similar to: Help! ZFS pool is UNAVAILABLE

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

Hi! I have a problem with ZFS and most likely the SATA PCI-X controllers. I run opensolaris 2008.11 snv_98 and my hardware is Sun Netra x4200 M2 with 3 SIL3124 PCI-X with 4 eSATA ports each connected to 3 1U diskchassis which each hold 4 SATA disks manufactured by Seagate model ES.2 (500 and 750) for a total of 12 disks. Every disk has its own eSATA cable connected to the ports on the PCI-X

Hello, What is the access algorithm used within multi-component pools for a given pool, and does it change when one or more members of the pool become degraded ? examples: zpool create mtank mirror c1t0d0 c2t0d0 mirror c3t0d0 c4t0d0 mirror c5t0d0 c6t0d0 or; zpool create ztank raidz c1t0d0 c2t0d0 c3t0d0 raidz c4t0d0 c5t0d0 c6t0d0 As files are created on the filesystem within these pools,

Suppose the requirements for storage shrink ( it can happen ) is it possible to remove a mirror set from a zpool? Given this : # zpool status array03 pool: array03 state: ONLINE status: The pool is formatted using an older on-disk format. The pool can still be used, but some features are unavailable. action: Upgrade the pool using ''zpool upgrade''. Once this is

Hello, I was hoping that this would work: http://blogs.sun.com/zhangfan/entry/how_to_turn_a_mirror I have 4x(1TB) disks, one of which is filled with 800GB of data (that I cant delete/backup somewhere else) > root at FSK-Backup:~# zpool create -f ambry raidz1 c4t0d0 c5t0d0 c5t1d0 > /dev/lofi/1 > root at FSK-Backup:~# zpool list > NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT

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

Ciao, the rot filesystem of my thumper is a ZFS with a single disk: bash-3.2# zpool status rpool pool: rpool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM rpool ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t0d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c0t7d0 AVAIL c1t6d0 AVAIL c1t7d0

Hi all, Sorry for the newbie question, but I''ve looked at the docs and haven''t been able to find an answer for this. I''m working with a system where the pool has already been configured and want to determine what the configuration is. I had thought that''d be with zpool status -v <poolname>, but it doesn''t seem to agree with the

Hi experts zpool import shows some weird config of an old zpool bash-3.00# zpool import pool: data1 id: 7539031628606861598 state: FAULTED status: One or more devices are missing from the system. action: The pool cannot be imported. Attach the missing devices and try again. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-3C config: data1 UNAVAIL insufficient replicas

Hi, Experts: A customer has X4500 and the boot drives mirrored (c5t0d0s0 and c5t4d0s0) by SVM, The ZFS uses the two other partitions on these two drives(c5t0d0s3 and c5t4d0s3). If we need to replace the disk drive c5t0d0, do we need to do anything on the ZFS (c5t0d0s3 and c5t4d0s3) first or just follow the regular boot drive replacement procedure? Below is the summary of their current ZFS

Hello... Since there has been much discussion about zpool import failures resulting in loss of an entire pool, I thought I would illustrate a scenario I just went through to recover a faulted pool that wouldn''t import under Solaris 10 U5. While this is a simple scenario, and the data was not terribly important, I think the exercise should at least give some piece of mind to those who

I have a customer who has implemented the following layout: As you can see, he has mostly raidz zvols but has one raidz2 in the same zpool. What are the implications here? Is this a bad thing to do? Please elaborate. Thanks, Scott Gaspard Scott.J.Gaspard at Sun.COM > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > > chipool1 ONLINE 0 0 0 > >

Hi All, I''ve just built an 8 disk zfs storage box, and I''m in the testing phase before I put it into production. I''ve run into some unusual results, and I was hoping the community could offer some suggestions. I''ve bascially made the switch to Solaris on the promises of ZFS alone (yes I''m that excited about it!), so naturally I''m looking

As mentioned last night, we''ve been reviewing a proposal for hot spare support in ZFS. Below you can find a current draft of the proposed interfaces. This has not yet been submitted for ARC review, but comments are welcome. Note that this does not include any enhanced FMA diagnosis to determine when a device is "faulted". This will come in a follow-on project, of which some

So, I took four 1.5TB drives and made RAIDZ, RAIDZ1 and RAIDZ2 pools. The sizes for the pools were 5.3TB, 4.0TB, and 2.67TB respectively. The man page for RAIDZ states that "The raidz vdev type is an alias for raidz1." So why was there a difference between the sizes for RAIDZ and RAIDZ1? Shouldn''t the size be the same for "zpool create raidz ..." and "zpool

Hi all, I have a 5 drive RAIDZ volume with data that I''d like to recover. The long story runs roughly: 1) The volume was running fine under FreeBSD on motherboard SATA controllers. 2) Two drives were moved to a HP P411 SAS/SATA controller 3) I *think* the HP controllers wrote some volume information to the end of each disk (hence no more ZFS labels 2,3) 4) In its "auto

I''m not sure if this is a problem with the iscsitarget or zfs. I''d greatly appreciate it if it gets moved to the proper list. Well I''m just about out of ideas on what might be wrong.. Quick history: I installed OS 2008.05 when it was SNV_86 to try out ZFS with VMWare. Found out that multilun''s were being treated as multipaths so waited till SNV_94 came out to

Hi, for zfs raidz1, I know for random io, iops of a raidz1 vdev eqaul to one physical disk iops, since raidz1 is like raid5 , so is raid5 has same performance like raidz1? ie. random iops equal to one physical disk''s ipos. Regards Victor -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

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.

Already making use of it, thank you! http://www.justinconover.com/blog/?p=17 I took 6x250gb disk and tried raidz2/raidz/none # zpool create zfs raidz2 c0d0 c1d0 c2d0 c3d0 c7d0 c8d0 df -h zfs Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on zfs 915G 49K 915G 1% /zfs # zpool destroy -f zfs Plain old raidz (raid-5ish) # zpool create zfs raidz c0d0