similar to: raidz2 import, some slices, some not

I have a customer who has implemented the following layout: As you can see, he has mostly raidz zvols but has one raidz2 in the same zpool. What are the implications here? Is this a bad thing to do? Please elaborate. Thanks, Scott Gaspard Scott.J.Gaspard at Sun.COM > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > > chipool1 ONLINE 0 0 0 > >

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

I read Ben Rockwood''s blog post about Thumpers and SMART (http://cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=993). Will the SUNWhd package only work on a Thumper? Can I use this on my snv_101 system with AMD 64 bit processor and nVidia SATA?

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

Hello, I mentioned this problem a year ago here and filed 6792701 and I know it has been discussed since. It should have been fixed in snv_118, but I can still trigger the same problem. This is only triggered if the creation of a large file is aborted, for example by loss of power, crash or SIGINT to mkfile(1M). The bug should probably be reopened but I post it here since some people where

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

Hey all, I''m not sure if this is a ZFS bug or a hardware issue I''m having - any pointers would be great! Following contents include: - high-level info about my system - my first thought to debugging this - stack trace - format output - zpool status output - dmesg output High-Level Info About My System --------------------------------------------- - fresh

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

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

Will it be possible to update an existing raidz to a raidz2? I wouldn''t think so, but maybe I''ll be pleasantly surprised. -frank

Hello, 1) If i create a raidz2 pool on some disks, start to use it, then the disks'' controllers change. What will happen to my zpool? Will it be lost or is there some disk tagging which allows zfs to recognise the disks? 2) if i create a raidz2 on 3 HDs, do i have any resilience? If any one of those drives fails, do i loose everything? I''ve got one such pool and

I recently had a hard drive die on my 6 drive raidz2 array (4+2). Unfortunately, now that the dead drive didn''t register anymore, Linux decided to rearrange all of the drive names around such that zfs couldn''t figure out what drives went where. After much hair pulling, I gave up on Linux and went to OpenSolaris, but it wouldn''t recognize my SATA controller, so

I have an X4500 thumper box with 48x 500gb drives setup in a a pool and split into raidz2 sets of 8 - 10 drives within the single pool. I had a failed disk with i cfgadm unconfigured and replaced no problem, but it wasn''t recognised as a Sun drive in Format and unbeknown to me someone else logged in remotely at the time and issued a zpool replace.... I corrected the system/drive

I''d like to replace/upgrade two 500GB disks in RaidZ2 vdev with 1TB disks, but I have some preliminary questions/concerns before trying ''zfs replace dpool ?'' Will ZFS permit this replacement? Will ZFS use the extra space in a heterogeneous RaidZ2 vdev, or is the size limited by the smallest disk in the vdev? Thanks in advance, Vizzini The system is currently running

Hello all, I''m building a file server (or just a storage that I intend to access by Workgroup from primarily Windows machines) using zfs raidz2 and openindiana 148. I will be using this to stream blu-ray movies and other media, so I will be happy if I get just 20MB/s reads, which seems like a pretty low standard considering some people are getting 100+. This is my first time with OI, and

Hi guys, I am about to reshape my data spool and am wondering what performance diff. I can expect from the new config. Vs. The old. The old config. Is a pool of a single vdev of 8 disks raidz2. The new pool config is 2vdev''s of 7 disk raidz2 in a single pool. I understand it should be better with higher io throughput....and better read/write rates...but interested to hear the science

I currently am getting good speeds out of my existing system (8x 2TB in a RAIDZ2 exported over fibre channel) but there''s no such thing as too much speed, and these other two drive bays are just begging for drives in them.... If I go to 10x 2TB in a RAIDZ3, will the extra spindles increase speed, or will the extra parity writes reduce speed, or will the two factors offset and leave things

I''m using ZFS and a drive has failed. I am quite new to solaris and Frankly I seem to know more about ZFS and how it works then I do the OS. I have the hot spare taking over the failed disk and from here, do I need to remove the disk on the OS side (if so what is proper) or do I need to take action on the ZFS side first? This message posted from opensolaris.org

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 playing around with ZFS and want to figure out the best use of my 6x 300GB SATA drives. The purpose of the drives is to store all of my data at home (video, photos, music, etc). I''m debating between: 6x 300GB disks in a single raidz2 pool --or-- 2x (3x 300GB disks in a pool) mirrored I''ve read up a lot on ZFS, but I can''t really figure out which is