RN214 data degraded even after hard disk replacement

Question

Hello all. I have an RN214 for several years now, comprising of 4 HDDs in one volume. Tray 1 and 2 have 2 4TB HDDs in a RAID1 conformation and Trays 3 and 4 have 2 2TB HDDs also in a RAID1 conformation. All disks are WD RED at 5400rpm with 64MB cache. Two weeks ago, the 4TB HDD in tray 1 died and the system is presenting on its LCD "DATA DEGRADED" ever since. I replaced the failed HDD with a similar one, a 4TB WD RED at 5400rpm with 256MB cache. At some point I got the notice that the system is resyncrhonising and the proccess got up to nearly 35%. Since then nothing constructive happened. The LCD keeps blinking "DATA DEGRADED". Am I doing something wrong? I thought that the resyncronisation proccess should be an automatic procedure after the installation of the new HDD. Is there anything more I ought to do in order for my system to obtain a heathy status once again without losing my data? Thank you in advance.

StephenB · Answer

azees&nbsp;wrote:
&nbsp;I replaced the failed HDD with a similar one, a 4TB WD RED at 5400rpm with 256MB cache.

Unfortunately the WD40EFAX is an SMR drive, not CMR.&nbsp; All the current WD Reds are SMR - the CMR models are now all in the WD Red Plus line.&nbsp; Several folks here have reported issues with the SMR models in OS-6 NAS (similar issues have been reported with competing NAS running ZFS or BTRFS file systems).
&nbsp;
So the new drive might be part of the problem.&nbsp; If it's not too late to exchange it with the seller for a Red Plus (WD40EFRX), I suggest doing that.
&nbsp;
azees&nbsp;wrote:
Is there anything more I ought to do in order for my system to obtain a healthy status once again without losing my data?&nbsp;

Your data is at risk.&nbsp; RAID isn't enough to keep your data safe (many posters here have found that out the hard way).&nbsp; And the degraded volume means you don't have RAID protection right now anyway.&nbsp; If you don't have a backup plan in place for your data, then I recommend taking care of that.&nbsp; Drives (and ReadyNAS) can fail at any time.
&nbsp;
azees&nbsp;wrote:
At some point I got the notice that the system is resynchronising and the process got up to nearly 35%.
&nbsp;
I thought that the resynchronisation proccess should be an automatic procedure after the installation of the new HDD.&nbsp;

It is, if you are running XRAID - and in your case the process did start automatically.&nbsp; If you look on the volume page in the NAS web ui, is the process still being shown as running?&nbsp; If not, is there any indication on the log page that the process failed?
&nbsp;
Please download the full log zip file, and post the contents of mdstat.log (copy/paste in your reply).&nbsp;

azees · Answer

Thank you so much for your reply. The logs do show a resync failure. I paste the content of the "mdstat" file as you asked:

Personalities : [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md126 : active raid1 sdb3[1] sda3[2](S)
3902168832 blocks super 1.2 [2/1] [_U]

md127 : active raid1 sdc3[0] sdd3[1]
1948662784 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]
bitmap: 0/15 pages [0KB], 65536KB chunk

md1 : active raid10 sda2[0] sdd2[3] sdc2[2] sdb2[1]
1044480 blocks super 1.2 512K chunks 2 near-copies [4/4] [UUUU]

md0 : active raid1 sdc1[0] sda1[5] sdb1[3] sdd1[4]
4190208 blocks super 1.2 [4/4] [UUUU]

unused devices: <none>
/dev/md/0:
Version : 1.2
Creation Time : Sat Jul 12 05:25:03 2014
Raid Level : raid1
Array Size : 4190208 (4.00 GiB 4.29 GB)
Used Dev Size : 4190208 (4.00 GiB 4.29 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Persistence : Superblock is persistent

Update Time : Fri Dec 10 21:09:35 2021
State : active
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0

Consistency Policy : unknown

Name : 09e0c79d:0 (local to host 09e0c79d)
UUID : a39f9642:f027c4cd:e6c78a23:9b5a85f6
Events : 555005

Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 33 0 active sync /dev/sdc1
4 8 49 1 active sync /dev/sdd1
3 8 17 2 active sync /dev/sdb1
5 8 1 3 active sync /dev/sda1
/dev/md/1:
Version : 1.2
Creation Time : Sat Dec 4 21:39:25 2021
Raid Level : raid10
Array Size : 1044480 (1020.00 MiB 1069.55 MB)
Used Dev Size : 522240 (510.00 MiB 534.77 MB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Persistence : Superblock is persistent

