Ralf Ramge wrote: > Questions: > > a) I don't understand why the kernel panics at the moment. the zpool > isn't mounted on both systems, the zpool itself seems to be fine after a > reboot ... and switching the primary and secondary hosts just for > resyncing seems to force a full sync, which isn't an option. > > b) I'll try a "sndradm -m -r" the next time ... but I'm not sure if I > like that thought. I would accept this if I replaced the primary host > with another server, but having to do a 24 TB full sync just because the > replication itself had been disabled for a few minutes would be hard to > swallow. Or did I do something wrong? > > I've answered these questions myself at the meantime (with a nice employee fo Sun Hamburg giving me the hint). For Google: during a reverse sync, neither side of the replication is allowed to have the zpool imported, because after the reverse sync finishes, SNDR enters replication mode. This renders reverse syncs useless for HA scenarios, switch primary & secondary instead.
> c) What performance can I expect from a X4500, 40 disks zpool, when > using slices, compared to LUNs? Any experiences? > > Any input to the question will still be appreciated :-) -- Ralf Ramge Senior Solaris Administrator, SCNA, SCSA Tel. +49-721-91374-3963 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://web.de/ 1&1 Internet AG Brauerstraße 48 76135 Karlsruhe Amtsgericht Montabaur HRB 6484 Vorstand: Henning Ahlert, Ralph Dommermuth, Matthias Ehrlich, Andreas Gauger, Matthias Greve, Robert Hoffmann, Norbert Lang, Achim Weiss Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Michael Scheeren _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
