Drive Genius 3 says, that there is an issue with consistency on my Disk Util RAID0 volume (two 2.0 TB enterprise WDs). Should I believe it and let the Drive Genius do its repair or is this error message somehow connected with the fact, that the volume is a strip?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Drive Genius and software RAIDed HDDs
- Thread starter Honbe
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In general, using third party tools to fix software RAID volumes isn't the greatest idea in the world. As you may have noticed Disk Utility is broken (and it's still broken under 10.7.1).
Disk Utility is just a GUI for the diskutil command which you can find in Terminal.
If you want to verify your RAID post-Lion, do this:
$ diskutil list
You'll get a list of physical disks, followed by virtual disks (such as you RAIDs) listed at the end.
To run verification do:
diskutil verifyVolume /dev/disk#
So, for instance, if your RAID is listed with the first command as disk7, you'd do:
diskutil verifyVolume /dev/disk7
For further info type: man diskutil in Terminal and you will be presented with every single option, including repair, which were previously available in the Disk Utility GUI, but remain broken until whenever Apple decides that Software RAID is important enough to at least fix their Disk Utility app.
I would seriously use diskutil to check your RAID before trusting whatever Drive Genius is telling you. I would also very seriously make sure you have a backup before allowing Drive Genius to make any changes to your RAID, or you could wind up with an epic disaster instead of fixing a problem which may or may not exist, and could simply be Drive Genius not yet being updated to work with software RAID under Lion.
Why nobody at Apple seems to care about something as basic as their GUI for diskutil being broken right through their first bug-fix release post Lion, is unknown.
p.s., You did not mention what OS you are running. If you're still on Snow Leopard or something older, just use Disk Utility (found in /Applications/Utilities) to check the RAID, it'll work correctly.
Disk Utility is just a GUI for the diskutil command which you can find in Terminal.
If you want to verify your RAID post-Lion, do this:
$ diskutil list
You'll get a list of physical disks, followed by virtual disks (such as you RAIDs) listed at the end.
To run verification do:
diskutil verifyVolume /dev/disk#
So, for instance, if your RAID is listed with the first command as disk7, you'd do:
diskutil verifyVolume /dev/disk7
For further info type: man diskutil in Terminal and you will be presented with every single option, including repair, which were previously available in the Disk Utility GUI, but remain broken until whenever Apple decides that Software RAID is important enough to at least fix their Disk Utility app.
I would seriously use diskutil to check your RAID before trusting whatever Drive Genius is telling you. I would also very seriously make sure you have a backup before allowing Drive Genius to make any changes to your RAID, or you could wind up with an epic disaster instead of fixing a problem which may or may not exist, and could simply be Drive Genius not yet being updated to work with software RAID under Lion.
Why nobody at Apple seems to care about something as basic as their GUI for diskutil being broken right through their first bug-fix release post Lion, is unknown.
p.s., You did not mention what OS you are running. If you're still on Snow Leopard or something older, just use Disk Utility (found in /Applications/Utilities) to check the RAID, it'll work correctly.
Thanks a lot for your response. Of course I am running Lion 10.7.1. I ran diskutil as per your advise and verify shows RAID0 volume is "corrupt and needs to be repaired". Basically what Drive Genius says.
So that should I let diskutil to repair the RAID0 volume?
BTW, I am far from being expert. I was really surprised there is no possibility to do this via Disk Utility. Now I know...
----------
This is what diskutil verify says:
Started file system verification on disk2 Name
Checking file system
Checking Journaled HFS Plus volume
Checking extents overflow file
Checking catalog file
Checking multi-linked files
Checking catalog hierarchy
Checking extended attributes file
Checking volume bitmap
Checking volume information
Volume header needs minor repair
The volume Name was found corrupt and needs to be repaired
Error: -69845: File system verify or repair failed
Underlying error: 8: POSIX reports: Exec format error
So that should I let diskutil to repair the RAID0 volume?
BTW, I am far from being expert. I was really surprised there is no possibility to do this via Disk Utility. Now I know...
----------
This is what diskutil verify says:
Started file system verification on disk2 Name
Checking file system
Checking Journaled HFS Plus volume
Checking extents overflow file
Checking catalog file
Checking multi-linked files
Checking catalog hierarchy
Checking extended attributes file
Checking volume bitmap
Checking volume information
Volume header needs minor repair
The volume Name was found corrupt and needs to be repaired
Error: -69845: File system verify or repair failed
Underlying error: 8: POSIX reports: Exec format error
If Disk Utility fails to repair it. diskutil will fail as well. Use Diskwarrior. I have yet to trust Drive Genius. I have a free copy they gave me but I am nervous about using it. That being said their Data Recovery software is tops. So maybe I am being overly cautious. You need to repair the directory on your RAID. NOT the physical sectors. This is almost a normal occurrence on HFS+ lately for me.
Disk Utility is not able to repair, the option is grayed for RAID volume. I do not have Diskwarrior, just Drive Genius (and Data Rescue). Used both before, without any problems. Still a little hesitant to use Drive Genius in this case, nevertheless that volume is backed up...
Well you need it. Support for it actually dictates whether I upgrade OS versions or not. Saved hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of data spanning many clients. It is the Citizen Kane of Mac SW and it only does 1 thing
Well you need it. Support for it actually dictates whether I upgrade OS versions or not. Saved hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of data spanning many clients. It is the Citizen Kane of Mac SW and it only does 1 thing
Does it fully support 10.7.1 Lion?
I don't know. I don't use Lion. Sorry. Have many copies. Don't like it very much.
----------
Yep. It is Lion compatible. You have to use version 4.3 though. Instructions on their page.
http://www.alsoft.com/diskwarrior/requirements.html
----------
Yep. It is Lion compatible. You have to use version 4.3 though. Instructions on their page.
http://www.alsoft.com/diskwarrior/requirements.html
I'm glad things turned out well for you. Make sure you have backups! Like NOW would be a good time to make sure.
+99e99 for Disk Warrior being an excellent app that can save you in all kinds of situations!
Drive Genius I dunno much about.
Single point: somebody said "...if Disk Utility fails to fix the problem, diskutil will also fail." Usually yes. But under Lion that's not true. Disk Utility is just a GUI for the diskutil *nix command. Under Lion (including 10.7.1) the GUI, by which I mean to say Disk Utility.app is broken. It will always fail to fix anything or verify *anything at all* under software RAID, but it's the GUI that's broken, the command line diskutil continues working as expected.
+99e99 for Disk Warrior being an excellent app that can save you in all kinds of situations!
Drive Genius I dunno much about.
Single point: somebody said "...if Disk Utility fails to fix the problem, diskutil will also fail." Usually yes. But under Lion that's not true. Disk Utility is just a GUI for the diskutil *nix command. Under Lion (including 10.7.1) the GUI, by which I mean to say Disk Utility.app is broken. It will always fail to fix anything or verify *anything at all* under software RAID, but it's the GUI that's broken, the command line diskutil continues working as expected.