Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS HW RAID
Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, David Magda wrote: If you care to keep your pool up and alive as much as possible, then mirroring across SAN devices is recommended. One suggestion I heard was to get a LUN that's twice the size, and set copies=2. This way you have some redundancy for incorrect checksums. This only helps for block-level corruption. It does not help much at all if a whole LUN goes away. It seems best for single disk rpools. I second this. In my experience you are more likely to have a single LUN go missing for some reason or another and it seems most prudent to support any production data volume with at the very minimum a mirror. This also give you 2 copies in a far more resilient way generally. (and per my other post, there can be other niceties that come with it as well when couple with SAN based LUNS.) Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS HW RAID
All this reminds me: how much work (if any) has been done on the asyncronous mirroring option? That is, for supporting mirrors with radically different access times? (useful for supporting a mirror across a WAN, where you have hundred(s)-millisecond latency to the other side of the mirror)? -Erik Scott Lawson wrote: Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, David Magda wrote: If you care to keep your pool up and alive as much as possible, then mirroring across SAN devices is recommended. One suggestion I heard was to get a LUN that's twice the size, and set copies=2. This way you have some redundancy for incorrect checksums. This only helps for block-level corruption. It does not help much at all if a whole LUN goes away. It seems best for single disk rpools. I second this. In my experience you are more likely to have a single LUN go missing for some reason or another and it seems most prudent to support any production data volume with at the very minimum a mirror. This also give you 2 copies in a far more resilient way generally. (and per my other post, there can be other niceties that come with it as well when couple with SAN based LUNS.) Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS HW RAID
I asked the same question about one year ago here, and the posts poured in. Search for my user id? There is more info in that thread about which is best: ZFS vs ZFS+HWraid -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Crazy Phantom Zpools Again
On 18.09.09 22:18, Dave Abrahams wrote: I just did a fresh reinstall of OpenSolaris and I'm again seeing the phenomenon described in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.solaris.opensolaris.zfs/26259 which I posted many months ago and got no reply to. Can someone *please* help me figure out what's going on here? Can you provide output of zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c8t1d0p0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c8t1d0s0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c9t0d0p0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c9t0d0s0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c9t1d0p0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c9t1d0s0 as a starter? I suspect there's some stale labels accessible through ...p0 devices (may be back labels only that unfortunately allow to open some pools that existed before. So let's start finding this out. victor ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Persistent errors - do I believe?
On 17.09.09 21:44, Chris Murray wrote: Thanks David. Maybe I mis-understand how a replace works? When I added disk E, and used 'zpool replace [A] [E]' (still can't remember those drive names), I thought that disk A would still be part of the pool, and read from in order to build the contents of disk E? Exactly. Disks A and E will be arranged into special vdev of type 'replacing' beneath the raidz vdev which behaves like a mirror. As soon as resilvering is complete, disk A will be removed from this 'replacing' mirror making disk E to stay alone in the raidz vdev. victor ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Crazy Phantom Zpools Again
