Am Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:49:01 +0200
schrieb Marius Nünnerich :
> For
> future constructions of zpool's one should zero the first few sectors
> of a device. For your specific I would make a tested backup and then
> zero the first 1KB of da0. But beware that it's dangerous! Don't blame
> me if you lo
Hi!
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 05:01:05PM +0200, Marius Nünnerich wrote:
> Hmm, it's rather stupid to put a GPT entry in the second sector but
> not the corresponding one in the last sector. So our GPT
> implementation has the right to think this GPT is broken. As far as I
> understand the ondisk spe
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 16:50, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 04:41:14PM +0200, Marius Nünnerich wrote:
>> OK, there is the GPT signature which reads "EFI PART" at offset 0x200.
>> What was on the disk before?
>
> Nothing. Factory new.
>
>> I think it should look differe
Hi!
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 04:41:14PM +0200, Marius Nünnerich wrote:
> OK, there is the GPT signature which reads "EFI PART" at offset 0x200.
> What was on the disk before?
Nothing. Factory new.
> I think it should look different. There is a document from sun which
> explains the ZFS ondisk for
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 16:41, Marius Nünnerich wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 16:14, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 03:38:51PM +0200, Marius Nünnerich wrote:
>>
>>> I'm sorry, it should have said:
>>> dd if=/dev/da0 count=4 | hd
>>
>> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 16:14, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 03:38:51PM +0200, Marius Nünnerich wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry, it should have said:
>> dd if=/dev/da0 count=4 | hd
>
> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ||
> *
> 01b0
Hi!
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 03:38:51PM +0200, Marius Nünnerich wrote:
> I'm sorry, it should have said:
> dd if=/dev/da0 count=4 | hd
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ||
*
01b0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ff ||
00
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 13:46, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 01:11:16PM +0200, Marius Nünnerich wrote:
>
>> > GEOM: da0: corrupt or invalid GPT detected.
>> > GEOM: da0: GPT rejected -- may not be recoverable.
>
>> could you post the output of
>> dd if=/dev/da0 count=1
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 01:11:16PM +0200, Marius Nünnerich wrote:
> > GEOM: da0: corrupt or invalid GPT detected.
> > GEOM: da0: GPT rejected -- may not be recoverable.
> could you post the output of
> dd if=/dev/da0 count=1 | hd
512 bytes transferred in 0.038030 secs (13463 bytes/sec)
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:43, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> I have a system with 12 S-ATA disks attached that I set up
> as a raidz2:
>
> %zpool status zfs
> pool: zfs
> state: ONLINE
> scrub: scrub in progress for 0h5m, 7.56% done, 1h3m to go
> config:
>
> NAME STATE
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> I have a system with 12 S-ATA disks attached that I set up
> as a raidz2:
>
> %zpool status zfs
> pool: zfs
> state: ONLINE
> scrub: scrub in progress for 0h5m, 7.56% done, 1h3m to go
> config:
>
> NAME STATE
Hi, all,
I have a system with 12 S-ATA disks attached that I set up
as a raidz2:
%zpool status zfs
pool: zfs
state: ONLINE
scrub: scrub in progress for 0h5m, 7.56% done, 1h3m to go
config:
NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
zfs ONLINE 0 0 0
12 matches
Mail list logo
