Re: [zfs-discuss] Reconfiguring a RAID-Z dataset
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Joe Auty wrote: > Thomas Burgess wrote: > > >> Yeah, this is what I was thinking too... >> >> Is there anyway to retain snapshot data this way? I've read about the ZFS >> replay/mirror features, but my impression was that this was more so for a >> development mirror for testing rather than a reliable backup? This is the >> only way I know of that one could do something like this. Is there some >> other way to create a solid clone, particularly with a machine that won't >> have the same drive configuration? >> >> >> >> > I recently used zfs send/recv to copy a bunch of datasets from a raidz2 > box to a box made on mirrors. It works fine. > > > ZFS send/recv looks very cool and very convenient. I wonder what it was > that I read that suggested not relying on it for backups? Maybe this was > alluding to the notion that like relying on RAID for a backup, if there is > corruption your mirror (i.e. machine you are using with zfs recv) will be > corrupted too? > > At any rate, thanks for answering this question! At some point if I go this > route I'll test send and recv functionality to give all of this a dry run. > > > well, it's not considered to be an "enterprise ready backup solution" I think this is due to the fact that you can't recover a single file from a zfs send stream but despite this limitation it's still VERY handy. Another reason, from what i understand by reading this list, is that the "zfs send" streams aren't resilient. If you do not pipe it directly into a zfs receive, it might get corrupted and be worthless(basically don't save the output of zfs send and expect to receive it later) again, this is not relevant if you are doing a zfs send into a zfs receive at the other end I think the 2 reasons i just gave are the reasons people have warned against it...but still, it's damn amazing. > -- > Joe Auty, NetMusician > NetMusician helps musicians, bands and artists create beautiful, > professional, custom designed, career-essential websites that are easy to > maintain and to integrate with popular social networks. > www.netmusician.org > j...@netmusician.org > > <>___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Reconfiguring a RAID-Z dataset
> > > Yeah, this is what I was thinking too... > > Is there anyway to retain snapshot data this way? I've read about the ZFS > replay/mirror features, but my impression was that this was more so for a > development mirror for testing rather than a reliable backup? This is the > only way I know of that one could do something like this. Is there some > other way to create a solid clone, particularly with a machine that won't > have the same drive configuration? > > > > I recently used zfs send/recv to copy a bunch of datasets from a raidz2 box to a box made on mirrors. It works fine. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ZFS Data Loss on system crash/upgrade
Hello all, I've been running OpenSolaris on my personal fileserver for about a year and a half, and it's been rock solid except for having to upgrade from 2009.06 to a dev version to fix some network driver issues. About a month ago, the motherboard on this computer died, and I upgraded to a better motherboard and processor. This move broke the OS install, and instead of bothering to try to figure out how to fix it, I decided on a reinstall. All my important data (including all my virtual hard drives) are stored on a separate 3 disk raidz pool. In attempting to import the pool, I realized that I had upgraded the zpool to a newer version than is supported in the live CD, so I installed the latest dev release to allow the filesystem to mount. After mounting the drives (with a zpool import -f), I noticed that some files might be missing. After installing virtualbox and booting up a WinXP VM, this issue was confirmed. Files before 2/10/2010 seem to be unharmed, but the next file I have logged on 2/19/2010 is missing. Every file created after this date is also missing. The machine had been rebooted several times before the crash with no issues. For the week or so prior to the machine finally dying for good, it would boot, last a few hours, and then crash. These files were fine during that period. One more thing of note: when the machine suffered critical hardware failure, the zpool in issue was at about 95% full. When I upgraded to new hardware (after updating the machine), I added two mirrored disks to the pool to alleviate the space issue until I could back everything up, destroy the pool, and recreate it with six disks instead of three. Is this a known bug with a fix, or am I out of luck with these files? Thanks, Austin -- 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] Zpool import not working
