I know nothing, but the inconsistency within
the disklabel report would certainly worry
me. At least until I looked around a little.
Around here:
urtx# hwmgr -view device
HWID: Device Name Mfg Model Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3: /dev/dmapi/dmapi
4: /dev/scp_scsi
5: /dev/kevm
57: /dev/random
58: /dev/urandom
91: /dev/disk/dsk4c FUJITSU MAB3091S SUN9.0G bus-1-targ-2-lun-0
94: /dev/disk/cdrom4c SONY DVD RW AW-Q170A bus-2-targ-0-lun-0
95: /dev/disk/dsk5c SEAGATE ST318404LC bus-0-targ-0-lun-0
96: /dev/disk/dsk6c SEAGATE ST318404LC bus-0-targ-1-lun-0
dsk5 has VMS on it, but dsk6 is a Tru64 boot
disk. These things make a little more sense,
but 14384 and 14080 are not exactly equal,
either:
urtx# disklabel -r dsk6
# /dev/rdisk/dsk6c:
type: SCSI
disk: ST318404LC
label:
flags:
bytes/sector: 512
sectors/track: 421
tracks/cylinder: 6
sectors/cylinder: 2526
cylinders: 14384
sectors/unit: 35566480
rpm: 10016
interleave: 1
trackskew: 75
cylinderskew: 85
headswitch: 0 # milliseconds
track-to-track seek: 0 # milliseconds
drivedata: 0
8 partitions:
# size offset fstype fsize bsize cpg # ~Cyl values
a: 1109466 0 AdvFS # 0 - 439*
b: 6339800 1109466 swap # 439*- 2949*
c: 35566480 0 unused 0 0 # 0 - 14080*
d: 0 0 unused 0 0 # 0 - 0
e: 0 0 unused 0 0 # 0 - 0
f: 28117213 7449266 AdvFS # 2949*- 14080*
g: 17586632 393216 unused 0 0 # 155*- 7117*
h: 17586632 17979848 unused 0 0 # 7117*- 14080*
This one looks better:
urtx# disklabel -r dsk4
# /dev/rdisk/dsk4c:
type: SCSI
disk: MAB3091S SUN9.0
label:
flags:
bytes/sector: 512
sectors/track: 133
tracks/cylinder: 27
sectors/cylinder: 3591
cylinders: 4926
sectors/unit: 17689267
rpm: 7200
interleave: 1
trackskew: 45
cylinderskew: 36
headswitch: 0 # milliseconds
track-to-track seek: 0 # milliseconds
drivedata: 0
8 partitions:
# size offset fstype fsize bsize cpg # ~Cyl values
a: 17689267 0 AdvFS # 0 - 4926*
b: 262144 131072 unused 0 0 # 36*- 109*
c: 17689267 0 unused 0 0 # 0 - 4926*
d: 0 0 unused 0 0 # 0 - 0
e: 0 0 unused 0 0 # 0 - 0
f: 0 0 unused 0 0 # 0 - 0
g: 8648025 393216 unused 0 0 # 109*- 2517*
h: 8648026 9041241 unused 0 0 # 2517*- 4926*
Except that in both cases, the "g" and "h"
partition data seem to have no connection
with reality. dsk4 has one big "a" AdvFS
partition, and dsk6 has "a" (root), "b"
(swap), and "f" (/usr + /var).
On the other hand, with any even semi-modern
SCSI disk, all those sectors/cylinders kinds
of parameters are fictional, so I wouldn't
spend a whole lot of time trying to make
sense of them. diskconfig seems to present a
picture which agrees better with what I
expect to see, but clicking on "Partition
Table..." returns to the land of unreality.
Perhaps those things are all (or mostly) junk
derived from "/etc/disktab", rather than
anything significant associated with the
actual disk. It sure looks that way.
So, I'd guess that the goofy partition table
supplied by disklabel may be safely ignored.
Whether there's a problem with the disk may
remain a mystery, however. Anything
suspicious in the system log files?
For the record, urtx is an XP1000:
urtx# sizer -v
HP Tru64 UNIX V5.1B (Rev. 2650); Fri Mar 20 20:19:48 CDT 2009
urtx# dupatch -track -type patch_level | grep -i 'patch kit '
Patch Kit 5: T64V51BB26AS0005-20050502 OSF540
Patch Kit 6: T64V51BB27AS0006-20061208 OSF540
Patch Kit 7: T64V51BB28AS0007-20090312 OSF540
