers nothing special. It's not safer, faster, or more featureful than a traditional server. It's actually less safe, same speed or slower, and definitely far fewer features than a normal server.
In this case, MD RAID is software raid, does that means, I will allocate one hard drive for OS (which linux by the way?), and connect 2 or 4 additional hard drives other than Hard Drive for OS.
Then implement RAID on additional hard drives with MD RAID?
I already have RAID Controller in this PE T310, Perc 6i/r, which supports only RAID 1 with 2TB max Virtual Disk, which is almost no use space for me.
-
@scottalanmiller said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
Again, since it is RAID 10, it will have a pair (for striping), is it HDD 1 and HDD 2 will be pair one ? HDD 3 and HDD 4 will be pair 2?
Only QNAP will know that one. I bet no one has it documented.
I asked QNAP Support on this, below is his reply:
" Due to I do not have information of the RAID array metadata, the information provided below is based on default assumption, which is same as your reply.
Disk 1 and Disk 2 is first pair
Disk 3 and Disk 4 is second pair"
I went with straight configuration while setting up RAID on this, so I believe it will have same default pair.
In that case, Disk 1 and Disk 2 are like RAID 0 array, and I can use any recovery software with these two drives, which supports RAID 0 to recover, obviously by taking precautions like disk status check and dupe the drives?
@scottalanmiller @CCWTech -
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@scottalanmiller said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
Again, since it is RAID 10, it will have a pair (for striping), is it HDD 1 and HDD 2 will be pair one ? HDD 3 and HDD 4 will be pair 2?
Only QNAP will know that one. I bet no one has it documented.
I asked QNAP Support on this, below is his reply:
" Due to I do not have information of the RAID array metadata, the information provided below is based on default assumption, which is same as your reply.
Disk 1 and Disk 2 is first pair
Disk 3 and Disk 4 is second pair"
I went with straight configuration while setting up RAID on this, so I believe it will have same default pair.
In that case, Disk 1 and Disk 2 are like RAID 0 array, and I can use any recovery software with these two drives, which supports RAID 0 to recover, obviously by taking precautions like disk status check and dupe the drives?
@scottalanmiller @CCWTechNot quite. Disk 1 and 2 are mirrored. Disk 3 and 4 are also mirrored. The "RAID 0" array is across the two mirrors.
So you could use disk 1 and 3 or disk 2 and 4.
What you described would be RAID 01, which was never popular because of so many reasons. A couple off the top of my head, same amount of drive space overhead as RAID10 and disk failure is much harder to deal with.
-
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
GetDataBack with RAID Reconstructor is a utility set we've used to recover data from a set of drives that were originally in a NAS box.
Don't see any option for RAID 10
https://www.runtime.org/raid.htmIn theory you are only recovering from RAID 0, RAID 1 is naturally recoverable.
-
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
In this case, MD RAID is software raid, does that means, I will allocate one hard drive for OS (which linux by the way?), and connect 2 or 4 additional hard drives other than Hard Drive for OS.
Or just make one RAID array. No need for a separate boot drive.
-
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
I already have RAID Controller in this PE T310, Perc 6i/r, which supports only RAID 1 with 2TB max Virtual Disk, which is almost no use space for me.
That's an ancient entry level hardware RAID controller. You should not be considering that, at all. It's not even remotely production ready.
Last OS supported was Windows 2003! Doesn't support any hypervisor, it's that old.
Run away, fast.
-
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
In that case, Disk 1 and Disk 2 are like RAID 0 array
That's the opposite of what they told you. They said that disk 1 and 2 were the first RAID 1 pair. So disk 1 and 3 are the RAID 0 pair.
-
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
I can use any recovery software with these two drives, which supports RAID 0 to recover, obviously by taking precautions like disk status check and dupe the drives?
In theory, yes. Just do it with a clone of the drive, and not the drive itself and there is no risk.
-
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
GetDataBack with RAID Reconstructor is a utility set we've used to recover data from a set of drives that were originally in a NAS box.
Don't see any option for RAID 10
https://www.runtime.org/raid.htmIndeed.
We stopped deploying RAID 10 so long ago that I'd forgotten that sorry.
NAS Recovery only does RAID 5 too.
Ugh
-
@openit said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
GetDataBack with RAID Reconstructor is a utility set we've used to recover data from a set of drives that were originally in a NAS box.
Don't see any option for RAID 10
https://www.runtime.org/raid.htmDo you need it though? you should only need RAID 0 recovery. As mentioned, any drive from 1 or 2 and any drive from 3 or 4 should give you a working RAID 0 pair.
As everyone else has said - clone the drives to new drives first so you don't damage your old production drives. I assume you've already purchased and are waiting for delivery of at least two new drives....
-
@PhlipElder : Why did you stop deploying RAID 10? It's about the most fault tolerant and performance oriented RAID config one can get for hardware RAID.
-
@manxam said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder : Why did you stop deploying RAID 10? It's about the most fault tolerant and performance oriented RAID config one can get for hardware RAID.