On 06/12/10 17:13, zfsnoob4 wrote: Thanks. As I discovered from that post, VB does not have cache flush enabled by default. Ignoreflush must be explicitly turned off. VBoxManage setextradata VMNAME "VBoxInternal/Devices/piix3ide/0/LUN#[x]/Config/IgnoreFlush" 0 where VMNAME is the name of your virtual machine. Although I tried that it it returned with no output (indicating it worked) but it still won't detect a pool that has been destroyed. Is there any way to detect if flushes are working from inside the OS? Maybe a command that tells you if cacheflush is enabled? Thanks. You also need the "-D" flag. I could successfully import. This was running the latest bits: : trasimene ; mkdir /pf : trasimene ; mkfile 100m /pf/a /pf/b /pf/c : trasimene ; zpool create whirl /pf/a /pf/b log /pf/c : trasimene ; zpool destroy whirl : trasimene ; zpool import -D -d /pf pool: whirl id: 1406684148029707587 state: ONLINE (DESTROYED) action: The pool can be imported using its name or numeric identifier. config: whirl ONLINE /pf/a ONLINE /pf/b ONLINE logs /pf/c ONLINE : trasimene ; zpool import -D -d /pf whirl : trasimene ; zpool status whirl pool: whirl state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM whirl ONLINE 0 0 0 /pf/a ONLINE 0 0 0 /pf/b ONLINE 0 0 0 logs /pf/c ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors : trasimene ; It would, of course, have been easier if you'd been using real devices but I understand you want to experiment first... ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zpool import not working
Thanks. As I discovered from that post, VB does not have cache flush enabled by default. Ignoreflush must be explicitly turned off. VBoxManage setextradata VMNAME "VBoxInternal/Devices/piix3ide/0/LUN#[x]/Config/IgnoreFlush" 0 where VMNAME is the name of your virtual machine. Although I tried that it it returned with no output (indicating it worked) but it still won't detect a pool that has been destroyed. Is there any way to detect if flushes are working from inside the OS? Maybe a command that tells you if cacheflush is enabled? Thanks. -- 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] Native ZFS for Linux (OK, done now)
On 6/12/2010 1:44 PM, andrew wrote: On 6/10/2010 9:04 PM, Rodrigo E. De León Plicet wrote: On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Anurag Agarwal wrote: We at KQInfotech, initially started on an independent port of ZFS to linux. When we posted our progress about port last year, then we came to know about the work on LLNL port. Since then we started working on to re-base our changing on top Brian's changes. We are working on porting ZPL on that code. Our current status is that mount/unmount is working. Most of the directory operations and read/write is also working. There is still lot more development work and testing that needs to be going in this. But we are committed to make this happen so please stay tuned. Good times ahead! I don't mean to be a PITA, but I'm assuming that someone lawyerly has had the appropriate discussions with the porting team about how linking against the GPL'd Linux kernel means your kernel module has to be GPL-compatible. It doesn't matter if you distribute it outside the general kernel source tarball, what matters is that you're linking against a GPL program, and the old GPL v2 doesn't allow for a non-GPL-compatibly-licensed module to do that. This is incorrect. The viral effects of the GPL only take effect at the point of distribution. If ZFS is distributed seperately to the Linux kernel as a module then the person doing the combining is the user. Different if a Linux distro wanted to include it on a live CD, for example. GPL is not concerned with what code is linked with what. Cheers Andrew. Yes, I know that. As has also been pointed out before in this thread. But, while it's not the original ZFS-linux developer's fault, very often you see downstream aggregators and distributions created out of software from multiple sources. It very much would be their problem. As would any folks producing hardware appliances. Or any of the other myriad (but by no means all) ways that using the ZFS-linux code could easily turn into distribution. The original point was that both the developer and those downstream need to be careful about using these two kinds of licensed code together. Not that's it not possible to use the code. Just that the developer needs to get good (professional) legal advice, and follow it. And that the limitations are understood by the community at large. I assumed distribution of the combined code at some point in my original note. Sorry I wasn't explicit about that. I didn't mean to start a license minutiae discussion. -- 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] Moved disks to new controller - cannot import pool even after moving back
