Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool question
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of bear > > [b]Short Version[/b] > I used zpool add instead of zpool replace while trying to move drives > from an si3124 controller card. I can backup the data to other drives > and destroy the pool, but would prefer not to since it involved around > 4 tb of data and will take forever. > [b]zpool add mypool c4t2d0[/b] > instead of > [b]zpool replace mypool c2t1d0 c4t2d0[/b] Yeah ... Unfortunately, you cannot remove a vdev from a pool once it's been added. So ... Temporarily, in order to get c4t2d0 back into your control for other purposes, you could create a sparse file somewhere, and replace this device with the sparse file. This should be very fast, and should not hurt performance, as long as you haven't written any significant amount of data to the pool since adding that device, and won't be writing anything significant until after all is said and done. Don't create the sparse file inside the pool. Create the sparsefile somewhere in rpool, so you don't have a gridlock mount order problem. Rather than replacing each device one-by-one, I might suggest creating a new raidz2 on the new hardware, and then use "zfs send | zfs receive" to replicate the contents of the first raid set to the 2nd raid set... Then, just destroy (or export, or unmount) the first raid set, while changing the mountpoint of the 2nd raid set. (And export/import or unmount/mount.) since you have data that's mostly not changing, the send/receive method should be extremely efficient. You do one send/receive, and you don't even have to follow up with any incrementals later... ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zpool question
[b]Short Version[/b] I used zpool add instead of zpool replace while trying to move drives from an si3124 controller card. I can backup the data to other drives and destroy the pool, but would prefer not to since it involved around 4 tb of data and will take forever. [b]zpool add mypool c4t2d0[/b] instead of [b]zpool replace mypool c2t1d0 c4t2d0[/b] no data has been written to the array since I did this. [b]Long Version[/b] I recently setup an OpenSolaris server as a file server in my home. This is a replacement for my previous system, a windows box, that had a problematic Perc 5 / raid 5 card. The last time the raid array on my windows server went offline (The device returned a Code 10 Error under the windows driver), I broke down and bought the components for its replacement. Unfortunately, the replacement system I purchased included an Si3124 card, which I did not realize has a driver issue under solaris. I had another raid card that works under solaris, but does not support JBOD, so I started creating raid 0 drives and moving them over one disk at a time, but I screwed up with the second drive and issued the following command [b]zpool add mypool c4t0d2[/b] I should have done a replace (what I did last time). Unfortunately, I cannot figure out how to remove the drive from the pool now. My pool has 8 2tb drives in raidz2. zpool status returned mypoolDEGRADED 0 0 0 - raidz2-0 DEGRADED 0 0 0 - -c2t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 - -c2t1d0 UNAVAIL 0 0 0 cannot open - -c4t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 - -c2t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 - -c3t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 - -c3t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 - -c3t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 - -c3t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 - c4t2d0ONLINE 0 0 0 Am I screwed and needing to destroy and recreate it? While not the end of the world, it would take a fair amount of time, and I would rather not. This server mainly hosts the video files for a media center PC. The si3124 pauses every 5 or 10 seconds, which reduces throughput from 40-50 MB/s to 2-3MB/s and interrupts the data stream long enough to make videos unplayable. -- 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 question
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Brian Lionberger wrote: > The question is, should I create one zpool or two to hold /export/home > and /export/backup? > Currently I have one pool for /export/home and one pool for /export/backup. > > Should it be on pool for both??? Would this be better and why? One thing to consider is that pools are the granularity of 'export' operations, so if you ever want to, for example, move the /export/backup disks to a new computer, but keep /export/home on the current computer, you couldn't do that easily if you create a pair of striped 2-way mirrors. Regards, markm ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zpool question
I have a zpool issue that I need to discuss. My application is going to run on a 3120 with 4 disks. Two(mirrored) disks will represent /export/home and the other two(mirrored) will be /export/backup. The question is, should I create one zpool or two to hold /export/home and /export/backup? Currently I have one pool for /export/home and one pool for /export/backup. Should it be on pool for both??? Would this be better and why? Thanks for any help and advice. Brian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool question