Hey, thanks for following up. on Sat Sep 19 2009, Victor Latushkin Victor.Latushkin-AT-Sun.COM wrote: Can you provide output of zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c8t1d0p0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c8t1d0s0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c9t0d0p0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c9t0d0s0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c9t1d0p0 zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c9t1d0s0 as a starter? I suspect there's some stale labels accessible through ...p0 devices (may be back labels only that unfortunately allow to open some pools that existed before. So let's start finding this out. d...@hoss:~# zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c8t1d0p0 LABEL 0 version=14 name='Xc8t1d0p0' state=0 txg=67 pool_guid=799109629249470450 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' top_guid=14688829453117747875 guid=14688829453117747875 vdev_tree type='disk' id=0 guid=14688829453117747875 path='/dev/dsk/c8t1d0p0' devid='id1,s...@sata_st3500641as_3pm0bxs4/q' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@7/d...@1,0:q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=32 ashift=9 asize=500103118848 is_log=0 LABEL 1 version=14 name='Xc8t1d0p0' state=0 txg=67 pool_guid=799109629249470450 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' top_guid=14688829453117747875 guid=14688829453117747875 vdev_tree type='disk' id=0 guid=14688829453117747875 path='/dev/dsk/c8t1d0p0' devid='id1,s...@sata_st3500641as_3pm0bxs4/q' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@7/d...@1,0:q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=32 ashift=9 asize=500103118848 is_log=0 LABEL 2 version=14 name='Xc8t1d0p0' state=0 txg=67 pool_guid=799109629249470450 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' top_guid=14688829453117747875 guid=14688829453117747875 vdev_tree type='disk' id=0 guid=14688829453117747875 path='/dev/dsk/c8t1d0p0' devid='id1,s...@sata_st3500641as_3pm0bxs4/q' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@7/d...@1,0:q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=32 ashift=9 asize=500103118848 is_log=0 LABEL 3 version=14 name='Xc8t1d0p0' state=0 txg=67 pool_guid=799109629249470450 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' top_guid=14688829453117747875 guid=14688829453117747875 vdev_tree type='disk' id=0 guid=14688829453117747875 path='/dev/dsk/c8t1d0p0' devid='id1,s...@sata_st3500641as_3pm0bxs4/q' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@7/d...@1,0:q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=32 ashift=9 asize=500103118848 is_log=0 d...@hoss:~# zdb -l /dev/rdsk/c8t1d0s0 LABEL 0 version=14 name='tank' state=0 txg=321059 pool_guid=18040158237637153559 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' top_guid=17370712873548817583 guid=5539950970989281033 vdev_tree type='raidz' id=0 guid=17370712873548817583 nparity=2 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=35 ashift=9 asize=4000755744768 is_log=0 children[0] type='disk' id=0 guid=17720655760296015906 path='/dev/dsk/c8t0d0s0' devid='id1,s...@sata_st3500641as_3pm0j4rw/a' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@7/d...@0,0:a' whole_disk=1 DTL=35 children[1] type='disk' id=1 guid=5539950970989281033 path='/dev/dsk/c8t1d0s0' devid='id1,s...@sata_st3500641as_3pm0bxs4/a' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@7/d...@1,0:a' whole_disk=1 DTL=34 children[2] type='disk' id=2 guid=11100368085398512076 path='/dev/dsk/c9t0d0s0' devid='id1,s...@sata_wdc_wd5000aacs-0_wd-wcasu4279114/a' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@8/d...@0,0:a' whole_disk=1 DTL=33 children[3] type='disk' id=3 guid=6967063319981472993 path='/dev/dsk/c9t1d0s0'
Re: [zfs-discuss] Crazy Phantom Zpools Again
on Fri Sep 18 2009, Cindy Swearingen Cindy.Swearingen-AT-Sun.COM wrote: Not much help, but some ideas: 1. What does the zpool history -l output say for the phantom pools? d...@hoss:~# zpool history -l Xc8t1d0p0 History for 'Xc8t1d0p0': 2009-05-14.06:00:20 zpool create Xc8t1d0p0 c8t1d0p0 [user root on hydrasol:global] 2009-06-07.21:42:44 zpool export Xc8t1d0p0 Xc9t0d0p0 [user root on hoss:global] d...@hoss:~# zpool history -l Xc9t0d0p0 History for 'Xc9t0d0p0': 2009-05-14.06:00:24 zpool create Xc9t0d0p0 c9t0d0p0 [user root on hydrasol:global] d...@hoss:~# zpool history -l Xc9t1d0p0 History for 'Xc9t1d0p0': 2009-05-14.06:00:26 zpool create Xc9t1d0p0 c9t1d0p0 [user root on hydrasol:global] 2009-06-07.21:30:42 zpool import -a -f [user root on hoss:global] 2009-06-07.21:42:51 zpool export Xc8t1d0p0 Xc9t1d0p0 [user root on hoss:global] 2009-09-17.15:04:23 zpool import -a [user root on hoss:global] d...@hoss:~# Were they created at the same time as the root pool or the same time as tank? No, earlier apparently, and they've been through a few OS reinstalls 2. The phantom pools contain the c8t1* and c9t1* fdisk partitions (p0s) that are in your tank pool as whole disks. A strange coincidence. Does zdb output or fmdump output identify the relationship, if any, between the c8 and c9 devices in the phantom pools and tank? I don't know how to read that stuff, but I've attached my zdb output. fmdump is essentially empty. 3. I can file a bug for you. Please provide the system information, such as hardware, disks, OS release. Thanks. The hardware is all described at http://techarcana.net/hydra/hardware/. The OS release is OpenSolaris 0906 with latest updates. d...