similar to: Raidz2 slow read speed (under 5MB/s)

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''ve got a zpool that has 4 raidz2 vdevs each with 4 disks (750GB), plus 4 spares. At one point 2 disks failed (in different vdevs). The message in /var/adm/messages for the disks were ''device busy too long''. Then SMF printed this message: Nov 23 04:23:51 x.x.com EVENT-TIME: Fri Nov 23 04:23:51 EST 2007 Nov 23 04:23:51 x.x.com PLATFORM: Sun Fire X4200 M2, CSN:

Following is the output of "zpool iostat -v". My question is regarding the datapool row and the raidz2 row statistics. The datapool row statistic "write bandwidth" is 381 which I assume takes into account all the disks - although it doesn''t look like it''s an average. The raidz2 row static "write bandwidth" is 36, which is where I am confused. What

Hello experts, I''ve had a lingering question for some time: when I use "zpool iostat -v" the values do not quite sum up. In the example below with a raidz2 array made of 6 drives: * the reported 33K of writes are less than two disks'' workload at this time (at 17.9K each), overall disks writes are 107.4K = 325% of 33K. * write ops sum up to 18 = 225% of 8 ops to

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

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 > >

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

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

Hi all I have this server with some 50TB disk space. It originally had 30TB on WD Greens, was filled quite full, and another storage chassis was added. Now, space problem gone, fine, but what about speed? Three of the VDEVs are quite full, as indicated below. VDEV #3 (the one with the spare active) just spent some 72 hours resilvering a 2TB drive. Now, those green drives suck quite hard, but not

Hello! I''am setup zfs / cifs home storage server, end now have low performance with play movie stored on this zfs from windows client. server hardware is not new , but n windows it perfomance was normal. CPU is AMD Athlon Burton Thunderbird 2500, runing on 1,7GHz, 1024 RAM and storage: usb c4t0d0 ST332062-0A-3.AA-298.09GB /pci at 0,0/pci1458,5004 at 2,2/cdrom at 1/disk at

I am in the middle of converting a FreeBSD 8.0-Release system to OpenSolaris b130 In order to import my stuff, the only way i knew to make it work (from testing in virtualbox) was to do this: label a bunch of drives with an EFI label by using the opensolaris live cd, then use those drives in FreeBSD to create a zpool. This worked fine. (though i did get a warning in freebsd about GPT

Well, I''ve searched my brains out and I can''t seem to find a reason for this. I''m getting bad to medium performance with my new test storage device. I''ve got 24 1.5T disks with 2 SSDs configured as a zil log device. I''m using the Areca raid controller, the driver being arcmsr. Quad core AMD with 16 gig of RAM OpenSolaris upgraded to snv_134. The zpool

Hi, Does anyone use Seagate ST32000542AS disks with ZFS? I wonder if the performance is not that ugly as with WD Green WD20EARS disks. Thanks, -- Piotr Jasiukajtis | estibi | SCA OS0072 http://estseg.blogspot.com

hi all I have a server running svn_131 and the scrub is very slow. I have a cron job for starting it every week and now it''s been running for a while, and it''s very, very slow scrub: scrub in progress for 40h41m, 12.56% done, 283h14m to go The configuration is listed below, consisting of three raidz2 groups with seven 2TB drives each. The root fs is on a pair of X25M (gen 1)