On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 21:18 -0700, Brian Lionberger wrote: > I have a zpool issue that I need to discuss. > > My application is going to run on a 3120 with 4 disks. Two(mirrored) > disks will represent /export/home and the other two(mirrored) will be > /export/backup. > > The question is, should I create one zpool or two to hold /export/home > and /export/backup? > Currently I have one pool for /export/home and one pool for /export/backup. > > Should it be on pool for both??? Would this be better and why? Depends on what you want to do. Is there a reason to separate them? Benefit of zfs is you pool all the storage and allocate as you need. You can use quota's to limit and reservation to guarantee space. If you need space later, you would only need to add two more disks to one pool go provide space to both current file systems vs. having to add 4 disks to two different pools. Also depending on what you need, you could use the 4 disks in a RAIDZ to provide additional space with redundancy, etc. Again, this would depend on what your current needs are. Without a description of your application, and other requirements (cluster/failover, etc), could be either or. > > Thanks for any help and advice. > > Brian. > > > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Mike Dotson ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool question
Krzys wrote: > hello folks, I am running Solaris 10 U3 and I have small problem that I dont > know how to fix... > > I had a pool of two drives: > > bash-3.00# zpool status >pool: mypool > state: ONLINE > scrub: none requested > config: > > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > mypoolONLINE 0 0 0 >emcpower0a ONLINE 0 0 0 >emcpower1a ONLINE 0 0 0 > > errors: No known data errors > > I added another drive > > so now I have pool of 3 drives > > bash-3.00# zpool status >pool: mypool > state: ONLINE > scrub: none requested > config: > > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > mypoolONLINE 0 0 0 >emcpower0a ONLINE 0 0 0 >emcpower1a ONLINE 0 0 0 >emcpower2a ONLINE 0 0 0 > > errors: No known data errors > > everything is great but I've made a mistake and I would like to remove > emcpower2a from my pool and I cannot do that... > > Well the mistake that I made is that I did not format my device correctly so > instead of adding 125gig I added 128meg > > here is my partition on that disk: > partition> print > Current partition table (original): > Total disk cylinders available: 63998 + 2 (reserved cylinders) > > Part TagFlag Cylinders SizeBlocks >0 rootwm 0 -63 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 >1 swapwu 64 - 127 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 >2 backupwu 0 - 63997 125.00GB(63998/0/0) 262135808 >3 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >4 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >5 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >6usrwm 128 - 63997 124.75GB(63870/0/0) 261611520 >7 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 > > partition> > > what I would like to do is to remove my emcpower2a device, format it and then > add 125gig one instead of the 128meg. Is it possible to do this in Solaris 10 > U3? If not what are my options? > > Regards, > > Chris > > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss One other (risker) option would be to export the pool and grow slice 0 in emcpower2a so that it consumes the entire disk. Then reimport the pool and we should detect the new size and grow the pool accordingly. You want to make sure you don't change the starting cylinder so that we can still see the front half of the labels. I've been able to successfully do this with EFI labels but have not tried this with VTOCs. If you do decide to go this route, a full backup is highly recommended. - George ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool question
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Cindy Swearingen wrote: > I'm curious if the capacity of this pool is 128mb x 3? If so, then I > think you could replace the emcpower2a with a 128mb file. That's a great idea. You could do it even if the other two aren't 128mb - you can always replace a device/file as long as the new dev/file is >= the original. Just make sure your file *isn't* in the zpool. Some local storage would do nicely. Regards, markm ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool question
Cindy Swearingen wrote: > Chris, > > I agree that your best bet is to replace the 128-mb device with > another device, fix the emcpower2a manually, and then replace it > back. I don't know these drives at all, so I'm unclear about the > fix it manually step. > > Because your pool isn't redundant, you can't use zpool offline > or detach. > > I'm curious if the capacity of this pool is 128mb x 3? If so, > then I think you could replace the emcpower2a with a 128mb file. It should be 125G+125G+128M. I think this is a good idea, just create this file somewhere outside of your pool. Hth, Victor > Then, replace it back. Like this: > > 0. Backup your data. > > 1. Create the file. > # mkdir /files > # mkfile 128m /files/file1 > > 2. Replace the device with the file: > > # zpool replace mypool emcpower2a /files/file1 > > 3. fix the emcpower2a drive > > 4. Replace the file with the