@hoss:~# zdb Xc8t1d0p0 version=14 name='Xc8t1d0p0' state=0 txg=67 pool_guid=799109629249470450 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' vdev_tree type='root' id=0 guid=799109629249470450 children[0] type='disk' id=0 guid=14688829453117747875 path='/dev/dsk/c8t1d0p0' devid='id1,s...@sata_st3500641as_3pm0bxs4/q' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@7/d...@1,0:q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=32 ashift=9 asize=500103118848 is_log=0 Xc9t0d0p0 version=14 name='Xc9t0d0p0' state=0 txg=66 pool_guid=12655905567020654415 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' vdev_tree type='root' id=0 guid=12655905567020654415 children[0] type='disk' id=0 guid=611575587582790566 path='/dev/dsk/c9t0d0p0' devid='id1,s...@sata_wdc_wd5000aacs-0_wd-wcasu4279114/q' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@8/d...@0,0:q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=32 ashift=9 asize=500103118848 is_log=0 Xc9t1d0p0 version=14 name='Xc9t1d0p0' state=0 txg=67 pool_guid=13088732420232844728 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' vdev_tree type='root' id=0 guid=13088732420232844728 children[0] type='disk' id=0 guid=5881429924050167143 path='/dev/dsk/c9t1d0p0' devid='id1,s...@sata_wdc_wd5000aacs-0_wd-wcasu3010505/q' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci10f1,2...@8/d...@1,0:q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=32 ashift=9 asize=500103118848 is_log=0 rpool version=14 name='rpool' state=0 txg=3151 pool_guid=8480802010740526288 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' vdev_tree type='root' id=0 guid=8480802010740526288 children[0] type='disk' id=0 guid=10153492011253799981 path='/dev/dsk/c7d0s0' devid='id1,c...@awdc_wd1600aajb-00j3a0=_wd-wcav30909252/a' phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci-...@6/i...@0/c...@0,0:a' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=30 ashift=9 asize=160001425408 is_log=0 tank version=14 name='tank' state=0 txg=321059 pool_guid=18040158237637153559 hostid=674932 hostname='hoss' vdev_tree type='root' id=0 guid=18040158237637153559 children[0] type='raidz' id=0 guid=17370712873548817583 nparity=2 metaslab_array=23 metaslab_shift=35 ashift=9 asize=4000755744768
Re: [zfs-discuss] Adding new disks and ditto block behaviour
Yeah, after I learned that ditto blocks don't protect against failed drives, I started working on a plan to move to raidz. I couldn't find any good documentation on setting multiple filesystems systems in one pool, though I know it is possible. I think I have enough storage to work this together somehow, but I think I need to read more and plan more. Thanks for your response On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote: On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Joe Toppi wrote: I filled this with data. So I added a 1.5 TB drive to the pool. Where will my ditto blocks and checksums go? Will it migrate data from the other drives automatically? Will it migrate data if I scrub or re-silver? will it never migrate data and just store all the new blocks and checksums on the new drive? Zfs does not automatically migrate data just because you added more drives. Scrub will only migrate failing data blocks. Resilver clones a failing disk. When a vdev becomes very full, more writes will be directed to the empty devices. If you have enough free disk space to store everything you had before, plus lots of space to spare, you could try creating a new filesystem in the pool and using zfs send to send from the existing filesystem to the new filesystem, and then destroy the old filesystem once you are satisified with the new one. This would only work if there is considerably more free space than existing data and the result will still be lop-sided. If you have a whole lot of reliable storage space elsewhere, you could use zfs send to send to a file in that other storage space, destroy the old filesystem, and then recreate it with your zfs send file. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ -- - Joe Toppi (402) 714-7539 top...@gmail.com http://www.assuredts.com/toppij/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ZFS and HW RAID
Hello folks, I am sure this topic has been asked, but I am new to this list. I have read a ton of doc¹s on the web, but wanted to get some opinions from you all. Also, if someone has a digest of the last time this was discussed, you can just send that to me. In any case, I am reading a lot of mixed reviews related to ZFS on HW RAID devices. The Sun docs seem to indicate it possible, but not a recommended course. I realize there are some advantages, such as snapshots, etc. But, the h/w raid will handle most¹ disk problems, basically reducing the great capabilities of the big reasons to deploy zfs. One suggestion would be to create the h/w RAID LUNs as usual, present them to the OS, then do simple striping with ZFS. Here are my two applications, where