On Jun 12, 2010, at 12:43 PM, Jan Hellevik wrote: > Thanks for the reply. The thread on FreeBSD mentions creating symlinks for > the fdisk partitions. So did you earlier in this thread. I tried that but it > did not help - you can see the result in my earlier reply to your previous > message in this thread. > > Is this the way to go? Should I try again with symlinks? The server has been > powered off since I started this thread, so it should be intact (or at least > not worse than before)... > > Is there hope for my pool or is it lost is really my question. Your latest > post wasn´t really clear on that point. :-) I would really like to get this > pool online again. Hopefully some facts will make it clear: 1. ZFS import looks in the zpool.cache file before looking in /dev/dsk 2. To search in a directory other than /dev/dsk, use the -d option 3. ZFS import will look for devices named c*t*d*s* 4. ZFS import will never look for devices named c*t*d*p* 5. Every file in /dev is a symlink, managed by devfsadm(1m) -- richard -- ZFS and NexentaStor training, Rotterdam, July 13-15, 2010 http://nexenta-rotterdam.eventbrite.com/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Native ZFS for Linux
> On 6/10/2010 9:04 PM, Rodrigo E. De León Plicet > wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Anurag > Agarwal wrote: > > > >> We at KQInfotech, initially started on an > independent port of ZFS to linux. > >> When we posted our progress about port last year, > then we came to know about > >> the work on LLNL port. Since then we started > working on to re-base our > >> changing on top Brian's changes. > >> > >> We are working on porting ZPL on that code. Our > current status is that > >> mount/unmount is working. Most of the directory > operations and read/write is > >> also working. There is still lot more development > work and testing that > >> needs to be going in this. But we are committed to > make this happen so > >> please stay tuned. > >> > > > > Good times ahead! > > > I don't mean to be a PITA, but I'm assuming that > someone lawyerly has had the appropriate discussions > with the porting team about how linking against the > GPL'd Linux kernel means your kernel module has to be > GPL-compatible. It doesn't matter if you distribute > it outside the general kernel source tarball, what > matters is that you're linking against a GPL program, > and the old GPL v2 doesn't allow for a > non-GPL-compatibly-licensed module to do that. This is incorrect. The viral effects of the GPL only take effect at the point of distribution. If ZFS is distributed seperately to the Linux kernel as a module then the person doing the combining is the user. Different if a Linux distro wanted to include it on a live CD, for example. GPL is not concerned with what code is linked with what. Cheers Andrew. -- 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] Moved disks to new controller - cannot import pool even after moving back
Thanks for the reply. The thread on FreeBSD mentions creating symlinks for the fdisk partitions. So did you earlier in this thread. I tried that but it did not help - you can see the result in my earlier reply to your previous message in this thread. Is this the way to go? Should I try again with symlinks? The server has been powered off since I started this thread, so it should be intact (or at least not worse than before)... Is there hope for my pool or is it lost is really my question. Your latest post wasn´t really clear on that point. :-) I would really like to get this pool online again. Thanks for helping. -- 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] Moved disks to new controller - cannot import pool even after moving back
On Jun 12, 2010, at 3:45 AM, Jan Hellevik wrote: > Hi! Sorry for the late reply - I have been busy at work and this had to wait. > The system has been powered off since my last post. > > The computer is new - built it to use as file server at home. I have not seen > any strange behaviour (other than this). All parts are brand new (except for > the disks). > > I did not do an export when I moved the test pool - I did everything exactly > as I did when I had the incident. The only difference is that I used a HDD > instead of a SSD as I didn't have an available SSD to use for the log/cache. > > I am not sure how to dd zero wipe the disks, but I can give it a try. I'll > google for the syntax. > > Is there anything else I can do to get my pool back? It seems strange to me > that merely moving the disks will render it useless. I have not written > anything to the disks, so all the data is there - is there no way to retrieve > the files? You used the fdisk partitions instead of a slice. If you export the pool, then the hint to look for fdisk partitions instead of a slice is lost (cleared from the zpool.cache file). If you search the forum archives, you'll find similar situations such as: http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=461199 Cindy, let's write something up for the ZFS Troubleshooting Guide :-) -- richard -- ZFS and NexentaStor training, Rotterdam, July 13-15, 2010 http://nexenta-rotterdam.eventbrite.com/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Native ZFS for Linux
