Ray Van Dolson
2010-Feb-11 16:40 UTC
[zfs-discuss] Whoops, accidentally created a new slog instead of mirroring
Had a two-device SSD (mirrored) slog/zil and needed to pull each disk
to read some numbers off of them. Unfortunately, when I placed the
devices back in the system, I used "zpool add" and created a separate
log device instead of reattaching the device to the existing log device
which would have resulted in a mirror.
Fortunately, there are two other SSD''s in the system acting as L2ARC
which I was able to borrow from and set up temp mirrors so I could pull
out the other drive, but, in the end I''m left with:
logs
c0t29d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c0t31d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
I''m running Solaris 10 U8.
Am I hosed? Obviously my zpool is fine, but I''m thinkin
there''s no way
to rid myself of this extra log device now... what if I physically yank
the drive? Is there any way to get the above two merged as a mirror?
Just for fun, I tried:
# zpool attach storage c0t31d0 c0t29d0
invalid vdev specification
use ''-f'' to override the following errors:
/dev/dsk/c0t29d0s0 is part of active ZFS pool storage. Please see zpool(1M).
What will happen if I do a -f? :)
It looks like support for removing log devices is pending or available
already in OpenSolaris, but, like I said, this is Solaris 10.
I''ll throw it to support as well, but thought I''d check here.
Thanks,
Ray
Ray Van Dolson
2010-Feb-25 18:42 UTC
[zfs-discuss] Whoops, accidentally created a new slog instead of mirroring
Well, it doesn''t seem like this is possible -- I was hoping there was some "hacky" way to do it via zdb or something. Sun support pointed me to a document[1] that leads me to believe this might have worked on OpenSolaris. Anyone out there in Sun-land care to comment? To recap, I accidentally created two zeparate slog/zil devices in my zpool instead of a mirror. I want to remove one of them. I wonder if this will be possible in Solaris 10 U9? I''m considering migrating all my data off and rebuilding the zpool, but might wait for U9 if I can remove zil devices then. Thanks, Ray [1] http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-2271/gayrd?a=view
Cindy Swearingen
2010-Feb-25 19:55 UTC
[zfs-discuss] Whoops, accidentally created a new slog instead of mirroring
Ray,
Log removal integrated into build 125, so yes, if you upgraded to at
least OpenSolaris build 125 you could fix this problem. See the syntax
below on my b133 system.
In this particular case, importing the pool from b125 or later media
and attempting to remove the log device could not fix this problem
unless you also upgraded the pool version, because it is the pool
version that provides support for this operation.
I hope someone else has a better idea...
Thanks,
Cindy
# zpool create tank mirror c2t10d0 c2t9d0 log c2t8d0 c2t7d0
# zpool status tank
pool: tank
state: ONLINE
scrub: none requested
config:
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
tank ONLINE 0 0 0
mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2t10d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2t9d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
logs
c2t8d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
errors: No known data errors
# zpool remove tank c2t8d0
# zpool remove tank c2t7d0
# zpool status tank
pool: tank
state: ONLINE
scrub: none requested
config:
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
tank ONLINE 0 0 0
mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2t10d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2t9d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
errors: No known data errors
On 02/25/10 11:42, Ray Van Dolson wrote:> Well, it doesn''t seem like this is possible -- I was hoping there
was
> some "hacky" way to do it via zdb or something.
>
> Sun support pointed me to a document[1] that leads me to believe this
> might have worked on OpenSolaris. Anyone out there in Sun-land care to
> comment?
>
> To recap, I accidentally created two zeparate slog/zil devices in my
> zpool instead of a mirror. I want to remove one of them.
>
> I wonder if this will be possible in Solaris 10 U9? I''m
considering
> migrating all my data off and rebuilding the zpool, but might wait for
> U9 if I can remove zil devices then.
