So it does appear that it is zpool that hangs, possibly during
resilvering (we lost a HDD at midnight, this what was started all this).
After boot:
x4500-02:~# zpool status -x
pool: zpool1
state: DEGRADED
status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The pool will
co
Jorgen Lundman wrote:
> # /usr/X11/bin/scanpci | /usr/sfw/bin/ggrep -A1 "vendor 0x11ab device
> 0x6081"
> pci bus 0x0001 cardnum 0x01 function 0x00: vendor 0x11ab device 0x6081
> Marvell Technology Group Ltd. MV88SX6081 8-port SATA II PCI-X Controller
>
> But it claims resolved for our version:
James C. McPherson wrote:
> One question to ask is: are you seeing the same messages
> on your system that are shown in that Sunsolve doc? Not
> just the write errors, but the whole sequence.
Unfortunately, I get no messages at all. I/O just stops. But login
shells are fine, as long as I don't
Hello! I'm new to ZFS and have some configuration questions.
What's the difference, performance wise, in below configurations?
* In the first configuration, can I loose 1 disk? And, are the disks striped to
gain performance, as they act as one vdev?
* In the second configuration, can I loose 2 d
Jorgen Lundman wrote:
>
> Jorgen Lundman wrote:
>> Anyway, it has almost rebooted, so I need to go remount everything.
>>
>
> Not that it wants to stay up for longer than ~20 mins, then hangs. In
> that all IO hangs, including "nfsd".
>
> I thought this might have been related:
>
> http://suns
Jorgen Lundman wrote:
>
> Anyway, it has almost rebooted, so I need to go remount everything.
>
Not that it wants to stay up for longer than ~20 mins, then hangs. In
that all IO hangs, including "nfsd".
I thought this might have been related:
http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?asset
On Aug 10, 2008, at 8:14 PM, Jorgen Lundman wrote:
Does the SATA controller show any information in its log (if you go
into
the controller BIOS, if there is one)?
Seeing more reports of full systems hangs from an unresponsive drive
makes me very concerned about bring a 4500 into our enviro
On Aug 10, 2008, at 7:26 PM, Jorgen Lundman wrote:
the 'hd' utility on the tools and drivers cd produces the attached
output on thumper.
Clearly I need to find and install this utility, but even then, that
seems to just add "yet another way" to number the drives.
The message I get from ke
> Does the SATA controller show any information in its log (if you go into
> the controller BIOS, if there is one)?
>
> Seeing more reports of full systems hangs from an unresponsive drive
> makes me very concerned about bring a 4500 into our environment :(
>
Not that I can see. Rebooting th
On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Jorgen Lundman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > See http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4500/arch-wp.pdf page 21.
> > Ian
>
> Referring to Page 20? That does show the drive order, just like it does
> on the box, but not how to map them from the kernel message to drive
> See http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4500/arch-wp.pdf page 21.
> Ian
Referring to Page 20? That does show the drive order, just like it does
on the box, but not how to map them from the kernel message to drive
slot number.
Lund
--
Jorgen Lundman | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unix Administrat
Jorgen Lundman writes:
>
> So unable to login on console. Again we ended up with the problem of
> knowing which HDD that actually is broken. Turns out to be drive #40.
> (Has anyone got a map we can print? Since we couldn't boot it, any Unix
> commands needed to map are a bit useless, nor do we
> the 'hd' utility on the tools and drivers cd produces the attached
> output on thumper.
>
Clearly I need to find and install this utility, but even then, that
seems to just add "yet another way" to number the drives.
The message I get from kernel is:
"/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/pci1022,[EMAIL PR
SunOS x4500-02.unix 5.10 Generic_127128-11 i86pc i386 i86pc
Admittedly we are not having much luck with the x4500s.
This time it was the new x4500, running Solaris 10 5/08. Drive
"/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/pci1022,[EMAIL PROTECTED]/pci11ab,[EMAIL
PROTECTED]/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0 (sd30):" stopped
re
There are two versions at play here: the pool version and the filesystem
version. See here for information about ZFS *filesystem* versions:
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2007/328/onepager/
(CIFS support integrated in build 77 so that is when the filesystem version was
bump
> I have detailed the
> meaning of the Solaris disk device aliases in my
> blog. clear="all">Cheers, _hartz-- Any
> sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable
> from magic.
> Arthur C. ClarkeAfrikaanse Stap Website: href="http://www.bloukous.co.za";>http://www.bloukous.
> o.zaMy blog:
I believe it would be handy to be able to examine properties of a ZFS pool
and all the data sets in it prior to importing the pool. In particular I
would like to be able to do commands similar to "zfs list" and "zfs get ",
for example to see where file systems will be mounted, whether they will be
On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 9:18 PM, Yi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I see docs talking about how to add a fdisk partition (or primary
> partition) to a zfs pool. But I wonder if it's possible to add a logical
> partition, which is inside the extended partition, to a pool. I'm on an X86
> syst
Hi,
I see docs talking about how to add a fdisk partition (or primary partition) to
a zfs pool. But I wonder if it's possible to add a logical partition, which is
inside the extended partition, to a pool. I'm on an X86 system and these are in
/dev/rdsk/:
c4t0d0p[0-4]
c4t0d0s[0-15]
I don't know
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 10:19:45PM -0700, andrew wrote:
> >
> > I also seem to also only have single MBR between the
> > two disks in the mirror. is this normal?
>
> Not really normal, but at present manually creating a ZFS boot
> mirror in this way does not set the 2nd disk up correctly, as you
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Rene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [sambatest]
> comment = samba_with_shadowcopies testing area
> path = /export/sambatest
> read only = no
> vfs objects = shadow_copy
> shadow_copy: sort = desc
> shadow_copy: path = /export/sambatest/renny/.zfs/snapshot
> shadow_copy
Hi myxiplx,
thanks for your support and help, and sorry for my late answer.
But it didn't work :(
I can still connect to my samba share, but I don't see the previous version tab.
Dunno, what's wrong there.
Greetings,
zer0bo
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_
Hi Folks,
I'm in the very unsettling position of fearing that I've lost all of my data
via a zfs send/receive operation, despite ZFS's legendary integrity.
The error that I'm getting on restore is:
receiving full stream of faith/[EMAIL PROTECTED] into Z/faith/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cannot receive: in
My upgrade has been completed - Comments interleaved below.
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Johan Hartzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since I've got my disk partitioning sorted out now, I want to move my BE
> from the old disk to the new disk.
>
> I created a new zpool, named RPOOL
24 matches
Mail list logo
