similar to: zpool degraded status after resilver completed

Hello zfs-discuss, One of a disk started to behave strangely. Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv sata: [ID 801593 kern.notice] NOTICE: /pci at 1,0/pci1022,7458 at 3/pci11ab,11ab at 1: Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv port 6: device reset Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv scsi: [ID 107833 kern.warning] WARNING: /pci at 1,0/pci1022,7458 at 3/pci11ab,11ab at 1/disk at 6,0 (sd27): Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv

So, my Areca controller has been complaining via email of read errors for a couple days on SATA channel 8. The disk finally gave up last night at 17:40. I got to say I really appreciate the Areca controller taking such good care of me. For some reason, I wasn''t able to log into the server last night or in the morning, probably because my home dir was on the zpool with the failed disk

I''ve got a Thumper running snv_57 and a large ZFS pool. I recently noticed a drive throwing some read errors, so I did the right thing and zfs replaced it with a spare. Everything went well, but the resilvering process seems to be taking an eternity: # zpool status pool: bigpool state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an unrecoverable error. An attempt was

I''ve got a zpool that has 4 raidz2 vdevs each with 4 disks (750GB), plus 4 spares. At one point 2 disks failed (in different vdevs). The message in /var/adm/messages for the disks were ''device busy too long''. Then SMF printed this message: Nov 23 04:23:51 x.x.com EVENT-TIME: Fri Nov 23 04:23:51 EST 2007 Nov 23 04:23:51 x.x.com PLATFORM: Sun Fire X4200 M2, CSN:

Hi all I have installed a new server with 77 2TB drives in 11 7-drive RAIDz2 VDEVs, all on WD Black drives. Now, it seems two of these drives were bad, one of them had a bunch of errors, the other was very slow. After zfs offlining these and then zfs replacing them with online spares, resilver ended and I thought it''d be ok. Appearently not. Albeit the resilver succeeds, the pool status

Hi, I don''t have means to replicate this issue nor file a bug about it so I''d like your opinion about these issues or perhaps make bug report if necessary. In scenario where is say three raidz2 groups consisting several disks, two disks fail in different raidz-groups. You have degraded pool and two degraded raidz2 groups. Now, one replaces first disk and starts resilvering, it

I look after an x4500 for a client and wee keep getting drives marked as degraded with just over 20 checksum errors. Most of these errors appear to be driver or hardware related and thier frequency increases during a resilver, which can lead to a death spiral. The increase in errors within a vdev during a resilver (I recently had three drives in an 8 drive raidz vdev "degraded")

Had an idea, could someone please tell me why it''s wrong? (I feel like it has to be). A RaidZ-2 pool with one missing disk offers the same failure resilience as a healthy RaidZ1 pool (no data loss when one disk fails). I had initially wanted to do single parity raidz pool (5disk), but after a recent scare decided raidz2 was the way to go. With the help of a sparse file

Hi all I''m seeing some rather bad resilver times for a pool of WD Green drives (I know, bad drives, but leave that). Does resilver go through the whole pool or just the VDEV in question? -- Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 roy at karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres

G''day, all, So, I''ve decided to migrate my home server from Linux+swRAID+LVM to Solaris+ZFS, because it seems to hold much better promise for data integrity, which is my primary concern. However, naturally, I decided to do some benchmarks in the process, and I don''t understand why the results are what they are. I though I had a reasonable understanding of ZFS, but now

Hi list, Here''s my case : pool: mypool state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The pool will continue to function, possibly in a degraded state. action: Wait for the resilver to complete. scrub: resilver in progress for 147h19m, 100.00% done, 0h0m to go config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM filerbackup13

Hi all, I recently experienced a disk failure on my home server and observed checksum errors while resilvering the pool and on the first scrub after the resilver had completed. Now everything seems fine but I''m posting this to get help with calming my nerves and detect any possible future faults. Lets start with some specs. OSOL 2009.06 Intel SASUC8i (w LSI 1.30IT FW) Gigabyte

This morning we got a fault management message from one of our production servers stating that a fault in one of our pools had been detected and fixed. Looking into the error using fmdump gives: fmdump -v -u 90ea244e-1ea9-4bd6-d2be-e4e7a021f006 TIME UUID SUNW-MSG-ID Oct 22 09:29:05.3448 90ea244e-1ea9-4bd6-d2be-e4e7a021f006 FMD-8000-4M Repaired

What does it mean for the reported value of a zvol volsize to be less than the product of used and compressratio? For example, # zfs get -p all home1/home1mm01 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE home1/home1mm01 type volume - home1/home1mm01 creation 1254440045 - home1/home1mm01 used 14902492672

Following is the output of "zpool iostat -v". My question is regarding the datapool row and the raidz2 row statistics. The datapool row statistic "write bandwidth" is 381 which I assume takes into account all the disks - although it doesn''t look like it''s an average. The raidz2 row static "write bandwidth" is 36, which is where I am confused. What

hi all I have a server running svn_131 and the scrub is very slow. I have a cron job for starting it every week and now it''s been running for a while, and it''s very, very slow scrub: scrub in progress for 40h41m, 12.56% done, 283h14m to go The configuration is listed below, consisting of three raidz2 groups with seven 2TB drives each. The root fs is on a pair of X25M (gen 1)

After applying 125205-07 on two X4500 machines running Sol10U4 and removing "set sata:sata_func_enable = 0x5" from /etc/system to re-enable NCQ, I am again observing drive disconnect error messages. This in spite of the patch description which claims multiple fixes in this area: 6587133 repeated DMA command timeouts and device resets on x4500 6538627 x4500 message logs contain multiple

Before I open a new case with Sun, I am wondering if anyone has seen this kernel panic before? It happened on an X4500 running Sol10U3 while it was receiving incremental snapshot updates. Thanks. Aug 25 17:01:50 ldasdata6 ^Mpanic[cpu0]/thread=fffffe857d53f7a0: Aug 25 17:01:50 ldasdata6 genunix: [ID 895785 kern.notice] dangling dbufs (dn=fffffe82a3532d10, dbuf=fffffe8b4e338b90) Aug 25 17:01:50

I am running dovecot 2.1.7 on Debian Squeeze 64 bit, config information at the end of the email. I am working on a Kerberos/GSSAPI based setup that requires cross-realm authentication. I have regular GSSAPI working, I can log in using pam_krb5 with password based logins or with the GSSAPI support when using a kerberos ticket in the default realm. However when I attempt to authenticate using

Is there any way to stop a resilver? We gotta stop this thing - at minimum, completion time is 300,000 hours, and maximum is in the millions. Raidz2 array, so it has the redundancy, we just need to get data off. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20100929/9dbb6cf5/attachment.html>