Re: Removing a failed drive permanently

[Larry Bolhuis <lbolhuis@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I cannot define the 'x' either however some general observations from 
Frankie and Frankie III's Disks. These are an eclectic pile of various 
8, 17, and 35 GB Units.
On Frankie III:
For FC #6719 drives (35GB 10K) It appears that each different 'x' 
defines a different part number. I have -5 -7 and -9s with three 
different part numbers.

For FC #6718 drives (17GB 10K) It appears the same. I have -6s and -7s 
and two part numbers.

For FC #6717 drives (8GB 10K) It appears to ALMOST match. I have -3s and 
-4s and while the -4s are the same part number some -3s are one part 
number and others are a different part number. Hmmmm.

For FC #6714 drives (17GB 7200RPM) I have only -1s and they are all the 
same part number.

On Frankie II:

He has FC #6717s I have -4s and -6s with the *same* part number and -3s 
all with another part number.

Also FC #6713s with -3s and -4s each with unique part numbers.

Persuing a couple of systems with FC #4326 (35GB 15K) tey all have the 
same -number and part numbers.

SO Based on this limited sample I would say the -x number generally 
indicates a particular part number though not perfectly.

 - Larry





Haase, Justin C. wrote:
> Wow!  Ok, trivia king - what's the type for?  I was looking for it the
> other day, and I swore I've seen it before (like for example, 6707-070-x
> - what's x mean?) but I can't find it.
>
> Model - Level - Type, I believe it what disks are represented as.  Below
> are levels, IIRC.
>
>
> --
> Justin C. Haase - Solution Engineer
> IBM Certified Systems Expert - System i
> Kingland Systems Corporation
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Leif Guldbrand -
> Think400.dk
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 3:00 PM
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> Subject: Re: Removing a failed drive permanently
>
> And for the archieves - Disk models (may not be up to date):
>
> 030 - Unprotected or mirrored unit of a type not supported in HA
> controller parity set 
>       (520-byte device).
>
> 050 - Unprotected or mirrored unit of a type supported in HA controller
> parity set membership
>       (522-byte device). Data compression inactive
>
> 060 - Unprotected or mirrored unit of a type supported in HA controller
> parity set membership
>       (522-byte device). Data compression active
>
> 070 - Non-parity unit of parity set (full capacity, 522-byte device).
> Data compression inactive
>
> 072 - Parity unit in parity set with 8 parity units (7/8 capacity,
> 522-byte device). Data
>       compression inactive
>
> 074 - Parity unit in parity set with 4 parity units (3/4 capacity,
> 522-byte device). Data
>       compression inactive.
>
> 080 - Non-parity unit of parity set (full capacity, 522-byte device).
> Data compression active
>
> 082 - Parity unit in parity set with 8 parity units (7/8 capacity,
> 522-byte device). Data
>       compression active
>
> 084 - Parity unit in parity set with 4 parity units (3/4 capacity,
> 522-byte device). Data
>       compression active
>
> Regards
> Leif
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Bolhuis" <lbolhuis@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 3. januar 2007 21:27
> Subject: Re: Removing a failed drive permanently
>
>
>   
> > If the drive is a model 070 then you can remove it from the ASP and
> >     
> then 
>   
> > from the RAID set and then from the system. If it's any other 07x
> >     
> number 
>   
> > then you need to remove it from the ASP, then end RAID, then remove
> >     
> it, 
>   
> > then restart RAID.
> >
> >   - Larry
> >
> > Pete Helgren wrote:
> >     
> > > I have replaced a failed drive with a new drive before but I'd like
> > >       
> to 
>   
> > > pull one that I have no intention of replacing.  The system is at
> > >       
> only 
>   
> > > 20% and losing a 8GB drive will make virtually no difference in
> > >       
> overall 
>   
> > > capacity (this is a seldom used test/development system).
> > >
> > > Once I pull the failed drive, what do I run so that the RAID set
> > >       
> "knows" 
>   
> > > that the drive won't replaced and that it has to rebuild the "lost" 
> > > drive using the remaining drives in the set?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Pete Helgren
> > >       
>
>
>
>