Solved

Inherited a server that is showing a RAID problem

Posted on 2013-12-10
4
949 Views
Last Modified: 2013-12-31
I just picked up a new site and one of the old-ish servers (about 3-4 years old) is an Chartec server based on the Intel RAID controller SROMBSASMR.  It is showing "SAS topology error: Device not addressable", but the strange thing is it has no SAS drives.  There are 4 SATA drives in a RAID 6 container and all show online and the container itself is not degraded.

I googled the error message, and found many LSI chipset manuals that have the same error code, and error message, but it doesn't say what the error means or how to go about correcting it.  So other than reading in the manual it is a possible error, I don;t know my next move.

The RAID log shows this as far back as the beginning of the log, which is earlier this year back in Feb, so I am guessing it has been throwing this for quite some time.  Anyone have suggestions how to resolve this?

Anyone
0
Comment
Question by:tsaico
  • 2
4 Comments
 
LVL 47

Accepted Solution

by:
dlethe earned 250 total points
ID: 39712181
The server likely USED to have SAS drives attached to one of the external ports.   Make sure there are no virtual drives defined other than the RAID6 (the disks do emulate SAS drives, BTW).

In order to fix the problem, you may have to do a bare metal backup, blow the configuration away and then rebuild the LUN.

Personally I wouldn't worry about it.  It isn't hurting anything other than creating log messages.
0
 
LVL 27

Assisted Solution

by:Steve
Steve earned 250 total points
ID: 39715269
I agree. This sounds like an old config that wasnt removed when drives were replaced with sata.

Its not ideal to leave a raid card in a confused state, but may not be worth the effort to fix if you are sure the current (and only remaining) raid is healthy.
0
 
LVL 9

Author Comment

by:tsaico
ID: 39720820
Yeah, I am thinking the same.  As long as I can wait out a couple of years, the issue will go away since it has to be retired anyhow...
0
 
LVL 9

Author Comment

by:tsaico
ID: 39748449
Just in case anyone reads this old post,

By chance I had noticed one of the SATA drives had a different speed.  (8 of the drives were showing 3 GPs negotiated 6 actual) except for one.  It was showing 3 and 3 respectively.  I pulled the drive and replaced it with a 6 like the others and the error went away after the rebuild happened.  Of course still SATA and still negotiated at 3 GPs, but at least one less error message.

My guess is all of the original drives had failed at one point and been replaced with this one being the last.  Why that would throw an error like this though, who knows?
0

Featured Post

Threat Intelligence Starter Resources

Integrating threat intelligence can be challenging, and not all companies are ready. These resources can help you build awareness and prepare for defense.

Join & Write a Comment

Suggested Solutions

Learn about cloud computing and its benefits for small business owners.
Data center, now-a-days, is referred as the home of all the advanced technologies. In-fact, most of the businesses are now establishing their entire organizational structure around the IT capabilities.
Access reports are powerful and flexible. Learn how to create a query and then a grouped report using the wizard. Modify the report design after the wizard is done to make it look better. There will be another video to explain how to put the final p…
In this tutorial you'll learn about bandwidth monitoring with flows and packet sniffing with our network monitoring solution PRTG Network Monitor (https://www.paessler.com/prtg). If you're interested in additional methods for monitoring bandwidt…

708 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question

Need Help in Real-Time?

Connect with top rated Experts

16 Experts available now in Live!

Get 1:1 Help Now