similar to: Proposal: ZFS Hot Spare support

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

1. I have a 4x18GB drive setup as RAIDZ. Now when thinking about it in terms of RAID5 I would expect to get (4-1)x18 worth of drive space, but DF -h shows 4x18. Is this a bug or do I not understand? 2. Once again thinking in RAID5 terms if I have 4X18GB and 12X9GB drives and I want to make a RAIDZ of all of them I would expect the 18GB to be treated at 9GB so the RAIDZ would be 16X9GB. Is

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,

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

I''m not sure exactly what happened with my box here, but something caused a hiccup on multiple sata disks... May 9 16:40:33 sol scsi: [ID 107833 kern.warning] WARNING: /pci at 0,0/pci10de,5c at 9/pci-ide at a/ide at 0 (ata6): May 9 16:47:43 sol scsi: [ID 107833 kern.warning] WARNING: /pci at 0,0/pci-ide at 7/ide at 1 (ata3): May 9 16:47:43 sol timeout: abort request, target=0

New server build with Solaris-10 u5/08, on a SunFire t5220, and this is our first rollout of ZFS and Zpools. Have 8 disks, boot disk is hardware mirrored (c1t0d0 + c1t1d0) Created Zpool my_pool as RaidZ using 5 disks + 1 spare: c1t2d0, c1t3d0, c1t4d0, c1t5d0, c1t6d0, and spare c1t7d0 I am working on alerting & recovery plans for disks failures in the zpool. As a test, I have pulled disk

Hi, Given two disk c1t0d0 (DISK A) and c1t1d0 (DISK B)... 1/ Standard install on DISK A. 2/ zfs boot install on DISK B. 3/ I change the boot order and my zfs boot works fine. 4/ I install grub on the mbr of DISK B 5/ I disconnect and replace DISK A with DISK B 6/ Reboot, get the grub menu select Solaris ZFS and it panics that it cannot mount root path @ device XXX... This is not a ZFS

While testing a zpool with a different storage adapter using my "blkdev" device, I did a test which made a disk unavailable -- all attempts to read from it report EIO. I expected my configuration (which is a 3 disk test, with 2 disks in a RAIDZ and a hot spare) to work where the hot spare would automatically be activated. But I''m finding that ZFS does not behave this way

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''m using Solaris 10u6 updated to u7 via patches, and I have a pool with a mirrored pair and a (shared) hot spare. We reconfigured disks a while ago and now the controller is c4 instead of c2. The hot spare was originally on c2, and apparently on rebooting it didn''t get found. So, I looked up what the new name for the hot spare was, then added it to the pool with "zpool

Hey, I''m currently running on Nexenta alpha 6 and I have some corrupted data in a pool. The output from sudo zpool status -v data is: pool: data > state: ONLINE > status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data > corruption. Applications may be affected. > action: Restore the file in question if possible. Otherwise restore the > entire

One of my disks in the zfs raidz2 pool developed some mechanical faliure and had to be replaced. It is possible that I may have swaped the sata cables during the exchange, but this has never been a problem before in my previous tests. What concerns me is the output from zpool status for the c2d0 disk. The exchanged disk is now c3d0 but is no longer a part of the pool?! This is build_75 on x86

i''ve got a little zpool with a naughty raidz vdev that won''t take a replacement that as far as i can tell should be adequate. a history: this could well be some bizarro edge case, as the pool doesn''t have the cleanest lineage. initial creation happened on NexentaCP inside vmware in linux. i had given the virtual machine raw device access to 4 500gb drives and 1 ~200gb

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

On Solaris 10 If I install using ZFS root on only one drive is there a way to add another drive as a mirror later? Sorry if this was discussed already. I searched the archives and couldn''t find the answer. Thank you.

I currently have a 7x1.5tb raidz1. I want to add "phase 2" which is another 7x1.5tb raidz1 Can I add the second phase to the first phase and basically have two raid5''s striped (in raid terms?) Yes, I probably should upgrade the zpool format too. Currently running snv_104. Also should upgrade to 110. If that is possible, would anyone happen to have the simple command lines to

Hi all! I''ve decided to take the "big jump" and build a ZFS home filer (although it might also do "other work" like caching DNS, mail, usenet, bittorent and so forth). YAY! I wonder if anyone can shed some light on how long a pool scrub would take on a fairly decent rig. These are the specs as-ordered: Asus P5Q-EM mainboard Core2 Quad 2.83 GHZ 8GB DDR2/80 OS: 2 x

Hi there, i''m building a small NAS with 5x1TB Disks. The disks contains at the moment some data, ntfs as the fs and aren''t a raid. Now my im wondering if its possible to add the parity later. So that i add step by step one disk to the pool. And when i add the last disk, i enable the parity. (i have only one another 1 tb disk to backup the files) Thank you for you replies and

In 2007 I bought 6 WD1600JS 160GB sata disks and used 4 to create a raidz storage pool and then shelved the other two for spares. One of the disks failed last night so I shut down the server and replaced it with a spare. When I tried to zpool replace the disk I get: zpool replace tank c10t0d0 cannot replace c10t0d0 with c10t0d0: device is too small The 4 original disk partition tables look like

I was recently evaluating much the same question but with out only a single pool and sizing my disks equally. I only need about 500GB of usable space and so I was considering the value of 4x 250GB SATA Drives versus 5x 160GB SATA drives. I had intended to use an AMS 5 disk in 3 5.25" bay hot-swap backplane. http://www.american-media.com/product/backplane/sata300/sata300.html I priced