- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- HPE ProLiant
- >
- ProLiant Servers (ML,DL,SL)
- >
- Re: High rate failure of 1.2TB HD on HP DL380p Gen...
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-25-2016 11:23 AM
01-25-2016 11:23 AM
High rate failure of 1.2TB HD on HP DL380p Gen8 with fully populated (25) hard drives.
High rate failure of 1.2TB HD on HP DL380p Gen8 with fully populated (25) hard drives.
01-25-2016 12:04 PM
HP DL380p Gen8
Smart Array 420i
25 hard drives
OS - Red Hat 6+
This a global issue...
This brings the total of 1.2TB HDDs replaced to 20 so far, a case was raised with HP because of the high number of failures, there are a couple of strange issues about these incidents, all the failed HDDs are in slot 20 as a hot spare, the controller is at 5.22, yet HP did not pick up on this, if we had received a bad batch of HDDs, the failures would be in various slots, the odds of installing every bad HDD in slot 20 are vast.
Smart Array P420i in Slot 0 (Embedded) (sn: 001438031178480)
array A (SAS, Unused Space: 0 MB)
logicaldrive 1 (279.4 GB, RAID 1, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:1 (port 1I:box 1:bay 1, SAS, 300 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:2 (port 1I:box 1:bay 2, SAS, 300 GB, OK)
array B (SAS, Unused Space: 0 MB)
logicaldrive 2 (16.4 TB, RAID 6, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:3 (port 1I:box 1:bay 3, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:4 (port 1I:box 1:bay 4, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:5 (port 1I:box 1:bay 5, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:6 (port 1I:box 1:bay 6, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:7 (port 1I:box 1:bay 7, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:8 (port 1I:box 1:bay 8, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:9 (port 1I:box 1:bay 9, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:10 (port 1I:box 1:bay 10, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:11 (port 1I:box 1:bay 11, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:12 (port 1I:box 1:bay 12, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 1I:1:13 (port 1I:box 1:bay 13, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 2I:1:14 (port 2I:box 1:bay 14, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 2I:1:15 (port 2I:box 1:bay 15, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 2I:1:16 (port 2I:box 1:bay 16, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 2I:1:17 (port 2I:box 1:bay 17, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 2I:1:18 (port 2I:box 1:bay 18, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 2I:1:19 (port 2I:box 1:bay 19, SAS, 1200.2 GB, OK)
physicaldrive 2I:1:20 (port 2I:box 1:bay 20, SAS, 1200.2 GB, Predictive Failure, spare)
Enclosure SEP (Vendor ID HP, Model Gen8 ServBP 25+2) 377 (WWID: 5001438029C5DE13
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-28-2016 06:47 AM
01-28-2016 06:47 AM
Re: High rate failure of 1.2TB HD on HP DL380p Gen8 with fully populated (25) hard drives.
I didn't see how often a drive will fail for you.
Generally, using disks larger than 1 TB is a RAID 5 is not suggested due to increased rate of failure. This really isn't much different on RAID 6 arrays. RAID 6 will just provide more redundency to make up for the higher rate of drive failures.
I'm not saying you don't have a deeper problem causing the failures, but I just want to make sure you understand that RAID 5 and 6 arrays with disks larger than 1 TB will most certainly have a higher rate of failure than if they were in a RAID 10.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-28-2016 08:18 AM
01-28-2016 08:18 AM
Re: High rate failure of 1.2TB HD on HP DL380p Gen8 with fully populated (25) hard drives.
I agree, but why only on all the failed HDD's are in slot 20 as a hot spare.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
09-08-2016 11:27 AM
09-08-2016 11:27 AM
Re: High rate failure of 1.2TB HD on HP DL380p Gen8 with fully populated (25) hard drives.
i have also same kind of issue. i have around 25 server running with redhat Linux first two disk is mirrored and third is used as Spare disk. and around 13 servers i faced issue spare disk is in predicitive failuer. its very strange still HP is not revert on this
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
09-08-2016 11:52 AM
09-08-2016 11:52 AM
Re: High rate failure of 1.2TB HD on HP DL380p Gen8 with fully populated (25) hard drives.
This is a known controller firmware bug.
A physical drive configured as a spare drive might indicate predictive failure sooner than expected.
Solved in version 7.02.
Hope this helps!
Regards
Torsten.
__________________________________________________
There are only 10 types of people in the world -
those who understand binary, and those who don't.
__________________________________________________
No support by private messages. Please ask the forum!
If you feel this was helpful please click the KUDOS! thumb below!