Frank Cusack wrote:
On April 11, 2007 11:54:38 AM +0200 Constantin Gonzalez Schmitz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Mark,
Mark J Musante wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Constantin Gonzalez wrote:
Has anybody tried it yet with a striped mirror? What if the pool is
composed out of two mirrors? Can I attach devices to both mirrors, let
them resilver, then detach them and import the pool from those?
You'd want to export them, not detach them. Detaching will
overwrite the
vdev labels and make it un-importable.
thank you for the export/import idea, it does sound cleaner from a ZFS
perspective, but comes at the expense of temporarily unmounting the
filesystems.
So, instead of detaching, would unplugging, then detaching work?
I'm thinking something like this:
- zpool create tank mirror <dev1> <dev2> <dev3>
- {physically move <dev3> to new box}
- zpool detach tank <dev3>
If we're talking about a 3rd device, added in order to migrate the data,
why not just zfs send | zfs recv?
Time? The reason people go the split mirror route, at least in block
land, is because once you split the volume you can export it someplace
else and start using it. Same goes for constant replication where you
suspend the replication, take a copy, go start working on it, restart
the replication. (Lots of ways people do that one.)
I think the requirement could be voiced as, "I want an independent copy
of my data on a secondary system in a quick fashion. I want to avoid
using resources from the primary system." The fun part is that people
will think in terms of current technologies so you'll see "split
mirror", or "volume copy" or "Truecopy" mixed in for flavor.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
