I have reported this bug here: 
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6685676

I think this bug may be related, but I do not see where to add a note to 
an existing bug report: 
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6633592
(both bugs refer to ZFS-8000-2Q however my report shows a FAULTED pool 
instead of a DEGRADED pool.)

Thanks,

-hk

Haudy Kazemi wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm writing to report what I think is an incorrect or conflicting 
> suggestion in the error message displayed on a faulted pool that does 
> not have redundancy (equiv to RAID0?).  I ran across this while testing 
> and learning about ZFS on a clean installation of NexentaCore 1.0.
>
> Here is how to recreate the scenario:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ mkfile 200m testdisk1 testdisk2
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo zpool create mybigpool $PWD/testdisk1 $PWD/testdisk2
> Password:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
>   pool: mybigpool
>  state: ONLINE
>  scrub: none requested
> config:
>
>         NAME                              STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
>         mybigpool                         ONLINE       0     0     0
>           /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE       0     0     0
>           /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  ONLINE       0     0     0
>
> errors: No known data errors
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo zpool scrub mybigpool
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
>   pool: mybigpool
>  state: ONLINE
>  scrub: scrub completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Apr  7 22:09:29 2008
> config:
>
>         NAME                              STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
>         mybigpool                         ONLINE       0     0     0
>           /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE       0     0     0
>           /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  ONLINE       0     0     0
>
> errors: No known data errors
>
> Up to here everything looks fine.  Now lets destroy one of the virtual 
> drives:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ rm testdisk2
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
>   pool: mybigpool
>  state: ONLINE
>  scrub: scrub completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Apr  7 22:09:29 2008
> config:
>
>         NAME                              STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
>         mybigpool                         ONLINE       0     0     0
>           /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE       0     0     0
>           /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  ONLINE       0     0     0
>
> errors: No known data errors
>
> Okay, still looks fine, but I haven't tried to read/write to it yet.  
> Try a scrub.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo zpool scrub mybigpool
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
>   pool: mybigpool
>  state: FAULTED
> status: One or more devices could not be opened.  Sufficient replicas 
> exist for
>         the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state.
> action: Attach the missing device and online it using 'zpool online'.
>    see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-2Q
>  scrub: scrub completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Apr  7 22:10:36 2008
> config:
>
>         NAME                              STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
>         mybigpool                         FAULTED      0     0     0  
> insufficient replicas
>           /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE       0     0     0
>           /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot 
> open
>
> errors: No known data errors
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
>
> There we go.  The pool has faulted as I expected to happen because I 
> created it as a non-redundant pool.  I think it was the equivalent of a 
> RAID0 pool with checksumming, at least it behaves like one.  The key to 
> my reporting this is that the "status" message says "One or more devices 
> could not be opened.  Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue 
> functioning in a degraded state." while the message further down to the 
> right of the pool name says "insufficient replicas".
>
> The verbose status message is wrong in this case.  From other forum/list 
> posts looks like that status message is also used for degraded pools, 
> which isn't a problem, but here we have a faulted pool.  Here's an 
> example of the same status message used appropriately: 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2006-April/031298.html
>
> Is anyone else able to reproduce this?  And if so, is there a ZFS bug 
> tracker to report this too? (I didn't see a public bug tracker when I 
> looked.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Haudy Kazemi
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>   

_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to