Paul Armor wrote: > Hi, > I was wondering if anyone would know if this is just an accounting-type > error with the recorded "version=" stored on disk, or if there > are/could-be any deeper issues with an "upgraded" zpool? > > I created a pool under a Sol10_x86_u3 install (11/06?), and zdb correctly > reported the pool as a "version=3" pool. I reinstalled the OS with a u4 > (08/07), ran zpool grade, was told I successfully upgraded from version 3 > to version 4, but zdb reported "version=3". I unmounted the zfs, > remounted, and zdb still reported "version=3". I reran zpool upgrade, and > was told there were no pools to upgrade. > > I blew away that pool, and created a new pool and zdb correctly reported > "version=4". > > Perhaps I'm being pedantic, but the version thing on an upgraded pool > bugged me ;-) > > Does anyone have any thoughts/experiences on other surprises that may be > lying in wait on an "upgraded" zpool? > > Thanks, > Paul > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss Hi Paul is it not zpool upgrade -a, but I could be wrong
I seem to remember zpool upgrade does not actually upgrade unless you specify the -a. Enda _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
