similar to: slow zfs scrub?

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

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

Hello, My imap daemon get SIGABRT with following message. "pool_data_stack_realloc(): stack frame changed" This is caused with cvs head sources.(and or not with my last 2 patches.) This causes while doing search command. This is IMAP command log: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- * PREAUTH [CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 SORT THREAD=REFERENCES

Hello, I'm trying to configure shared mailboxes with ACL. My problem is FS layout. Our maildirs is completely outside of home dirs (home dirs is on pure SSD zpool, maildirs on separate HDD zpool). We are using checkpassword auth, which sets mailbox_location for each user. Layout is following: maildirs: /dpool/mail/maldirs/user-uuid/ home is: /dpool/mail/home/user-uuid/ index &

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 21 Jan 2015, Peter Hodur wrote: > > maildirs: > > /dpool/mail/maldirs/user-uuid/ > > > home is: > > /dpool/mail/home/user-uuid/ > > > index & control is under home: > > /dpool/mail/home/user-uuid/[index|control] > > > the problem is how to specify path in NAMESPACE definition. I can use

Hi, Today's core dump from 1.0alpha1 came from a syslog message of: IMAP(user): pool_data_stack_realloc(): stack frame changed gdb info on the resulting core dump attached. Question: how many people are building/using dovecot 1.0alpha1 with gcc 4.0.1 versus gcc 3.4.x? I am wondering if these issues come from the compiler instead of dovecot itself? Jeff Earickson Colby College

Hi all, IHACWHAC (I have a colleague who has a customer - hello, if you''re listening :-) who''s trying to build and test a scenario where he can salvage the data off the (internal ?) disks of a T2000 in case the sysboard and with it the on-board raid controller dies. If I understood correctly, he replaces the motherboard, does some magic to get the raid config back, but even

IF you run solaris and opensolaris ?for example you my use c0t0d0 (for scsi disk) or c0d0 (for ide /SATA disk ) as the system disk. In default ,solaris x86 and opensolaris will use RAW driver : c0t0d0s0 (/dev/rdsk/c0t0d0s0) as the member driver of rpool. Infact, solaris2 partition can be more then one in each Hard Disk, so we also can use the RAW driver like : c0t0d0p1 (/dev/rdsk/c0t0d0p1)

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

The 80Gb Intel MLC SSDs have been hard to find in-stock and prices keep varying .... The original list price on the x25m 80Gb MLC drive was $230 - and it was *supposed* to be available for less than that. Demand has been high and a lot of on-line sellers have taken advantage of the demand to keep prices high. In particular, newegg.com, who usually have very keen pricing, has been selling the

I''m just uploading all my data to my server and the space used is much more than what i''m uploading; Documents = 147MB Videos = 11G Software= 1.4G By my calculations, that equals 12.547T, yet zpool list is showing 21G as being allocated; NAME SIZE ALLOC FREE CAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT dpool 27.2T 21.2G 27.2T 0% 1.00x ONLINE - It doesn''t look like

Hi all, just after sending a message to sunmanagers I realized that my question should rather have gone here. So sunmanagers please excus ethe double post: I have inherited a X4140 (8 SAS slots) and have just setup the system with Solaris 10 09. I first setup the system on a mirrored pool over the first two disks pool: rpool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME

This might be a bad HD but I thought I'd ask anyway. Running RedHat 8 system; kernel 2.4.18-14. Was having some weird problems on boot so I did: % find / -type f -fstype ext3 | perl -n -e 'print `md5sum $_`;' to torture the disk. It's a 20G Maxtor disk with about 12G free. The system locks up hard (no ping, no capslock light) after a while. Different place every time.

Hi all, I have a 5 drive RAIDZ volume with data that I''d like to recover. The long story runs roughly: 1) The volume was running fine under FreeBSD on motherboard SATA controllers. 2) Two drives were moved to a HP P411 SAS/SATA controller 3) I *think* the HP controllers wrote some volume information to the end of each disk (hence no more ZFS labels 2,3) 4) In its "auto

My setup: A SuperMicro 24-drive chassis with Intel dual-processor motherboard, three LSI SAS3081E controllers, and 24 SATA 2TB hard drives, divided into three pools with each pool a single eight-disk RAID-Z2. (Boot is an SSD connected to motherboard SATA.) This morning I got a cheerful email from my monitoring script: "Zchecker has discovered a problem on bigdawg." The full output is

Resolve the given path within the chroot, so scrub can be invoked outside the chroot on an already-resolved path. Given that realpath is used, its availability is checked manually, since scrub-file already depends on the "scrub" feature. Slightly ugly, but on the other hand realpath is generally available nowadays, so the check should not be failing. Add few tests in scrub-file for this

I have a weekly scrub setup, and I''ve seen at least once now where it says "don''t snapshot while scrubbing" Is this a data integrity issue, or will it make one or both of the processes take longer? Thanks

uname -a SunOS 5.11 snv_132 i86pc i386 i86pc Solaris scrub made my system unresponsive. could not login with ssh. had to do a hard reboot. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

2011-12-17 21:59, Steve Gonczi wrote: > Coincidentally, I am pretty sure entry 0 of these meta dnode objects is > never used, > so the block with the checksum error does never comes into play. > Steve I wonder if this is true indeed - seems so, because the pool seems to work reardless of the seemingly deep metadata error. Now, can someone else please confirm this guess? If I were to

Hey folks, While scrubbing, zpool status shows nearly 40MB "repaired" but 0 in each of the read/write/checksum columns for each disk. One disk has "(repairing)" to the right but once the scrub completes there''s no mention that anything ever needed fixing. Any idea what would need to be repaired on that disk? Are there any other types of errors besides