I am presented with this possibility: Sun Messaging Environment: We currently use EMC storage. The storage team manages all Enterprise storage. We currently have 10x300gb UFS mailstores presented to the OS. Each LUN is a HW RAID 5 device. We will be upgrading the application and doing a hardware refresh of this environment, which will give us the chance to move to ZFS, but stay on EMC storage. I am sure the storage team will not want to present us with JBOD. It is there practice to create the HW LUNs and present them to the application teams. I don¹t want to end up with a complicated scenario, but would like to leverage the most I can with ZFS, but on the EMC array as I mentioned. Sun Directory Environment: The directory team is running HP DL385 G2, which also has a built-in HW RAID controller for 5 internal SAS disks. The team currently has DS5.2 deployed on RHEL3, but as we move to DS6.3.1, they may want to move to Solaris 10. We have an opportunity to move to ZFS in this environment, but am curious how to best leverage ZFS capabilities in this scenario. JBOD is very clear, but a lot of manufacturers out there are still offering HW RAID technologies, with high-speed caches. Using ZFS with these is not very clear to me, and as I mentioned, there are very mixed reviews, not on ZFS features, but how it¹s used in HW RAID settings. Thanks for any observations. Lloyd ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] addendum: zpool UNAVAIL even though disk is online: another label issue?
Victor Latushkin wrote: I think you need to get a closer look at your another disk. Is it possible to get result of (change controller/target numbers as appropriate if needed) dd if=/dev/rdsk/c8t0d0p0 bs=1024k count=4 | bzip2 -9 c8t0d0p0.front.bz2 while booted off OpenSolaris CD? not anymore - I realised I had no relevant data on the box, so I re-installed to get going again. thx Michael -- Michael Schuster http://blogs.sun.com/recursion Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion' ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] If you have ZFS in production, willing to share some details (with me)?
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Steffen Weiberle steffen.weibe...@sun.com wrote: I am trying to compile some deployment scenarios of ZFS. # of systems 3 amount of storage 10 TB on storage server (can scale to 30) application profile(s) NFS and CIFS type of workload (low, high; random, sequential; read-only, read-write, write-only) Boot drives, Nearline backup, Postgres DB (OpenNMS) storage type(s) SATA industry Software whether it is private or I can share in a summary anything else that might be of interest You can share my info :) Thanks in advance!! Steffen ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] If you have ZFS in production, willing to share some details (with me)?
In the Eat-Your-Own-Dogfood mode: Here in CSG at Sun (which is mainly all Java-related things): Steffen Weiberle wrote: I am trying to compile some deployment scenarios of ZFS. If you are running ZFS in production, would you be willing to provide (publicly or privately)? # of systems All our central file servers plus the various Source Code repositories (of particular note: http://hg.openjdk.java.net which holds all of the OpenJDK and related source code). Approximately 20 major machines, plus several dozen smaller ones. And that's only what I know about (maybe about 50% of the total organization). amount of storage 45TB+ just on the fileservers and Source Code repos application profile(s) NFS servers, Mercurial Source Code Repositories, Teamware Source Code Repositories, Lightweight web databases (db, postgresql, MySql), Web twikis, flat file data profile storage, Virtualized Host centralized storage. Starting with roll-your-own VTLs. type of workload (low, high; random, sequential; read-only, read-write, write-only) NFS servers: high load (100s of clients per server), random read write, mostly small files. Hg TW source code repos: low load (only on putbacks), huge amounts of small file read/writes (i.e. mostly random) Testing apps: mostly mid-size sequential writes VTL (disk backups): high load streaming writes almost exclusively. xVM systems: moderate to high load, heavy random read, modest random write. storage type(s) Almost exclusively FC-attached SAN. Small amounts of dedicated FC arrays (STK2540 / STK6140), and the odd iSCSI thing here and there. NFS servers are pretty much all T2000. Source Code repos are X4000-series Opteron systems (usually X4200, X4140, or X4240). Thumpers (X4500) are scattered around, and the rest is a total mishmash of both Sun and others. industry Software development whether it is private or I can share in a summary I can't see any reason not to summarize. anything else that might be of interest right now, we're not using SSDs hardly at