device > > # zpool replace mypool /files/file1 emcpower2a > > I have no experience with these drives, but in theory, this should work. > I'm also wondering if you should make the 128mb file slightly larger to > account for any differences in sizing of a UFS file and the emcpower > drive. > > Cindy > > Krzys wrote: > >> yes, I was thinking about this but I wanted to just remove the whole 128mb >> disk >> and then use format to repartition this complete disk to give it full >> capacity... I have all the disks setup this way so I wanted to be consistent >> with it but its not letting remove that disk at all from the pool...128mb is >> not >> much to waste and I am not concern about it but as I said I wanted to be >> consistent and thats the reason why I wanted to remove the other disk... >> >> Maybe what I can do is replace it with a different device if I can find it >> and >> then replace that disk with it and then partition it to my need and then >> replace >> the temporary disk with this new repartitioned disk... I thought there might >> be >> easier way to do it... >> >> Thanks for help. >> >> Chris >> >> >> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Mark J Musante wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Krzys wrote: >>> >>> everything is great but I've made a mistake and I would like to remove emcpower2a from my pool and I cannot do that... Well the mistake that I made is that I did not format my device correctly so instead of adding 125gig I added 128meg >>> You can't remove it directly, but you certainly can *replace* it with a >>> larger drive. If this is critical data, then obviously back up first, and >>> test these steps on alternate storage. >>> >>> >>> Part TagFlag Cylinders SizeBlocks 0 rootwm 0 -63 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 1 swapwu 64 - 127 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 2 backupwu 0 - 63997 125.00GB(63998/0/0) 262135808 3 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 4 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 5 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 6usrwm 128 - 63997 124.75GB(63870/0/0) 261611520 7 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >>> The easiest thing would be to replace s0 with s6. >>> >>> You'll be 128mb shy of the full disk, but that's a drop in the bucket. >>> The command would be: >>> zpool replace mypool emcpower2a emcpowerXX >>> where XX is the name of slice 6. You should see the new size right away. >>> >>> Another option would be to use a different drive, formatted to give you >>> the entire disk, and then do a replace of emcpower2a with emcpower3a. >>> Then you could repartition 2 properly, and repalce 3 with 2. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> markm >>> ___ >>> zfs-discuss mailing list >>> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org >>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >>> >>> >>> !DSPAM:122,472733c5131049287932! >>> >>> >>> >> ___ >> 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 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool question
Chris, I agree that your best bet is to replace the 128-mb device with another device, fix the emcpower2a manually, and then replace it back. I don't know these drives at all, so I'm unclear about the fix it manually step. Because your pool isn't redundant, you can't use zpool offline or detach. I'm curious if the capacity of this pool is 128mb x 3? If so, then I think you could replace the emcpower2a with a 128mb file. Then, replace it back. Like this: 0. Backup your data. 1. Create the file. # mkdir /files # mkfile 128m /files/file1 2. Replace the device with the file: # zpool replace mypool emcpower2a /files/file1 3. fix the emcpower2a drive 4. Replace the file with the device # zpool replace mypool /files/file1 emcpower2a I have no experience with these drives, but in theory, this should work. I'm also wondering if you should make the 128mb file slightly larger to account for any differences in sizing of a UFS file and the emcpower drive. Cindy Krzys wrote: >yes, I was thinking about this but I wanted to just remove the whole 128mb >disk >and then use format to repartition this complete disk to give it full >capacity... I have all the disks setup this way so I wanted to be consistent >with it but its not letting remove that disk at all from the pool...128mb is >not >much to waste and I am not concern about it but as I said I wanted to be >consistent and thats the reason why I wanted to remove the other disk... > >Maybe what I can do is replace it with a different device if I can find it and >then replace that disk with it and then partition it to my need and then >replace >the temporary disk with this new repartitioned disk... I thought there might >be >easier way to do it... > >Thanks for help. > >Chris > > >On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Mark J Musante wrote: > > > >>On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Krzys wrote: >> >> >>>everything is great but I've made a mistake and I would like to remove >>>emcpower2a from my pool and I cannot do that... >>> >>>Well the mistake that I made is that I did not format my device >>>correctly so instead of adding 125gig I added 128meg >>> >>> >>You can't remove it directly, but