Nope.
Had a virtualization host RAID 10 drive, of six, die.
I popped by, did a hot swap of the dead drive, rebuild started, and I sat for a coffee with the on-site IT person.
About 5 minutes into that coffee we heard a BEEP, BEEP-BEEP, and then nothing. It was sitting at the RAID POST prompt indicating failed array and no POST.
It's pair had died too.
I'll stick with RAID 6 thank you very much. We'd still have had the server.
We ended up installing a fresh OS, setting things up, and recovering from backup (ShadowProtect) after flattening and setting up the array again.
-
@PhlipElder said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@manxam said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder : Why did you stop deploying RAID 10? It's about the most fault tolerant and performance oriented RAID config one can get for hardware RAID.
Nope.
Had a virtualization host RAID 10 drive, of six, die.
I popped by, did a hot swap of the dead drive, rebuild started, and I sat for a coffee with the on-site IT person.
About 5 minutes into that coffee we heard a BEEP, BEEP-BEEP, and then nothing. It was sitting at the RAID POST prompt indicating failed array and no POST.
It's pair had died too.
I'll stick with RAID 6 thank you very much. We'd still have had the server.
We ended up installing a fresh OS, setting things up, and recovering from backup (ShadowProtect) after flattening and setting up the array again.
You can't say that. There's way more work being done on the drives with a RAID6, maybe then 3 or 4 drives would have went out close together instead of just two. If you think a RAID10 was the cause of 2 drives dieing, then holy shit a RAID 6 woulda killed 3+.
My guesses are one or more of the folowing:
- a bad batch of drives
- wrong drives
- drives used past their warranty/expectancy or whatever
- lack of monitoring
And by the way, a RAID 10 isn't really a "rebuild". It's not a very disk intensive thing like it is with a RAID 6.
-
@Obsolesce said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@manxam said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder : Why did you stop deploying RAID 10? It's about the most fault tolerant and performance oriented RAID config one can get for hardware RAID.
Nope.
Had a virtualization host RAID 10 drive, of six, die.
I popped by, did a hot swap of the dead drive, rebuild started, and I sat for a coffee with the on-site IT person.
About 5 minutes into that coffee we heard a BEEP, BEEP-BEEP, and then nothing. It was sitting at the RAID POST prompt indicating failed array and no POST.
It's pair had died too.
I'll stick with RAID 6 thank you very much. We'd still have had the server.
We ended up installing a fresh OS, setting things up, and recovering from backup (ShadowProtect) after flattening and setting up the array again.
You can't say that. There's way more work being done on the drives with a RAID6, maybe then 3 or 4 drives would have went out close together instead of just two. If you think a RAID10 was the cause of 2 drives dieing, then holy shit a RAID 6 woulda killed 3+.
My guesses are one or more of the folowing:
- a bad batch of drives
- wrong drives
- drives used past their warranty/expectancy or whatever
- lack of monitoring
And by the way, a RAID 10 isn't really a "rebuild". It's not a very disk intensive thing like it is with a RAID 6.
I think he meant that RAID10 can only handle 1 drive failure with certainty, while RAID6 can handle 2 drive failures with certainty.
Rebuild is not much different really. On RAID6 all drives in the arrays are read concurrently and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. On RAID10 one drive is read and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. So the read intensity and write intensity is the same per drive, there are just more drives that needs to be read when rebuilding a RAID6 array.
-
@Pete-S said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
I think he meant that RAID10 can only handle 1 drive failure with certainty, while RAID6 can handle 2 drive failures with certainty.
Rebuild is not much different really. On RAID6 all drives in the arrays are read concurrently and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. On RAID10 one drive is read and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. So the read intensity and write intensity is the same per drive, there are just more drives that needs to be read when rebuilding a RAID6 array.
Sure, it can handle two drive failures - but at what costs? I mean if you're SSD, then sure, great, hell, the argument is there for RAID 5, but then, back to only able to loose one drive, so meh. But RAID 6 is so bloody slow compared to RAID 10, etc. If that's the only reason you're going RAID 6, I'm not sure the logic is there to support it.
-
@Obsolesce said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@manxam said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder : Why did you stop deploying RAID 10? It's about the most fault tolerant and performance oriented RAID config one can get for hardware RAID.
Nope.
Had a virtualization host RAID 10 drive, of six, die.
I popped by, did a hot swap of the dead drive, rebuild started, and I sat for a coffee with the on-site IT person.
About 5 minutes into that coffee we heard a BEEP, BEEP-BEEP, and then nothing. It was sitting at the RAID POST prompt indicating failed array and no POST.
It's pair had died too.
I'll stick with RAID 6 thank you very much. We'd still have had the server.
We ended up installing a fresh OS, setting things up, and recovering from backup (ShadowProtect) after flattening and setting up the array again.
You can't say that. There's way more work being done on the drives with a RAID6, maybe then 3 or 4 drives would have went out close together instead of just two. If you think a RAID10 was the cause of 2 drives dieing, then holy shit a RAID 6 woulda killed 3+.
