Chris,
I believe the trouble is stemming from the fact both devices in the pool
are seen as available, but as customer noted one side of the mirror was
destroyed by the install.
If the untouched device were alone then the pool should be listed as
being in a degraded state as with a mirror the poo
Hello all,
I have a customer asking the following question. Does anyone have any
suggestions? I have searched SunSolve
and have not had any luck finding documentation to assist this customer.
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated!
Thank you in advance,
Chris
-C
Michael Shadle wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
No. The two vdevs will be load shared rather than creating a mirror. This
should double your multi-user performance.
Cool - now a followup -
When I attach this new raidz2, will ZFS auto "rebalance" data
Hi,
I have lost a ZFS volume and I am hoping to get some help to recover the
information ( a couple of months worth of work :( ).
I have been using ZFS for more than 6 months on this project. Yesterday
I ran a "zvol status" command, the system froze and rebooted. When it
came back the discs
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
> No. The two vdevs will be load shared rather than creating a mirror. This
> should double your multi-user performance.
Cool - now a followup -
When I attach this new raidz2, will ZFS auto "rebalance" data between
the two, or will it keep
* On 07 Apr 2009, Michael Shadle wrote:
>
> Now quick question - if I have a raidz2 named 'tank' already I can
> expand the pool by doing:
>
> zpool attach tank raidz2 device1 device2 device3 ... device7
>
> It will make 'tank' larger and each group of disks (vdev? or zdev?)
> will be dual pari
Michael Shadle wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 3:19 AM, Michael Shadle wrote:
I'm going to try to move one of my disks off my rpool tomorrow (since
it's a mirror) to a different controller.
According to what I've heard before, ZFS should automagically
recognize this new location and have no
On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Michael Shadle wrote:
Now quick question - if I have a raidz2 named 'tank' already I can
expand the pool by doing:
zpool attach tank raidz2 device1 device2 device3 ... device7
It will make 'tank' larger and each group of disks (vdev? or zdev?)
will be dual parity. It won't
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 3:19 AM, Michael Shadle wrote:
> I'm going to try to move one of my disks off my rpool tomorrow (since
> it's a mirror) to a different controller.
>
> According to what I've heard before, ZFS should automagically
> recognize this new location and have no problem, right?
I s
