Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs resilvering
Hi, it was actually shared both as a dataset and a NFS-share. we had zonedata/prodlogs set up as a dataset and then we had zonedata/tmp mounted as a NFS filesystem within the zone. //Mike -- 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] zfs resilvering
Richard, thanks alot for that answer. It can be argued back and forth what is right, but it helps knowing the reason behind the problem. Again, thanks alot... //Mike -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zfs resilvering
Hi, I've searched without luck, so I'm asking instead. I have a Solaris 10 box, # cat /etc/release Solaris 10 11/06 s10s_u3wos_10 SPARC Copyright 2006 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Use is subject to license terms. Assembled 14 November 2006 this box was rebooted this morning and after the boot I noticed a resilver was in progress. But the suggested time seemed a bit long, so is this a problem which can be patched or remediated in another way? # zpool status -x pool: zonedata state: ONLINE status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The pool will continue to function, possibly in a degraded state. action: Wait for the resilver to complete. scrub: resilver in progress, 0.04% done, [b]4398h43m[/b] to go config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM zonedata ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004282B00282B10A0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004283300283310A0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004282B00282B10A1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004283300283310A1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004282B00282B10A2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004283300283310A2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004282B00282B10A4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004283300283310A4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004282B00282B10A5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004283300283310A5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004282B00282B10A6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004283300283310A6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004282B00282B2022d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E800428330028332022d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004282B00282B2023d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E800428330028332024d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E8004282B00282B2024d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t60060E800428330028332023d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 I also have a question about sharing a zfs from the global zone to a local zone. Are there any issues with this? We had an unfortunate sysadmin who did this and our systems hung. We have no logs that show anyhing at all, but I thought I'd ask just be sure. cheers, //Mike -- 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] zfs resilvering
define a lot :-) We are doing about 7-8M per second which I don't think is a lot but perhaps it is enough to screw up the estimates? Anyhow the resilvering completed about 4386h earlier than expected so everything is ok now, but I still feel that the way it figures out the number is wrong. Any thoughts on my other issue? cheers, //Mike -- 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] Yet another zfs vs. vxfs comparison...
Hi, thanks for the reply. But there must be a better explanation other than that? Otherwise it seems kinda harsh to loose 20GB per 1TB and I will most likely have to answer this question when we are going to discuss if we are to migrate to zfs over vxfs.. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Yet another zfs vs. vxfs comparison...
Hi, sorry if I am brining up old news, but I couldn't find a good answer searching the previous posts (My mom always says I am bad with finding things :) However I noticed a difference when creating a zfs filesystem compared with a vxfs filesystem in the available size. ie. ZFS zonedata/zfs [b]392G[/b] 120G 272G31%/zfs VxFS /dev/vx/dsk/zonedg/zonevol [b]400G[/b]78M 397G 1%/vxfs They are both build from 4 LUNs of the same size from the same array So where did the 8G's go? thanks, //Mike This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zpool unavailable after reboot
Hi, so it happened... I have a 10 disk raidz pool running Solaris 10 U2, and after a reboot the whole pool became unavailable after apparently loosing a diskdrive. (The drive is seemingly ok as far as I can tell from other commands) --- bootlog --- Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd fmd: [ID 441519 daemon.error] SUNW-MSG-ID: ZFS-8000-CS, TYPE: Fault, VER: 1, SEVERITY: Major Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd EVENT-TIME: Mon Jul 17 09:57:38 MEST 2006 Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd PLATFORM: SUNW,UltraAX-i2, CSN: -, HOSTNAME: expprd Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd SOURCE: zfs-diagnosis, REV: 1.0 Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd EVENT-ID: e2fd61f7-a03d-6279-d5a5-9b8755fa1af9 Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd DESC: A ZFS pool failed to open. Refer to http://sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-CS for more information. Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd AUTO-RESPONSE: No automated response will occur. Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd IMPACT: The pool data is unavailable Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd REC-ACTION: Run 'zpool status -x' and either attach the missing device or Jul 17 09:57:38 expprd restore from backup. --- --- zpool status -x --- bash-3.00# zpool status -x pool: data state: FAULTED status: One or more devices could not be opened. There are insufficient replicas for the pool to continue functioning. action: Attach the missing device and online it using 'zpool online'. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-D3 scrub: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM dataUNAVAIL 0 0 0 insufficient replicas c1t0d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t1d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t2d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c2t0d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c2t1d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c2t2d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c2t3d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c2t4d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t4d0UNAVAIL 0 0 0 cannot open -- The problem as I see it is that the pool should be able to handle 1 disk error, no? and the online, attach, replace commands doesn't work when the pool is unavailable. I've filed a case with Sun, but thought I'd ask around here to see if anyone has experienced this before. cheers, //Mikael This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
