similar to: state of zfs pool shrinking

Hello, I''m looking for info on adding a disk to my current zfs pool. I am running OpenSoarlis snv_98. I have upgraded my pool since my image-update. When I installed OpenSolaris it was a machine with 2 hard disks (regular IDE). Is it possible to add the second hard disk to the pool to increase my storage capacity without a raid controller? >From what I''ve found, the

Author: talley Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: 8f002966e2de5d912f1b3f740784a1307059b667 Log message: 6351004 capacity of pool in zfs gui is not consistent with the output of zpool list Files: update: usr/src/lib/libzfs_jni/common/libzfs_jni_dataset.c

Thies C. Arntzen wrote: > Hi, > > I’m new here so apologies if this has been answered before. > > I have a box that uses ZFS for everything (ubuntu 17.04) and I want to > create a libvirt pool on that. My ZFS pool is named „big" > > So i do: > > > zfs create big/zpool > > virsh pool-define-as --name zpool --source-name big/zpool --type zfs > >

Hi, I’m new here so apologies if this has been answered before. I have a box that uses ZFS for everything (ubuntu 17.04) and I want to create a libvirt pool on that. My ZFS pool is named „big" So i do: > zfs create big/zpool > virsh pool-define-as --name zpool --source-name big/zpool --type zfs > virsh pool-start zpool > virsh pool-autostart zpool > virsh pool-list >

Thank you for your reply. I have managed to create a virtual machine on my ZFS-filesystem using virt-install:-) It seems to me that my version of libvirt (Ubuntu 17.04) has problems enumerating the devices when "virsh vol-list“ is used. The volumes are available for virt-install but not thru virsh or virt-manager. As to when the volumes disappear in virsh vol-list - I have no idea. I’m not

Hello all, This is not so much a question but rather a "how-to" for posterity. Comments and possible fixes are welcome, though. I''m toying (for work) with a Solaris 10 VM, and it has a dedicated virtual HDD for data and zones. The template VM had a 20Gb disk, but a particular application needs more. I hoped ZFS autoexpand would do the trick transparently, but it turned out

*Synopsis*: "set once" / "create time only" properties can''t be set for pool level dataset Due to a change requested by <User 1-5Q-12446>, <User 1-5Q-12446> is now the responsible engineer for: CR 6647661 changed on Jan 7 2008 by <User 1-5Q-12446> === Field ============ === New Value ============= === Old Value ============= Responsible Engineer

*Synopsis*: "set once" / "create time only" properties can''t be set for pool level dataset CR 6647661 changed on Apr 15 2009 by <User 1-ERV-6> === Field ============ === New Value ============= === Old Value ============= See Also 6828754 ====================== ===========================

Hi all, I recently created a RAID-Z1 pool out of a set of 7 SCSI disks, using the following command: # zpool create magicant raidz c5t0d0 c5t1d0 c5t2d0 c5t3d0 c5t4d0 c5t5d0 c5t6d0 It worked fine, but I was slightly confused by the size yield (99 GB vs the 116 GB I had on my other RAID-Z1 pool of same-sized disks). I thought one of the disks might have been to blame, so I tried swapping it out

Hi, I have lost a ZFS volume and I am hoping to get some help to recover the information ( a couple of months worth of work :( ). I have been using ZFS for more than 6 months on this project. Yesterday I ran a "zvol status" command, the system froze and rebooted. When it came back the discs where not available. See bellow the output of " zpool status", "format"

I am seeing this issue posted a lot in the forums: A zpool add/replace command is run, for example: zpool add archive spare c2t0d2 invalid vdev specification use ''-f'' to override the following errors: /dev/dsk/c2t1d7s0 is part of active ZFS pool archive. Please see zpool(1M). (-f just says: the following errors must be manually repaired:) Also, when running format and

http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=631 Summary: zpool get with no pool name dumps core in zfs-crypto Classification: Development Product: zfs-crypto Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: Solaris Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P4 Component: other AssignedTo:

I''m seeing odd behaviour when I create a ZFS raidz pool using three disks. The output of "zpool status" shows the pool size as the size of the three disks combined (as if it were a Raid 0 volume). This isn''t expected behaviour is it? When I create a mirrored volume in ZFS everything is as one would expect the pool is the size of a single drive. My setup: Compaq

I have an OpenSolaris snv_101 box with ZFS on it. (Sun Ultra 20 M2) zpool name is rpool. The I have a 2nd hard drive in the box that I am trying to recover the ZFS data from (long story but that HD became unbootable after installing IPS on the machine) Both drives have a pool named "rpool", so I can''t import the rpool from the 2nd drive. root at hyperion:~# zpool status

We have a Sun v890, and I''m interested converting existing ZFS zpool from c#t#d# to MPxIO. % zpool status pool: data state: ONLINE status: ONLINE scrub: scrub completed with 0 errors on Sun Jul 15 10:58:33 2007 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM data ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t2d0

Hi all, we have just bought a sun X2200M2 (4GB / 2 opteron 2214 / 2 disks 250GB SATA2, solaris 10 update 4) and a sun STK 2540 FC array (8 disks SAS 146 GB, 1 raid controller). The server is attached to the array with a single 4 Gb Fibre Channel link. I want to make a mirror using ZFS with this array. I have created 2 volumes on the array in RAID0 (stripe of 128 KB) presented to the host

Hello, Sorry for the (very) long subject but I''ve pinpointed the problem to this exact situation. I know about the other threads related to hangs, but in my case there was no < zfs destroy > involved, nor any compression or deduplication. To make a long story short, when - a disk contains 2 partitions (p1=32GB, p2=1800 GB) and - p1 is used as part of a zfs mirror of rpool

Hello, I am actually using ZFS under FreeBSD, but maybe someone over here can help me anyway. I''d like some advice if I still can rely on one of my ZFS pools: [user at host ~]$ sudo zpool clear zpool01 ... [user at host ~]$ sudo zpool scrub zpool01 ... [user at host ~]$ sudo zpool status -v zpool01 pool: zpool01 state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an

Hi, I had a plan to set up a zfs pool with different raid levels but I ran into an issue based on some testing I''ve done in a VM. I have 3x 750 GB hard drives and 2x 320 GB hard drives available, and I want to set up a RAIDZ for the 750 GB and mirror for the 320 GB and add it all to the same pool. I tested detaching a drive and it seems to seriously mess up the entire pool and I

Hi experts, I have few issues about ZFS and virtualization: [b]Virtualization and performance[/b] When filesystem traffic occurs on a zpool containing only spindles dedicated to this zpool i/o can be distributed evenly. When the zpool is located on a lun sliced from a raid group shared by multiple systems the capability of doing i/o from this zpool will be limited. Avoiding or limiting i/o to