you certainly can *replace* it with a >>larger drive. If this is critical data, then obviously back up first, and >>test these steps on alternate storage. >> >> >> >>>Part TagFlag Cylinders SizeBlocks >>> 0 rootwm 0 -63 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 >>> 1 swapwu 64 - 127 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 >>> 2 backupwu 0 - 63997 125.00GB(63998/0/0) 262135808 >>> 3 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >>> 4 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >>> 5 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >>> 6usrwm 128 - 63997 124.75GB(63870/0/0) 261611520 >>> 7 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >>> >>> >>The easiest thing would be to replace s0 with s6. >> >>You'll be 128mb shy of the full disk, but that's a drop in the bucket. >>The command would be: >> zpool replace mypool emcpower2a emcpowerXX >>where XX is the name of slice 6. You should see the new size right away. >> >>Another option would be to use a different drive, formatted to give you >>the entire disk, and then do a replace of emcpower2a with emcpower3a. >>Then you could repartition 2 properly, and repalce 3 with 2. >> >> >>Regards, >>markm >>___ >>zfs-discuss mailing list >>zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org >>http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >> >> >>!DSPAM:122,472733c5131049287932! >> >> >> >___ >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] zpool question
yes, I was thinking about this but I wanted to just remove the whole 128mb disk and then use format to repartition this complete disk to give it full capacity... I have all the disks setup this way so I wanted to be consistent with it but its not letting remove that disk at all from the pool...128mb is not much to waste and I am not concern about it but as I said I wanted to be consistent and thats the reason why I wanted to remove the other disk... Maybe what I can do is replace it with a different device if I can find it and then replace that disk with it and then partition it to my need and then replace the temporary disk with this new repartitioned disk... I thought there might be easier way to do it... Thanks for help. Chris On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Mark J Musante wrote: > On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Krzys wrote: >> >> everything is great but I've made a mistake and I would like to remove >> emcpower2a from my pool and I cannot do that... >> >> Well the mistake that I made is that I did not format my device >> correctly so instead of adding 125gig I added 128meg > > You can't remove it directly, but you certainly can *replace* it with a > larger drive. If this is critical data, then obviously back up first, and > test these steps on alternate storage. > >> >> Part TagFlag Cylinders SizeBlocks >> 0 rootwm 0 -63 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 >> 1 swapwu 64 - 127 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 >> 2 backupwu 0 - 63997 125.00GB(63998/0/0) 262135808 >> 3 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >> 4 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >> 5 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 >> 6usrwm 128 - 63997 124.75GB(63870/0/0) 261611520 >> 7 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 > > The easiest thing would be to replace s0 with s6. > > You'll be 128mb shy of the full disk, but that's a drop in the bucket. > The command would be: > zpool replace mypool emcpower2a emcpowerXX > where XX is the name of slice 6. You should see the new size right away. > > Another option would be to use a different drive, formatted to give you > the entire disk, and then do a replace of emcpower2a with emcpower3a. > Then you could repartition 2 properly, and repalce 3 with 2. > > > Regards, > markm > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > !DSPAM:122,472733c5131049287932! > ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool question
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Krzys wrote: > > everything is great but I've made a mistake and I would like to remove > emcpower2a from my pool and I cannot do that... > > Well the mistake that I made is that I did not format my device > correctly so instead of adding 125gig I added 128meg You can't remove it directly, but you certainly can *replace* it with a larger drive. If this is critical data, then obviously back up first, and test these steps on alternate storage. > > Part TagFlag Cylinders SizeBlocks > 0 rootwm 0 -63 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 > 1 swapwu 64 - 127 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 > 2 backupwu 0 - 63997 125.00GB(63998/0/0) 262135808 > 3 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 > 4 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 > 5 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 > 6usrwm 128 - 63997 124.75GB(63870/0/0) 261611520 > 7 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 The easiest thing would be to replace s0 with s6. You'll be 128mb shy of the full disk, but that's a drop in the bucket. The command would be: zpool replace mypool emcpower2a emcpowerXX where XX is the name of slice 6. You should see the new size right away. Another option would be to use a different drive, formatted to give you the entire disk, and then do a replace of emcpower2a with emcpower3a. Then you could repartition 2 properly, and repalce 3 with 2. Regards, markm ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zpool question
