zfs discuss - Jan 2007 - Replacing a drive in a raidz2 group

Hello zfs-discuss,

  One of our drives in x4500 is failing - it periodically
  disconnects/connects. ZFS only reports READ errors and no hot-spare
  automatically took in which was expected currently.

  So I issued zpool replace with a hot-spare drive.

  Now it takes forever and it seems like ZFS is rebuilding drive using
  checksums - wouldn''t it be much faster if it just copied data from
  the drive being replaced (like attaching mirror)?
  

-- 
Best regards,
 Robert                          mailto:rmilkowski at task.gda.pl
                                     http://milek.blogspot.com

Hi Robert,

We''ve experienced luck with flaky SATA drives in our STK array by
unseating and reseating the drive to cause a reset of the firmware. It
may be a bad drive, or the firmware may just have hit a bug. Hope its
the latter! :-D

I''d be interested why the hot-spare didn''t kick in. I thought
the FMA
integration would detect read errors.

Best Regards,
Jason

On 1/12/07, Robert Milkowski <rmilkowski at task.gda.pl>
wrote:
> Hello zfs-discuss,
>
>   One of our drives in x4500 is failing - it periodically
>   disconnects/connects. ZFS only reports READ errors and no hot-spare
>   automatically took in which was expected currently.
>
>   So I issued zpool replace with a hot-spare drive.
>
>   Now it takes forever and it seems like ZFS is rebuilding drive using
>   checksums - wouldn''t it be much faster if it just copied data
from
>   the drive being replaced (like attaching mirror)?
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Robert                          mailto:rmilkowski at task.gda.pl
>                                      http://milek.blogspot.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>

Hello Jason,

Saturday, January 13, 2007, 12:06:57 AM, you wrote:

JJWW> Hi Robert,

JJWW> We''ve experienced luck with flaky SATA drives in our STK array
by
JJWW> unseating and reseating the drive to cause a reset of the firmware. It
JJWW> may be a bad drive, or the firmware may just have hit a bug. Hope its
JJWW> the latter! :-D

JJWW> I''d be interested why the hot-spare didn''t kick in. I
thought the FMA
JJWW> integration would detect read errors.

FMA did but ZFS+FMA we''re not there in U3.

-- 
Best regards,
 Robert                            mailto:rmilkowski at task.gda.pl
                                       http://milek.blogspot.com

Hi Robert,

Will build 54 offline the drive?

Best Regards,
Jason

On 1/13/07, Robert Milkowski <rmilkowski at task.gda.pl>
wrote:
> Hello Jason,
>
> Saturday, January 13, 2007, 12:06:57 AM, you wrote:
>
> JJWW> Hi Robert,
>
> JJWW> We''ve experienced luck with flaky SATA drives in our STK
array by
> JJWW> unseating and reseating the drive to cause a reset of the
firmware. It
> JJWW> may be a bad drive, or the firmware may just have hit a bug. Hope
its
> JJWW> the latter! :-D
>
> JJWW> I''d be interested why the hot-spare didn''t kick
in. I thought the FMA
> JJWW> integration would detect read errors.
>
> FMA did but ZFS+FMA we''re not there in U3.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Robert                            mailto:rmilkowski at task.gda.pl
>                                        http://milek.blogspot.com
>
>

Hello Jason,

Sunday, January 14, 2007, 1:26:37 AM, you wrote:

JJWW> Hi Robert,

JJWW> Will build 54 offline the drive?

IIRC there hasn''t been ZFS+FMA integration yet.

-- 
Best regards,
 Robert                            mailto:rmilkowski at task.gda.pl
                                       http://milek.blogspot.com