Well I managed to get my pool back up, unconventionally though...
I got to thinking about how my data was fine before the replace so I
popped the cable off of the new disk and walla! The spare showed back
up and the pool imported in a degraded state.
Something must have gotten botched in the repl
Kenny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have Sun Solaris 5.10 Generic_120011-14 and the zpool version is 4.
> I've found references to version 5-10 on the Open Solaris site.
>
> Are these versions for Open solaris only? I've searched the SUN site
> for ZFS patches and found nothing (most likely ope
On Tue, 20 May 2008, Marion Hakanson wrote:
> You've probably already seen/heard this, but I haven't seen it mentioned
> in this thread. The consensus is, and measurements seem to confirm, that
> splitting it into two vdev's will double your available IOPS for small,
> random read loads on raidz/r
Ok, I used the OpenSolaris 2008.05 live cd to try things on a newer
version of nevada. No luck.
At this point I just need to get my data off of the pool. Is there any
way to do that without importing the pool?
Any help/ideas are greatly appreciated since this data is REALLY
important to me.
On T
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> I'm curious about your array configuration above... did you create your
> RAIDZ2 as one vdev or multiple vdev's? If multiple, how many? On mine, I
> have all 10 disks set up as one RAIDZ2 vdev which is supposed to be near the
> performance limit... I'm wondering how much
Ah, yes, that was the first thing I checked.
Disk utilities verify the state of the A1000 as funtioning normally.
Just found a discussion about using zdb. Suggestions?
Brian
michael schuster wrote:
> Brian Nelson wrote:
>> Although not OpenSolaris, I had a raidz pool on a SCSI A1000 using
>> Sol
Brian Nelson wrote:
> Although not OpenSolaris, I had a raidz pool on a SCSI A1000 using Solaris 10
> just disappear. zpool
> import says no pool exists.
have you checked the state / health of the A1000?
Michael
--
Michael Schuster http://blogs.sun.com/recursion
Recursion, n.: see 'Recursi
Although not OpenSolaris, I had a raidz pool on a SCSI A1000 using Solaris 10
just disappear. zpool
import says no pool exists.
Any suggestions?
Brian
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinf
I am using OpenSolaris 2008.05. If I do "zpool create -R /altroot mypool c0d3"
then "zfs get mountpoint mypool" shows the value as "/altroot" rather then
/altroot/mypool".
If you then do "zpool export mypool" followed by "zpool import mypool", you get:
cannot mount 'mypool': No such file or di
Here's what I get back:
$ sudo zdb -e tank
zdb: can't open tank: Invalid argument
"tank" is the name of my pool. I tried a bogus name and get this back:
$ sudo zdb -e tank2
Assertion failed: nvlist_lookup_string(config, name, &s) == 0, file
../zdb.c, line 2080, function nvlist_string_match
Abort
Look at alternate cachefiles ('zpool set cachefile', 'zpool import -c
', etc). This avoids scanning all devices in the system and
instead takes the config from the cachefile.
- Eric
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 05:20:52PM -0400, Chris Siebenmann wrote:
> We're planning to build a ZFS-based Solaris N
On Tue, 20 May 2008, Chris Siebenmann wrote:
> We're planning to build a ZFS-based Solaris NFS fileserver environment
> with the backend storage being iSCSI-based, in part because of the
> possibilities for failover. In exploring things in our test environment,
> I have noticed that 'zpool import
We're planning to build a ZFS-based Solaris NFS fileserver environment
with the backend storage being iSCSI-based, in part because of the
possibilities for failover. In exploring things in our test environment,
I have noticed that 'zpool import' takes a fairly long time; about
35 to 45 seconds per
> How do I go about making it show?
zdb -e exported_pool_name
will show the children's paths and find the path of the "spare"
that's missing and once you get it to shows up you can import the pool.
Rob
___
zfs-discuss mailing l
Hi Rob, thanks for the help.
How do I go about making it show? The pool won't import so I'm pretty
limited in what I can do.
Before (when the pool was running fine) it would just show at the
bottom of the pool config. For instance, when I would run 'zpool
status'.
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 3:46 PM
> There's also a spare attached to the pool that's not showing here.
can you make it show?
Rob
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
type:
zpool import 11464983018236960549 rpool.old
zpool import -f mypool
zpool upgrade -a
zfs upgrade -a
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Hi All ;
2 TB limit on the 6000 series will be removed when we release CAM 6,1 and
cyrstall firmware. I cant give an actual date at the moment but it's pretty
close.
The same will happen for 2500 series but it will take some more time.
Mertol
Mertol Ozyoney
Storage Practice - Sales Manager
Here's some more output that might be helpful:
$ sudo zpool import
pool: tank
id: 1800443326470279765
state: UNAVAIL
action: The pool cannot be imported due to damaged devices or data.
config:
tankUNAVAIL insufficient replicas
raidz1UNAVAIL corrupted data
So just as the subject says, I replaced a failed disk. Resilver
completed successfully and everything was fine. The next day I
restarted the system and the pool was unavailable. I tried to export
it and re-import it - unfortunately it exported and now it won't
import.
This is what I get back:
$ su
> would do and booted from the CD. OK, now I zpool imported rpool,
> modified [], exported the pool, and rebooted.
the oops part is the "exported the pool" as a reboot after editing
would have worked as expected so rpool wasn't marked as exported
so boot from the cdrom again, zpool import r
Hi,
I've run into an issue with a test machine that I'm happy to encounter
with this machine, because it is no real trouble. But I'd like to know
the solution for this issue in case I run into it again...
I've installed OpenSolaris 2008.05 on an USB disk on a laptop. After
installing I've modifie
Your Solaris 10 system should also have the Sun Update Manager which will allow
you to install patches in a more automated fashion. Look for it on the Gnome /
CDE menus.
