similar to: Need Help Invalidating Uberblock

Hi, my system (solaris b77) was physically destroyed and i loosed data saved in a zpool mirror. The only thing left is a dettached vdev from the pool. I''m aware that uberblock is gone and that i can''t import the pool. But i still hope their is a way or a tool (like tct http://www.porcupine.org/forensics/) i can go too recover at least partially some data) thanks in advance for

Long story short, my cat jumped on my server at my house crashing two drives at the same time. It was a 7 drive raidz (next time ill do raidz2). The server crashed complaining about a drive failure, so i rebooted into single user mode not realizing that two drives failed. I put in a new 500g replacement and had zfs start a replace operation which failed at about 2% because there was two broken

Hello all, I found this dialog on the zfs-devel at zfsonlinux.org list, and I''d like someone to confirm-or-reject the discussed statement. Paraphrasing in my words and understanding: "Labels, including Uberblock rings, are fixed 256KB in size each, of which 128KB is the UB ring. Normally there is 1KB of data in one UB, which gives 128 TXGs to rollback to. When ashift=12 is

We are currently experiencing a very huge perfomance drop on our zfs storage server. We have 2 pools, pool 1 stor is a raidz out of 7 iscsi nodes, home is a local mirror pool. Recently we had some issues with one of the storagenodes, because of that the pool was degraded. Since we did not succeed in bringing this storagenode back online (on zfs level) we upgraded our nashead from opensolaris b57

ZFS documentation lists snapshot limits on any single file system in a pool at 2**48 snaps, and that seems to logically imply that a snap on a file system does not require an update to the pool?s currently active uberblock. That is to say, that if we take a snapshot of a file system in a pool, and then make any changes to that file system, the copy on write behavior induced by the changes will

Hello, I''ve looked around Google and the zfs-discuss archives but have not been able to find a good answer to this question (and the related questions that follow it): How well does ZFS handle unexpected power failures? (e.g. environmental power failures, power supply dying, etc.) Does it consistently gracefully recover? Should having a UPS be considered a (strong) recommendation or

OK, I am a butt-head and accidentally destroyed my last snapshot of a replicated ZFS dataset. The dataset is NOT mounted and other than a resilver going on, there is no I/O going on to this dataset. Is there any way to roll back and get my latest snapshot back? from zpool history -i: 2012-06-18.10:34:00 zfs destroy xxx at 1339668001 2012-06-18.10:34:00 [internal destroy txg:2213852] dataset =

Tuning should not be done in general and Best practices should be followed. So get very much acquainted with this first : http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Best_Practices_Guide Then if you must, this could soothe or sting : http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide So drive carefully. -r

I would like to pick the brains of the ZFS experts on this list: What would you do next to try and recover this zfs pool? I have a ZFS RAIDZ1 pool named bank0 that I cannot import. It was composed of 4 1.5 TiB disks. One disk is totally dead. Another had SMART errors, but using GNU ddrescue I was able to copy all the data off successfully. I have copied all 3 remaining disks as images using

Has anyone worked with a x4500/x4540 and know if the internal raid controllers have a bbu? I''m concern that we won''t be able to turn off the write-cache on the internal hds and SSDs to prevent data corruption in case of a power failure. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

I recently had an X86 system (running Nexenta Elatte, if that matters -- b101 kernel, I think) suffer hardware failure and refuse to boot. I''ve migrated the disks into a SPARC system (b115) in an attempt to bring the data back online while I see about repairing the former system. However, I''m having some trouble with the import process: hydra# zpool import pool: tank id:

Hi, If I add an entire disk to a new pool by doing "zpool create", is this reversible? I.e. if there was data on that disk (e.g. it was the sole disk in a zpool in another system) can I get this back or is zpool create destructive? Joubert This message posted from opensolaris.org

I have three zpools on a server and want to add a mirrored pair of ssd''s for the ZIL. Can the same pair of SSDs be used for the ZIL of all three zpools or is it one ZIL SLOG device per zpool? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

I have a lot of people whispering "zfs" in my virtual ear these days, and at the same time I have an irrational attachment to xfs based entirely on its lack of the 32000 subdirectory limit. I''m not afraid of ext4''s newness, since really a lot of that stuff has been in Lustre for years. So a-benchmarking I went. Results at the bottom:

Hi, Unable to do peer probe... and unable to figure out whats the reason from the gluster log. can someone help ? 1) This is what i was trying... gluster> peer probe llm19.in.ibm.com Probe unsuccessful Probe returned with unknown errno 107 gluster> peer probe 9.124.111.25 Probe unsuccessful Probe returned with unknown errno 107 gluster> peer status Number of Peers: 1 Hostname:

We''re currently designing a ZFS fileserver environment with iSCSI based storage (for failover, cost, ease of expansion, and so on). As part of this we would like to use multipathing for extra reliability, and I am not sure how we want to configure it. Our iSCSI backend only supports multiple sessions per target, not multiple connections per session (and my understanding is that the

2. update ZFS in libfsimage from illumos for pygrub diff -r 7c12aaa128e3 -r c2e11847cac0 tools/libfsimage/Rules.mk --- a/tools/libfsimage/Rules.mk Thu Oct 24 22:46:20 2013 +0100 +++ b/tools/libfsimage/Rules.mk Sat Oct 26 20:03:06 2013 +0400 @@ -2,11 +2,19 @@ include $(XEN_ROOT)/tools/Rules.mk CFLAGS += -Wno-unknown-pragmas -I$(XEN_ROOT)/tools/libfsimage/common/

Hi Derek, Here''s the latest email I''ve received from the zfs-discuss alias. ------------- Begin Forwarded Message ------------- Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 23:55:27 -0400 From: Jonathan Edwards <Jonathan.Edwards@sun.com> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and HDS ShadowImage To: Eric Schrock <eric.schrock@sun.com> Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, Torrey McMahon

Hi, I've tested omega (cgi) on several sql databases on my local machine in which runs Ubuntu, using the version 0.9.4 (installed using apt), and I was really satisfied for the results I obtained. I customized a bit the "query" template. But once I installed omega on the server (using apt for Debian, and omega version 0.9.5), I discovered that the relevances didn't work, as

Hi, Is there anything known about ZFS under 10.0-BETA4 when FreeBSD was upgraded from 9.2-RELEASE? I have two servers, with very different hardware (on is with soft raid and the other have not) and after a zpool upgrade, no way to get the server booting. Do I miss something when upgrading? I cannot get the error message for the moment. I reinstalled the raid server under Linux and the other