similar to: resilver speed.

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

This must be resliver day :) I just had a drive failure. The hot spare kicked in, and access to the pool over NFS was effectively zero for about 45 minutes. Currently the pool is still reslivering, but for some reason I can access the file system now. Resliver speed has been beaten to death I know, but is there a way to avoid this? For example, is more enterprisy hardware less susceptible to

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

I know this topic has been discussed many times... but what the hell makes zpool resilvering so slow? I''m running OpenSolaris 2009.06. I have had a large number of problematic disks due to a bad production batch, leading me to resilver quite a few times, progressively replacing each disk as it dies (and now preemptively removing disks.) My complaint is that resilvering ends up

So, when you add a log device to a pool, it initiates a resilver. What is it actually doing, though? Isn''t the slog a copy of the in-memory intent log? Wouldn''t it just simply replicate the data that''s in the other log, checked against what''s in RAM? And presumably there isn''t that much data in the slog so there isn''t that much to check? Or

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

The default blocksize is 128K. If you are using mirrors, then each block on disk will be 128K whenever possible. But if you''re using raidzN with a capacity of M disks (M disks useful capacity + N disks redundancy) then the block size on each individual disk will be 128K / M. Right? This is one of the reasons the raidzN resilver code is inefficient. Since you end up waiting for the

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

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

Hello, I''m working with someone who replaced a failed 1TB drive (50% utilized), on an X4540 running OS build 134, and I think something must be wrong. Last Tuesday afternoon, zpool status reported: scrub: resilver in progress for 306h0m, 63.87% done, 173h7m to go and a week being 168 hours, that put completion at sometime tomorrow night. However, he just reported zpool status shows:

This past weekend, but holiday was ruined due to a log device "replacement" gone awry. I posted all about it here: http://jmlittle.blogspot.com/2008/05/problem-with-slogs-how-i-lost.html In a nutshell, an resilver of a single log device with itself, due to the fact one can''t remove a log device from a pool once defined, cause ZFS to fully resilver but then attach the log

Hello All I read this thread Resilver/scrub times? for a few minutes and I have recognize that I dont know the different between Resilvering and Scrubing. Shame on me. :-( I dont find some declarations in the man-pages and I know the command to start scrubing "zpool scrub tank" but what is the command to start resilver and what is the different? -- Best Regards Alexander Dezember, 20

After several days of trying to get a 1.5TB drive to resilver and it continually restarting, I eliminated all of the snapshot-taking facilities which were enabled and 2009-10-29.14:58:41 [internal pool scrub done txg:567780] complete=0 2009-10-29.14:58:41 [internal pool scrub txg:567780] func=1 mintxg=3 maxtxg=567354 2009-10-29.16:52:53 [internal pool scrub done txg:567999] complete=0

I''m in well over my head with this report from zpool status saying: root # zpool status z3 pool: z3 state: DEGRADED 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 pool from backup. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-8A

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

for s10u2, documentation recommends 3 to 9 devices in raidz. what is the basis for this recommendation? i assume it is performance and not failure resilience, but i am just guessing... [i know, recommendation was intended for people who know their raid cold, so it needed no further explanation] thanks... oz -- ozan s. yigit | oz at somanetworks.com | 416 977 1414 x 1540 I have a hard time

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>

I figure this group will know better than any other I have contact with, is 700-800 I/Ops reasonable for a 7200 RPM SATA drive (1 TB Sun badged Seagate ST31000N in a J4400) ? I have a resilver running and am seeing about 700-800 writes/sec. on the hot spare as it resilvers. There is no other I/O activity on this box, as this is a remote replication target for production data. I have a the

In a discussion a few weeks back, it was mentioned that the Best Practices Guide says something like "Don''t put more than ___ disks into a single vdev." At first, I challenged this idea, because I see no reason why a 21-disk raidz3 would be bad. It seems like a good thing. I was operating on assumption that resilver time was limited by sustainable throughput of disks, which

Hi, one quick&dirty way of backing up a pool that is a mirror of two devices is to zpool attach a third one, wait for the resilvering to finish, then zpool detach it again. The third device then can be used as a poor man''s simple backup. Has anybody tried it yet with a striped mirror? What if the pool is composed out of two mirrors? Can I attach devices to both mirrors, let them