hello folks, I am running Solaris 10 U3 and I have small problem that I dont know how to fix... I had a pool of two drives: bash-3.00# zpool status pool: mypool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM mypoolONLINE 0 0 0 emcpower0a ONLINE 0 0 0 emcpower1a ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors I added another drive so now I have pool of 3 drives bash-3.00# zpool status pool: mypool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM mypoolONLINE 0 0 0 emcpower0a ONLINE 0 0 0 emcpower1a ONLINE 0 0 0 emcpower2a ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors everything is great but I've made a mistake and I would like to remove emcpower2a from my pool and I cannot do that... Well the mistake that I made is that I did not format my device correctly so instead of adding 125gig I added 128meg here is my partition on that disk: partition> print Current partition table (original): Total disk cylinders available: 63998 + 2 (reserved cylinders) Part TagFlag Cylinders SizeBlocks 0 rootwm 0 -63 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 1 swapwu 64 - 127 128.00MB(64/0/0) 262144 2 backupwu 0 - 63997 125.00GB(63998/0/0) 262135808 3 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 4 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 5 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 6usrwm 128 - 63997 124.75GB(63870/0/0) 261611520 7 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 partition> what I would like to do is to remove my emcpower2a device, format it and then add 125gig one instead of the 128meg. Is it possible to do this in Solaris 10 U3? If not what are my options? Regards, Chris ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re[2]: [zfs-discuss] zpool question.
Hello Krzys, Monday, October 23, 2006, 5:14:06 PM, you wrote: K> Awesome, thanks for your help, will there be any way to convert raidz to K> raidz2? No, at there's no such tool right now. -- Best regards, Robertmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://milek.blogspot.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool question.
Awesome, thanks for your help, will there be any way to convert raidz to raidz2? Thanks again for help/ Chris On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Robert Milkowski wrote: Hello Krzys, Sunday, October 22, 2006, 8:42:06 PM, you wrote: K> I have solaris 10 U2 and I have raidz partition setup on 5 disks, I just added a K> new disk and was wondering, can I add another disk to raidz? I was able to add K> it to a pool but I do not think it added it to zpool. You can't grow RAID-Z :( You can add a disk but you will end-up with one raid-z group and one disk and "striping" between them. K> Also when spare disks and raidz2 will be released in Solaris 10? Does anyone K> know when U3 will be comming out? In S10U3 which should be available late November. -- Best regards, Robertmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://milek.blogspot.com !DSPAM:122,453cd0015307021468! ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool question.
Hello Krzys, Sunday, October 22, 2006, 8:42:06 PM, you wrote: K> I have solaris 10 U2 and I have raidz partition setup on 5 disks, I just added a K> new disk and was wondering, can I add another disk to raidz? I was able to add K> it to a pool but I do not think it added it to zpool. You can't grow RAID-Z :( You can add a disk but you will end-up with one raid-z group and one disk and "striping" between them. K> Also when spare disks and raidz2 will be released in Solaris 10? Does anyone K> know when U3 will be comming out? In S10U3 which should be available late November. -- Best regards, Robertmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://milek.blogspot.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zpool question.
I have solaris 10 U2 and I have raidz partition setup on 5 disks, I just added a new disk and was wondering, can I add another disk to raidz? I was able to add it to a pool but I do not think it added it to zpool. [13:38:41] /root > zpool status -v mypool2 pool: mypool2 state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM mypool2 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors [14:35:36] /root > zpool add mypool2 c3t6d0 invalid vdev specification use '-f' to override the following errors: /dev/dsk/c3t6d0s0 contains a ufs filesystem. /dev/dsk/c3t6d0s4 contains a ufs filesystem. [14:36:02] /root > zpool add -f mypool2 c3t6d0 [14:36:14] /root > zpool list NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT mypool 278G187G 90.6G67% ONLINE - mypool2 952G367K952G 0% ONLINE - [14:36:21] /root > zpool status -v mypool2 pool: mypool2 state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM mypool2 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t6d0ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors Also when spare disks and raidz2 will be released in Solaris 10? Does anyone know when U3 will be comming out? Thanks guys. Chris ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
