On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:42 PM, alessio <ales...@ftgm.it> wrote: > Yes but... what disk? It is c6d0, I suppose, but why all disks are > reported as degraded?
At a guess, since writes to a raidz vdev get striped across all component disks, if it can't successfully reconstruct a block, it can't figure out which disk(s) had bad data, so it marked them all as degraded? I don't know why this wouldn't be reported in checksum errors for the raidz vdev, though. It might have stopped trying to read from that disk with all the errors before it encountered the error that it couldn't recover from (since it no longer had any redundancy), a clear followed by a scrub might be able to recover if this is the case (and that one disk doesn't fail further, and successfully took the writes ZFS sent it during the scrub, and there isn't even more bad data hiding on it...). Checking the SMART data for the disk with the errors reported may shed some light on the issue. Note that raidz-1, especially with a fair number of disks, is not particularly safe (an error encountered while replacing a failed disk is always unrecoverable, for starters). Consider moving to raidz-2 for your number of disks. Tim _______________________________________________ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss