On Tue, 26 Jul 2011, Charles Stephens wrote:
I'm on S11E 150.0.1.9 and I replaced one of the drives and the pool
seems to be stuck in a resilvering loop. I performed a 'zpool
clear' and 'zpool scrub' and just complains that the drives I didn't
replace are degraded because of too many errors.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 08:00:43PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jul 2011, Charles Stephens wrote:
I'm on S11E 150.0.1.9 and I replaced one of the drives and the pool
seems to be stuck in a resilvering loop. I performed a 'zpool clear'
and 'zpool scrub' and just complains that
I'm on S11E 150.0.1.9 and I replaced one of the drives and the pool seems to be
stuck in a resilvering loop. I performed a 'zpool clear' and 'zpool scrub' and
just complains that the drives I didn't replace are degraded because of too
many errors. Oddly the replaced drive is reported as being
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
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
Johan Hartzenberg wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 7:03 PM, Richard Elling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mikael Kjerrman wrote:
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
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 7:03 PM, Richard Elling [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Mikael Kjerrman wrote:
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
Mikael Kjerrman wrote:
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.
How
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.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 1:27 AM, Mikael Kjerrman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
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.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 4:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note the progress so far 0.04%. In my experience the time estimate has
no basis in reality until it's about 1% do or so. I think there is some
bookkeeping or something ZFS does at the start of a scrub or resilver that
throws off the
Mikael Kjerrman wrote:
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
13 matches
Mail list logo