all, and we unfortunately haven't done much with the Amber Road storage devices (7000-series). Our new interest is the Thumper/Thor (x4500 / x4540 ) machines being used as a disk backup device: we're moving our backups to disk (i.e. client backup goes to disk first, then to tape as needed). This is possible due to ZFS. We're replacing virtually all our VxFS systems with ZFS. Also, the primary development build/test system depends heavily on ZFS for storage, and will lean even more on it as we convert to xVM-based virtualization. I plan on using snapshots to radically reduce disk space required by multiple identical clients, and to make adding and retiring clients simpler. In the case of our Windows clients, I expect ZFS snapshotting to enable me to automaticlly wipe the virtual client after every test run. Which is really nice, considering the flakiness that testing on Windows causes. Thanks in advance!! Steffen -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Fwd: ZFS HW RAID
-- Forwarded message -- From: Al Hopper a...@logical-approach.com Date: Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 5:55 PM Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS HW RAID To: Scott Lawson scott.law...@manukau.ac.nz On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Scott Lawson scott.law...@manukau.ac.nzwrote: . snip .. Sun Directory Environment: The directory team is running HP DL385 G2, which also has a built-in HW RAID controller for 5 internal SAS disks. The team currently has DS5.2 deployed on RHEL3, but as we move to DS6.3.1, they may want to move to Solaris 10. We have an opportunity to move to ZFS in this environment, but am curious how to best leverage ZFS capabilities in this scenario. JBOD is very clear, but a lot of manufacturers out there are still offering HW RAID technologies, with high-speed caches. Using ZFS with these is not very clear to me, and as I mentioned, there are very mixed reviews, not on ZFS features, but how it’s used in HW RAID settings. Sun Directory environment generally isn't very IO intensive, except for in massive data reloads or indexing operations. Other than this it is an ideal candidate for ZFS and it's rather nice ARC cache. Memory is cheap on a lot of boxes and it will make read only type file systems fly. I imagine your actual living LDAP data set on disk probably won't be larger than 10 Gigs or so? I have around 400K objects in mine and it's only about 2 Gigs or so including all our indexes. I tend to tune DS up so that everything it needs is in RAM anyway. As far as diectory server goes, are you using the 64 bit version on Linux? If not you should be as well. It would make sense IMHO to spend your budget on enterprise grade SSDs for this use case than to use EMC based storage. Imagine a 3-way or 4-way mirror of SSDs and the I/O Ops/Sec you'd get for it!! Bear in mind that Intel will soon release their 2nd generation E series SSD products - which is based on SLC flash. I know that politics may get in the way - but for certain workloads, the price/performance of EMC is difficult to justify IMHO. Thanks for any observations. Lloyd -- ___ zfs-discuss mailing listzfs-disc...@opensolaris.orghttp://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- _ Scott Lawson Systems Architect Information Communication Technology Services Manukau Institute of Technology Private Bag 94006 South Auckland Mail Centre Manukau 2240 Auckland New Zealand Phone : +64 09 968 7611 Fax: +64 09 968 7641 Mobile : +64 27 568 7611 mailto:sc...@manukau.ac.nz sc...@manukau.ac.nz http://www.manukau.ac.nz __ perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(115),10);' __ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX a...@logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ -- Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX a...@logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] backup disk of rpool on solaris
I added a disk to the rpool of my zfs root: # zpool attach rpool c1t0d0s0 c1t1d0s0 # installgrub /boot/grub/stage1 /boot/grub/stage2 /dev/rdsk/c1t1d0s0 I waited for the resilver to complete, then i shut the system down. then i physically removed c1t0d0 and put c1t1d0 in it's place. I tried to boot the system, but it panics: SunOS Release 5.10 Version Generic_141415-10 64-bit Copyright 1983-2009 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved. Use is subject to license terms. NOTICE: spa_import_rootpool: error 6 Cannot mount root on /p...@0,0/pci1022,7...@a/pci17c2,1...@4/s...@0,0:a /p...@0,0/pci1022,7...@a/pci17c2,1...@4/s...@1,0:a fstype zfs panic[cpu0]/thread=fbc283a0: vfs_mountroot: cannot mount root fbc4ab50 genunix:vfs_mountroot+323 () fbc4ab90 genunix:main+af () fbc4aba0 unix:_start+95 () skipping system dump - 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@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