>
> Thanks,
> Ray
>
> [1] http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-2271/gayrd?a=view
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Ray Van Dolson
2010-Feb-25 20:05 UTC
[zfs-discuss] Whoops, accidentally created a new slog instead of mirroring
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:55:35AM -0800, Cindy Swearingen wrote:> Ray, > > Log removal integrated into build 125, so yes, if you upgraded to at > least OpenSolaris build 125 you could fix this problem. See the syntax > below on my b133 system. > > In this particular case, importing the pool from b125 or later media > and attempting to remove the log device could not fix this problem > unless you also upgraded the pool version, because it is the pool > version that provides support for this operation. > > I hope someone else has a better idea...Thanks Cindy. I need to stay on Solaris 10 for the time being, so I''m guessing I''d have to Live boot into an OpenSolaris build, fix my pool then hope it re-imports into Solaris 10 (I would imagine it wouldn''t though). Might be a little too adventurous for my tastes right now... :) I''d really like to know if the ZFS changes from b125 will be merged into Solaris 10 either pre-U9 or for U9... I''m debating just waiting to fix this until then. Ray> > Thanks, > > Cindy > > # zpool create tank mirror c2t10d0 c2t9d0 log c2t8d0 c2t7d0 > # zpool status tank > pool: tank > state: ONLINE > scrub: none requested > config: > > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > tank ONLINE 0 0 0 > mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > c2t10d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > c2t9d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > logs > c2t8d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > c2t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > errors: No known data errors > # zpool remove tank c2t8d0 > # zpool remove tank c2t7d0 > # zpool status tank > pool: tank > state: ONLINE > scrub: none requested > config: > > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > tank ONLINE 0 0 0 > mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > c2t10d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > c2t9d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > errors: No known data errors > > > On 02/25/10 11:42, Ray Van Dolson wrote: > > Well, it doesn''t seem like this is possible -- I was hoping there was > > some "hacky" way to do it via zdb or something. > > > > Sun support pointed me to a document[1] that leads me to believe this > > might have worked on OpenSolaris. Anyone out there in Sun-land care to > > comment? > > > > To recap, I accidentally created two zeparate slog/zil devices in my > > zpool instead of a mirror. I want to remove one of them. > > > > I wonder if this will be possible in Solaris 10 U9? I''m considering > > migrating all my data off and rebuilding the zpool, but might wait for > > U9 if I can remove zil devices then. > > > > Thanks, > > Ray
Bryan Allen
2010-Feb-25 20:15 UTC
[zfs-discuss] Whoops, accidentally created a new slog instead of mirroring
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | On 2010-02-25 12:05:03, Ray Van Dolson wrote: | | Thanks Cindy. I need to stay on Solaris 10 for the time being, so I''m | guessing I''d have to Live boot into an OpenSolaris build, fix my pool | then hope it re-imports into Solaris 10 (I would imagine it wouldn''t | though). Might be a little too adventurous for my tastes right now... | :) | | I''d really like to know if the ZFS changes from b125 will be merged | into Solaris 10 either pre-U9 or for U9... | | I''m debating just waiting to fix this until then. http://sparcv9.blogspot.com/2010/01/first-hints-on-solaris-10-update-9.html Seems at least possible. -- bda cyberpunk is dead. long live cyberpunk.
Cindy Swearingen
2010-Feb-25 20:29 UTC
[zfs-discuss] Whoops, accidentally created a new slog instead of mirroring
Correct, if you upgraded this pool, you would not be able to import it back on your existing Solaris 10 system. My advice would be to wait. Cindy On 02/25/10 13:05, Ray Van Dolson wrote:> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:55:35AM -0800, Cindy Swearingen wrote: >> Ray, >> >> Log removal integrated into build 125, so yes, if you upgraded to at >> least OpenSolaris build 125 you could fix this problem. See the syntax >> below on my b133 system. >> >> In this particular case, importing the pool from b125 or later media >> and attempting to remove the log device could not fix this problem >> unless you also upgraded the pool version, because it is the pool >> version that provides support for this operation. >> >> I hope someone else has a better idea... > > Thanks Cindy. I need to stay on Solaris 10 for the time being, so I''m > guessing I''d have to Live boot into an OpenSolaris build, fix my pool > then hope it re-imports into Solaris 10 (I would imagine it wouldn''t > though). Might be a little too adventurous for my tastes right now... > :) > > I''d really like to know if the ZFS changes from b125 will be merged > into Solaris 10 either pre-U9 or for U9... > > I''m debating just waiting to fix this until then. > > Ray > >> Thanks, >> >> Cindy >> >> # zpool create tank mirror c2t10d0 c2t9d0 log c2t8d0 c2t7d0 >> # zpool status tank >> pool: tank >> state: ONLINE >> scrub: none requested >> config: >> >> NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM >> tank ONLINE 0 0 0 >> mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> c2t10d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> c2t9d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> logs >> c2t8d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> c2t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> >> errors: No known data errors >> # zpool remove tank c2t8d0 >> # zpool remove tank c2t7d0 >> # zpool status tank >> pool: tank >> state: ONLINE >> scrub: none requested >> config: >> >> NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM >> tank ONLINE 0 0 0 >> mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> c2t10d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> c2t9d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >> >> errors: No known data errors >> >> >> On 02/25/10 11:42, Ray Van Dolson wrote: >>> Well, it doesn''t seem like this is possible -- I was hoping there was >>> some "hacky" way to do it via zdb or something. >>> >>> Sun support pointed me to a document[1] that leads me to believe this >>> might have worked on OpenSolaris. Anyone out there in Sun-land care to >>> comment? >>> >>> To recap, I accidentally created two zeparate slog/zil devices in my >>> zpool instead of a mirror. I want to remove one of them. >>> >>> I wonder if this will be possible in Solaris 10 U9? I''m considering >>> migrating all my data off and rebuilding the zpool, but might wait for >>> U9 if I can remove zil devices then. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Ray