[zfs-discuss] Zfs ignoring spares?

2010-12-05 Thread Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
Hi all I have installed a new server with 77 2TB drives in 11 7-drive RAIDz2 VDEVs, all on WD Black drives. Now, it seems two of these drives were bad, one of them had a bunch of errors, the other was very slow. After zfs offlining these and then zfs replacing them with online spares, resilver

Re: [zfs-discuss] Zfs ignoring spares?

2010-12-05 Thread Tim Cook
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote: > Hi all > > I have installed a new server with 77 2TB drives in 11 7-drive RAIDz2 > VDEVs, all on WD Black drives. Now, it seems two of these drives were bad, > one of them had a bunch of errors, the other was very slow. After zfs > offl

Re: [zfs-discuss] Zfs ignoring spares?

2010-12-05 Thread Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
> Hot spares are dedicated spares in the ZFS world. Until you replace > the actual bad drives, you will be running in a degraded state. The > idea is that spares are only used in an emergency. You are degraded > until your spares are no longer in use. > > --Tim Thanks for the clarification. Woul

Re: [zfs-discuss] Zfs ignoring spares?

2010-12-05 Thread Mark Musante
On 5 Dec 2010, at 16:06, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote: >> Hot spares are dedicated spares in the ZFS world. Until you replace >> the actual bad drives, you will be running in a degraded state. The >> idea is that spares are only used in an emergency. You are degraded >> until your spares are

Re: [zfs-discuss] Zfs ignoring spares?

2010-12-05 Thread Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
> > Thanks for the clarification. Wouldn't it be nice if ZFS could fail > > over > > to a spare and then allow the replacement as the new spare, as with > > what > > is done with most commercial "hardware" RAIDs? > > If you use "zpool detach" to remove the disk that went bad, the spare > is promot