My guesses are one or more of the folowing:
- a bad batch of drives
- wrong drives
- drives used past their warranty/expectancy or whatever
- lack of monitoring
And by the way, a RAID 10 isn't really a "rebuild". It's not a very disk intensive thing like it is with a RAID 6.
Please re-read what I wrote and stop interpreting it.
-
@Dashrender said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@Pete-S said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
I think he meant that RAID10 can only handle 1 drive failure with certainty, while RAID6 can handle 2 drive failures with certainty.
Rebuild is not much different really. On RAID6 all drives in the arrays are read concurrently and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. On RAID10 one drive is read and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. So the read intensity and write intensity is the same per drive, there are just more drives that needs to be read when rebuilding a RAID6 array.
Sure, it can handle two drive failures - but at what costs? I mean if you're SSD, then sure, great, hell, the argument is there for RAID 5, but then, back to only able to loose one drive, so meh. But RAID 6 is so bloody slow compared to RAID 10, etc. If that's the only reason you're going RAID 6, I'm not sure the logic is there to support it.
To me it's simple. If you need speed you are on SSDs. Period.
If you need storage space then it's 3.5" HDDs with RAID1 for a small array (<=16TB) and RAID6 for a large array.There might be some need for RAID10 on HDDs somewhere but I think it's making less and less sense.
-
@Pete-S said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@Dashrender said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@Pete-S said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
I think he meant that RAID10 can only handle 1 drive failure with certainty, while RAID6 can handle 2 drive failures with certainty.
Rebuild is not much different really. On RAID6 all drives in the arrays are read concurrently and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. On RAID10 one drive is read and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. So the read intensity and write intensity is the same per drive, there are just more drives that needs to be read when rebuilding a RAID6 array.
Sure, it can handle two drive failures - but at what costs? I mean if you're SSD, then sure, great, hell, the argument is there for RAID 5, but then, back to only able to loose one drive, so meh. But RAID 6 is so bloody slow compared to RAID 10, etc. If that's the only reason you're going RAID 6, I'm not sure the logic is there to support it.
To me it's simple. If you need speed you are on SSDs. Period.
If you need storage space then it's 3.5" HDDs with RAID1 for a small array (<=16TB) and RAID6 for a large array.aww, so you're just against RAID 10 or RAID 5 period.
-
@PhlipElder said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@Obsolesce said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@manxam said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@PhlipElder : Why did you stop deploying RAID 10? It's about the most fault tolerant and performance oriented RAID config one can get for hardware RAID.
Nope.
Had a virtualization host RAID 10 drive, of six, die.
I popped by, did a hot swap of the dead drive, rebuild started, and I sat for a coffee with the on-site IT person.
About 5 minutes into that coffee we heard a BEEP, BEEP-BEEP, and then nothing. It was sitting at the RAID POST prompt indicating failed array and no POST.
It's pair had died too.
I'll stick with RAID 6 thank you very much. We'd still have had the server.
We ended up installing a fresh OS, setting things up, and recovering from backup (ShadowProtect) after flattening and setting up the array again.
You can't say that. There's way more work being done on the drives with a RAID6, maybe then 3 or 4 drives would have went out close together instead of just two. If you think a RAID10 was the cause of 2 drives dieing, then holy shit a RAID 6 woulda killed 3+.
My guesses are one or more of the folowing:
- a bad batch of drives
- wrong drives
- drives used past their warranty/expectancy or whatever
- lack of monitoring
And by the way, a RAID 10 isn't really a "rebuild". It's not a very disk intensive thing like it is with a RAID 6.
Please re-read what I wrote and stop interpreting it.
I'm curious where he got it wrong? RAID 10's are considered ridiculously reliable. The most likely reason for a failure of two drives in a RAID 10 is a single batch of drives - so they all or several reach failure at the same time.
-
@Dashrender said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@Pete-S said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@Dashrender said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
@Pete-S said in How can we recover data from Hard Drives were on RAID 10 without controller?:
I think he meant that RAID10 can only handle 1 drive failure with certainty, while RAID6 can handle 2 drive failures with certainty.
Rebuild is not much different really. On RAID6 all drives in the arrays are read concurrently and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. On RAID10 one drive is read and one full drive of data is written to the new drive. So the read intensity and write intensity is the same per drive, there are just more drives that needs to be read when rebuilding a RAID6 array.
Sure, it can handle two drive failures - but at what costs? I mean if you're SSD, then sure, great, hell, the argument is there for RAID 5, but then, back to only able to loose one drive, so meh. But RAID 6 is so bloody slow compared to RAID 10, etc. If that's the only reason you're going RAID 6, I'm not sure the logic is there to support it.
To me it's simple. If you need speed you are on SSDs. Period.
If you need storage space then it's 3.5" HDDs with RAID1 for a small array (<=16TB) and RAID6 for a large array.aww, so you're just against RAID 10 or RAID 5 period.
For HDDs in general - yes.
