Andriy Gapon
2012-Aug-23 16:32 UTC
[zfs-discuss] unallocated block pointers in indirect block
Guys, I am curious if the following is something valid or a result of a bad corruption. Here is a snippet from a dump of an indirect block (zdb -R with i flag): ... [many uninterestingly good BPs skipped] DVA[0]=<0:13da6a47a00:2d000> [L0 ZFS plain file] fletcher4 uncompressed LE contiguous unique single size=20000L/20000P birth=39369L/39369P fill=1 cksum=3df551808443:f842dcdc8a32e57:af4094c9cac4733c:c7ac3865df0c4ced DVA[0]=<0:13da6a74a00:2d000> [L0 ZFS plain file] fletcher4 uncompressed LE contiguous unique single size=20000L/20000P birth=39369L/39369P fill=1 cksum=3e69cad45d5c:f8bc987d5aabad0:e5f72ba62f3b2955:84a2a388440c0d31 <hole> <hole> <hole> <hole> <hole> <hole> <hole> <hole> <hole> <hole> DVA[0]=<0:ac00:1c400> DVA[1]=<0:1ee00:1ea00> DVA[2]=<0:1ee00:11400> [L0 unallocated] inherit inherit BE contiguous unique triple size=1c000L/200P birth=12L/71P fill=93 cksum=9a:97:8f:b ...>From here on all the BPs appear either as holes or as "L0 unallocated".I wonder how those unallocated BPs came to be and if their presence is valid and is to be expected by the ZFS code. Just in case, the indirect block passes checksum verification (and also decompression, in fact). Thank you very much in advance. -- Andriy Gapon