Cheers
Andrew.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss maili
On Mon, 19 May 2008, Richard Elling wrote:
> I believe the plan is to track the releases, though perhaps only in the
> repository. If so, then you can get the bits, but you'll need a new
> installer (CD?) to actually install everything on a ZFS file system.
The initial openSolaris 05/08 install
Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 May 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >
> > The reason why GPLd code may happily call non-GPLd code is because otherwise
> > GPLd code would be illegal on AIX, HP-UX or Cygwin (or other closed source
> > platforms). This is what the FSF likes to
On Tue, 20 May 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> The reason why GPLd code may happily call non-GPLd code is because otherwise
> GPLd code would be illegal on AIX, HP-UX or Cygwin (or other closed source
> platforms). This is what the FSF likes to avoid. Given the fact that the GPLv2
It seems that i
"Brian H. Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Keith Bierman wrote:
> >
> > Not being a lawyer, and this not being a Legal forum ... can we leave
> > license analysis alone?
> >
> >
>
> The GNU _itself_ states that it is not allowable in plain English. Why
> people continue to argue about it
Keith Bierman wrote:
Not being a lawyer, and this not being a Legal forum ... can we leave
license analysis alone?
The GNU _itself_ states that it is not allowable in plain English. Why
people continue to argue about it is beyond me :-)
Common Development and Distribution License (CD
On May 20, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> ,,,
> It may be that you confuse the term "work" in trying to extend it
> in a wrong way.
...many wise words elided...
Not being a lawyer, and this not being a Legal forum ... can we leave
Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 May 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> > The GPL does not forbid GPLd code to use non-GPLd code from a GPLd project.
> > If this was not true, then the GPL would be completely unusable. It is bad
> > to
> > see that RMS in his talks always tel
| So, from a feature perspective it looks like S10U6 is going to be in
| pretty good shape ZFS-wise. If only someone could speak to (perhaps
| under the cloak of anonymity ;) ) the timing side :).
For what it's worth, back in January or so we were told that S10U6 was
scheduled for August. Given t
On Tue, 20 May 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> The GPL does not forbid GPLd code to use non-GPLd code from a GPLd project.
> If this was not true, then the GPL would be completely unusable. It is bad to
> see that RMS in his talks always tells you what he _likes_ to do but never
> what
> the GPL r
On Tue, 20 May 2008, Tom Buskey wrote:
> Regardless, ZFS is compelling enought that I'd like it everywhere.
Agreed--but not at the expense of changing its (ZFS') license.
--
Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA
CEO,
My Online Home Inventory
URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
http://www.linke
> > On May 18, 2008, at 14:01, Mario Goebbels wrote:
> > ZFS on Linux on
> > humper would actually be very interesting to many
> of
> > them. I think
> > that's good for Sun. Of course, ZFS on Linux on
>
> Umm, how many Linux shops buy support and/or HW from
> Sun ?
>
> It it's a Linux sho
Kenny wrote:
> Back to the top
>
> Is there a patch upgrade for ZFS on Solaris 10? Where might I find it.
it's the kernel patch, depending on how far back you are in the update's you
might have to
install m ultiple Kernel Patches.
the latest one is 127127-11/127128-11 ( the u5 KU )
it dep
Back to the top
Is there a patch upgrade for ZFS on Solaris 10? Where might I find it.
TIA --Kenny
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/
"Colin Raven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In general, licensing issues just make my brain bleed, but one hopes
> that the licensing gurus can get their heads together and find a way
> to get this done. I don't personally believe that Open Solaris *OR*
I see no license issue here. The problem is
Amazon EC2 enviroment represent some interesting chalenges like ephemeral
storage feature fist access can be significantly slower then
subsequent ones.
See more in 'OpenSolaris on Amazon EC2' workshop:
http://blogs.sun.com/VirtualGuru/entry/warm_welcome_opensolaris_on_amazon
Nice day
Virtual
Your question has already been answered on another thread:
5008936 ZFS and/or zvol should support dumps
5070124 dumpadm -d /dev/... does not enforce block
device requirement for savecore
6633197 zvol should not permit newfs or createpool while
it's in use by swap or dump
You can look these bugs u
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 10:06 PM, Bill McGonigle
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On May 18, 2008, at 14:01, Mario Goebbels wrote:
> >
> >> I mean, if the Linux folks to want it, fine. But
> if Sun's actually
> >> helping with such a possible effort, then it's
> just shooting itself in
> >> the f
Bill McGonigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On May 19, 2008, at 17:31, David Magda wrote:
> > you can use, modify, and redistribute code released under CDDL
> > without worrying about any patents
>
> On May 19, 2008, at 18:12, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > If it was correct, then neither FreeBSD no
> On May 18, 2008, at 14:01, Mario Goebbels wrote:
> ZFS on Linux on
> humper would actually be very interesting to many of
> them. I think
> that's good for Sun. Of course, ZFS on Linux on
Umm, how many Linux shops buy support and/or HW from Sun ?
It it's a Linux shop money is (in order)
On May 20, 2008, at 03:09, Erik Trimble wrote:
> That is, the ZFS on-disk format isn't IP protected, and the general
> concepts of how ZFS works (pools, CoW, snapshots, etc) are open,
> it's just _how_ the guts do these things which are.
I'm also in the decidedly-not-a-lawyer camp too, but w
Frankly, while I love Linux for a bunch of things (it runs my desktop,
amongst other things), I really think the impetus of "Geeze, can't we
get Linux to have THAT" every time some interesting thing comes along is
a BAD IDEA.
Having a large ecosystem of OSes which can cross-germinate ideas, but
44 matches
Mail list logo