On Sat, 12 Jun 2010, Dick Hoogendijk wrote: Op Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:00:39 +0200 schreef Joerg Schilling : The main problem with GPL related license debates seems to be that very few people did read the GPL license text. Or simply do not want to and just believe what they have been told to be the truth. If things are told often enough they have a tendency to become true, even if they are not. Richard Stallman and the FSF are feeling considerable remorse over GPLv2 (and especially LGPL) since they had not fully anticipated how things turned out. GNU Hurd failed while Linux prevailed, so Linux was re-christend GNU/Linux but is not under FSF control. Due to the profound remorse, opinions expressed on the FSF/GNU web sites have tried to add enough FUD to suggest that perfectly legal approaches might actually be infringing ones. More recently, GPLv3 became the current GPL license. GPLv3 was written over a span of quite a few years, with many lawyers involved. Opinions/advice on the FSF/GNU web site are now based on GPLv3 since it is the current GPL license. Linux is locked into the GPLv2 license since Linus did not trust the FSF. 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
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS recovery tools
> >op> I was setting up a new systen (osol 2009.06 > and updating to > >op> the lastest version of osol/dev - snv_134 - > with > >op> deduplication) and then I tried to import my > backup zpool, but > >op> it does not work. > > > >op> # zpool import -f tank1 > >op> cannot import 'tank1': one or more devices > is currently unavailable > >op> Destroy and re-create the pool from a backup > source > > > >op> Any other option (-F, -X, -V, -D) and any > combination of them > >op> doesn't helps too. > > R., please let us know if the 'zdb -e -bcsvL > ' incantation > > Sigbjorn suggested ends up working for you or not. Hi, it seems that you are talking about my case of trouble. I answered in this thread: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=485342&tstart=0#485342 I hope of any ideas helping me. Regards Ron -- 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] Native ZFS for Linux
Op Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:00:39 +0200 schreef Joerg Schilling : The main problem with GPL related license debates seems to be that very few people did read the GPL license text. Or simply do not want to and just believe what they have been told to be the truth. If things are told often enough they have a tendency to become true, even if they are not. -- Dick Hoogendijk -- PGP/GnuPG key: 01D2433D + http://nagual.nl/ | OpenSolaris 2010.xx b134 + All that's really worth doing is what we do for others (Lewis Carrol) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zpool import not working
I'm guessing that the virtualbox VM is ignoring write cache flushes. See this for more ifno: http://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13661 On 12 Jun, 2010, at 5.30, zfsnoob4 wrote: > Thanks, that works. But it only when I do a proper export first. > > If I export the pool then I can import with: > zpool import -d / > (test files are located in /) > > but if I destroy the pool, then I can no longer import it back, even though > the files are still there. Is this normal? > > > Thanks for your help. > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.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] Moved disks to new controller - cannot import pool even after moving back
Hi! Sorry for the late reply - I have been busy at work and this had to wait. The system has been powered off since my last post. The computer is new - built it to use as file server at home. I have not seen any strange behaviour (other than this). All parts are brand new (except for the disks). I did not do an export when I moved the test pool - I did everything exactly as I did when I had the incident. The only difference is that I used a HDD instead of a SSD as I didn't have an available SSD to use for the log/cache. I am not sure how to dd zero wipe the disks, but I can give it a try. I'll google for the syntax. Is there anything else I can do to get my pool back? It seems strange to me that merely moving the disks will render it useless. I have not written anything to the disks, so all the data is there - is there no way to retrieve the files? -- 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] Native ZFS for Linux
Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > I am really sad to hear you saying these things since if it was all > actually true, then Linux, *BSD, and Solaris distributions could not > legally exist. Thankfully, only part of the above is true. If linking of independent works would create something else than a (permitted) collective work, the WWW could not exist. The main problem with GPL related license debates seems to be that very few people did read the GPL license text. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zpool import not working
Thanks, that works. But it only when I do a proper export first. If I export the pool then I can import with: zpool import -d / (test files are located in /) but if I destroy the pool, then I can no longer import it back, even though the files are still there. Is this normal? Thanks for your help. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
