search for: c5t2d0

...c6t3d0 FAULTED corrupted data spare DEGRADED c7t2d0 UNAVAIL cannot open c5t6d0 ONLINE c7t3d0 FAULTED corrupted data Is it possible to get rid of this without destroying the whole pool and recreating it? I would like to add c5t2d0 c5t6d0 to the actual zpool as hotspares, but I can''t: bash-3.00# zpool add data1 spare c5t2d0 c5t6d0 invalid vdev specification use ''-f'' to override the following errors: /dev/dsk/c5t6d0s0 is part of exported or potentially active ZFS pool data1. Please see zpool(1M). b...

...095 device 0x3124 Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 3124 PCI-X Serial ATA Controller pci bus 0x0088 cardnum 0x01 function 0x00: vendor 0x1095 device 0x3124 Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 3124 PCI-X Serial ATA Controller c5*, c6* and c7* are the eSATA disks. zpool create -f zfsatan mirror c5t0d0 c5t1d0 mirror c5t2d0 c5t3d0 mirror c6t0d0 c6t1d0 mirror c6t2d0 c6t3d0 mirror c7t0d0 c7t1d0 mirror c7t2d0 c7t3d0 zfs create zfsatan/fs01 -bash-3.2# time dd if=/dev/zero bs=1024x1024x1024 count=8 of=/zfsatan/ fs01/storfil 8+0 records in 8+0 records out real 2m58.863s user 0m0.001s sys 0m10.636s gives me...

Hi all, I recently created a RAID-Z1 pool out of a set of 7 SCSI disks, using the following command: # zpool create magicant raidz c5t0d0 c5t1d0 c5t2d0 c5t3d0 c5t4d0 c5t5d0 c5t6d0 It worked fine, but I was slightly confused by the size yield (99 GB vs the 116 GB I had on my other RAID-Z1 pool of same-sized disks). I thought one of the disks might have been to blame, so I tried swapping it out - it turned out my replacement disk was a dud (zpool...

Hi All, I posted this in a different threat, but it was recommended that I post in this one. Basically, I have a 3 drive raidz array on internal Seagate drives. running build 64nv. I purchased 3 add''l USB drives with the intention of mirroring and then migrating the data to the new USB drives. I accidentally added the 3 USB drives in a raidz to my original storage pool, so now I have 2

...0 c4t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4t6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t1d0 ONLINE 0...

...c2t16d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c2t17d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c2t18d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c2t20d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c2t21d0 ONLINE...

...c6t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4t3d0 ONLINE...

...c5t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t4d0...

Just look at this. I thought all the restarting resilver bugs were fixed, but it looks like something odd is still happening at the start: Status immediately after starting resilver: # zpool status pool: rc-pool state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices has experienced an unrecoverable error. An attempt was made to correct the error. Applications are unaffected. action: Determine

...c5t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c8t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t3d0 ON...

...t; c7t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > c0t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > c1t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > c4t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > c5t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > c6t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > c7t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > c0t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > c1t3d0 ONLINE...

...ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c5t1d0 INUSE currently in use c5t2d0 AVAIL Looks just fine except its been running for 3 days already! These are 500gb drives. Should I have removed the bad drive and just replaced it vs. trying to swap in a spare? Is there some sort of contention issue because the spare and the original drive are still both up? Not sure...

Currently I''m trying to figure out the best zfs layout for a thumper wrt. to read AND write performance. I did some simple mkfile 512G tests and found out, that per average ~ 500 MB/s seems to be the maximum on can reach (tried initial default setup, all 46 HDDs as R0, etc.). According to http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAssets/ArchitectureWP_062806.pdf I would

Running a zpool scrub on our production pool is showing a scrub rate of about 400K/s. (When this pool was first set up we saw rates in the MB/s range during a scrub). Both zpool iostat and an iostat -Xn show lots of idle disk times, no above average service times, no abnormally high busy percentages. Load on the box is .59. 8 x 3GHz, 32GB ram, 96 spindles arranged into raidz zdevs on OI 147.

...oller 6 x 15K SAS DRIVEs with ZFS RAIDZ1 configuration. I shared the zfs partitions and mounted them on VMWare. Everything is great till I have to write to the disks. It won''t write! Steps I took creating the disks 1) Installed mega_sas drivers. 2) zpool create tank raidz c5t0d0 c5t1d0 c5t2d0 c5t3d0 c5t4d0 c5t5d0 3) zfs create -V 1TB tank/disk1 4) zfs create -V 1TB tank/disk2 5) iscsitadm create target -b /dev/zvol/rdsk/tank/disk1 LABEL1 6) iscsitadm create target -b /dev/zvol/rdsk/tank/disk2 LABEL2 Now both drives are lun 0 but with uniqu VMHBA device identifiers. SO they are detected...

Hello. We''re currently using a Sun Blade1000 (2x750MHz, 1G ram, 2x160MB/s mpt scsi buses, skge GigE network) as a NFS backend with ZFS for distribution of free software like Debian (cdimage.debian.org, ftp.se.debian.org) and have run into some performance issues. We are running SX snv_48 and have run with a raidz2 with 7x300G for a while now, just added another 7x300G raidz2 today but