[zfs-discuss] broken zfs root

00 %l4-7: 0183d400 0180c000 0001 skipping system dump - no dump device configured rebooting... Res LOM event: +0h1m59s host reset etting ... -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ ___ zfs-discuss mailing li

Re: [zfs-discuss] Solaris disk confusion ?

ol10 x86 format binary would help... -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Solaris disk confusion ?

to give the same "dd" treatment to the end of the disk as well; ZFS puts copies of its labels at the beginning and at the end. Oh, and im not sure what you mean here - I thought p0 was the entire disk in x86 - and s2 was the whole disk in the partition. what else should i overwrite? T

[zfs-discuss] Solaris disk confusion ?

v/rdsk/c12t1d0 | grep Serial Serial number: 3KR2FXB77651PJE6 any ideas?? -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs bug

import -f tank that is what is causing the breakage, not necessarily the softlink itself. how do i amend the CR? should i just make a new one ? Thanks for your follow up, Trevor. -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs

[zfs-discuss] zfs bug

I entered CR 6883885 at bugs.opensolaris.org. someone closed it - not reproducible. Where do i find more information, like which planet's gravitational properties affect the zfs source code ?? -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ __

Re: [zfs-discuss] If you have ZFS in production, willing to share some details (with me)?

On 9/22/2009 1:55 PM, Jeremy Kister wrote: (b) 2 of them have 268GB raw 26 HP 300GB SCA disks with mirroring + 2 hot spares 28 * 300G = 8.2T. Not 268G. "Math class is tough!" -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ ___ z

Re: [zfs-discuss] If you have ZFS in production, willing to share some details (with me)?

in the line to begin with. Yet 93% of people complied. A request without “because” in it (”Can I jump the line, please?”) generated 24% compliance. -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opens

[zfs-discuss] backup disk of rpool on solaris

- no dump device configured þebooting... I've googled plenty, but don't see what's going on. Can anyone tell me how to make this work ? -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@

Re: [zfs-discuss] If you have ZFS in production, willing to share some details (with me)?

On 9/18/2009 1:51 PM, Steffen Weiberle wrote: I am trying to compile some deployment scenarios of ZFS. # of systems do zfs root count? or only big pools? amount of storage raw or after parity ? -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net

Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz replace issue

t9d0ONLINE 0 0 0 replacing DEGRADED 0 0 0 c5t9d0s0/o UNAVAIL 0 0 0 cannot open c5t9d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 woohoo! i've never had to use either "s0" or "s0/o", but hey, i'

Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz replace issue

was relevant to include them all in the email to the list. they're all working fine and are just more raidz1s. but i'll surely post the entire output of zpool status if anyone wants. -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ ___ zfs

[zfs-discuss] raidz replace issue

t9d0 with c5t9d0: no such device in pool # suex zpool replace nfspool c5t90d0 c5t14d0 cannot replace c5t9d0 with c5t14d0: no such device in pool Any clues on what to do here ? -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./ ___

[zfs-discuss] read errors observed after scrub

s) ? # smartctl -a /dev/rdsk/c2t1d0 | grep defect Elements in grown defect list: 3 # smartctl -a /dev/rdsk/c2t4d0 | grep defect Elements in grown defect list: 3 # smartctl -a /dev/rdsk/c2t5d0 | grep defect Elements in grown defect list: 2 -- Jer

Re: [zfs-discuss] unexpected ZFS behavior

On 2/5/2008 2:45 PM, Jeremy Kister wrote: >> 1. What do I have to do (short of replacing the seemingly good disk) to >> get c3t8d0 back online? I ended up applying patches 124205-05 and 118855-36. things are much better now, but there are still [at least] two issues remaining. w

Re: [zfs-discuss] unexpected ZFS behavior

On 2/4/2008 5:40 PM, Jeremy Kister wrote: > 1. What do I have to do (short of replacing the seemingly good disk) to > get c3t8d0 back online? I did find a related thread: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2006-June/032179.html but the thread ended without a resolution.

[zfs-discuss] unexpected ZFS behavior

replacing the seemingly good disk) to get c3t8d0 back online? 2. Is there an alternative to the seemingly necessary reboot when the zfs pool locks? 3. Is the pool locking due to a possible problem in u3 that is addressed in u4 and beyond ? -- Jeremy Kister http://jeremy.kister.net./