Update Time : Fri Dec 10 21:08:20 2021
State : clean
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0

Layout : near=2
Chunk Size : 512K

Consistency Policy : unknown

Name : 09e0c79d:1 (local to host 09e0c79d)
UUID : 3d015c59:09fa392c:49a1f6cf:f46875ac
Events : 19

Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 2 0 active sync set-A /dev/sda2
1 8 18 1 active sync set-B /dev/sdb2
2 8 34 2 active sync set-A /dev/sdc2
3 8 50 3 active sync set-B /dev/sdd2
/dev/md/data-0:
Version : 1.2
Creation Time : Sat Jul 12 05:25:04 2014
Raid Level : raid1
Array Size : 1948662784 (1858.39 GiB 1995.43 GB)
Used Dev Size : 1948662784 (1858.39 GiB 1995.43 GB)
Raid Devices : 2
Total Devices : 2
Persistence : Superblock is persistent

Intent Bitmap : Internal

Update Time : Fri Dec 10 21:09:23 2021
State : clean
Active Devices : 2
Working Devices : 2
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0

Consistency Policy : unknown

Name : 09e0c79d:data-0 (local to host 09e0c79d)
UUID : 98d23c1b:880010b6:9d3e98e8:01e17cf8
Events : 27876

Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 8 35 0 active sync /dev/sdc3
1 8 51 1 active sync /dev/sdd3
/dev/md/data-1:
Version : 1.2
Creation Time : Tue Jul 28 10:56:21 2015
Raid Level : raid1
Array Size : 3902168832 (3721.40 GiB 3995.82 GB)
Used Dev Size : 3902168832 (3721.40 GiB 3995.82 GB)
Raid Devices : 2
Total Devices : 2
Persistence : Superblock is persistent

Update Time : Fri Dec 10 21:09:23 2021
State : clean, degraded
Active Devices : 1
Working Devices : 2
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 1

Consistency Policy : unknown

Name : 09e0c79d:data-1 (local to host 09e0c79d)
UUID : 3bec5d68:ea24fbde:1034161c:4cd3ed69
Events : 133659

Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
- 0 0 0 removed
1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3

2 8 3 - spare /dev/sda3

StephenB · Answer

azees&nbsp;wrote:
&nbsp;
Personalities : [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]md126 : active raid1 sdb3[1] sda3[2](S)3902168832 blocks super 1.2 [2/1] [_U]
&nbsp;
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State- 0 0 0 removed1 8 19 1 active sync /dev/sdb3
2 8 3 - spare /dev/sda3

sda (normally disk 1) has been marked as a spare for some reason.
&nbsp;
Can you give us more details on why the resync failed?&nbsp; you might need to look for disk errors in system.log and kernel.log at around the time of the resync failure message.
&nbsp;
I do recommend backing up the data on this volume, as it is at risk.
&nbsp;
&nbsp;

azees · Answer

Hello and thank you very much for your time. I understand your advice and I realise that my data are not safe at the moment, but the reason I am using the RN214 is to take backup of my personal files at home. I cannot proccess any procedure in which I can take backup of my backup, without spending a whole lot of money on an insanely expensive external disk, with a capacity of 6 TB or more. I believe that my NAS should do its job and restore my RAID1 configuration so as for my data to be in one more copy. I am about to change my newly purchased SMR HDD to a CMR HDD in hope that the resynchronisation process will be completed successfuly. The resynchronisation process took place from the 4th until the 5th of December at the most. I am giving you the corresponding files, system.log and kernel.log, that you asked, since their content isn't small enough to be pasted in this text editor. Firstly, I am attaching the systel.log file in this post, and the kernel.log in the next one in pdf format. Thank you so much.&nbsp;&nbsp;

azees · Answer

The kernel.log file.

Forum Discussion

RN214 data degraded even after hard disk replacement

6 Replies

Related Content

RN214 replacement tray

Failed Drive Replaced, Recync Complete, But Volume Is Still Degraded

RN214 replacing hard disks

RN214 replacing good hard disks to more capacity

Degraded Drive Replacement Ready Nas 422

NETGEAR Academy

ProSupport for Business