On Sep 19, 2010, at 12:08 AM, Stephan Ferraro wrote:
> Is there a way to fsck the spacemap?
> Does scrub helps for this?
No, because issues that you see are internal inconsistencies with unclear
nature.
Though as actual issue varies from one inctance to another this is likely some
random corru
On Sep 19, 2010, at 12:11 AM, Stephan Ferraro wrote:
> This is new for me:
>
> $ zpool status
> pool: rpool
> state: ONLINE
> status: One or more devices has experienced an unrecoverable error. An
> attempt was made to correct the error. Applications are unaffected.
> action: Determine if t
I have registered ECC memory in the system. I will run some memory diagnostics
also, but mentioning the power supply got me thinking that around the same time
of the errors we had a storm and the lights dimmed in my house quite a few
times. It was not enough of a drop to shut the system down but
On Sep 19, 2010, at 9:06 PM, Stephan Ferraro wrote:
> Am 19.09.2010 um 18:59 schrieb Victor Latushkin:
>
>> On Sep 19, 2010, at 12:08 AM, Stephan Ferraro wrote:
>>
>>> Is there a way to fsck the spacemap?
>>> Does scrub helps for this?
>>
>> No, because issues that you see are internal inconsi
On Sep 18, 2010, at 11:37 AM, Stephan Ferraro wrote:
> I'm really angry against ZFS:
Emotions rarely help to get to the root cause...
> My server no more reboots because the ZFS spacemap is again corrupt.
> I just replaced the whole spacemap by recreating a new zpool from scratch and
> copying
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Bob Friesenhahn
>
> It is very unusual to obtain the same number of errors (probably same
> errors) from two devices in a pair. This should indicate a common
> symptom such as a memory error (
I have another question to add to the two you already asked and answered.
Why not two separate machines, one for XP, one for zfs/raid? At today's
network speeds, hooking a cable between those two would provide any speed data
access to the files in the raid that you want. A suitable ZFS machine
Pardon in advance my n00b ignorance. (Yes I have googled a [i]lot[/i] before
asking.)
I am considering VirtualBoxing away one physical machine at home, and running
WinXP as host (yes, as atrocious it may seem, explanation below [1]) and
OpenSolaris guest as file server, with OpenSolaris (why?[2
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Gary Gendel wrote:
> I moved my home directories to a new disk and then mounted the disk using a
> legacy mount point over /export/home. Here is the output of the zfs list:
>
> NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
> rpool 55.8G 11.1G
Doh,
Why didn't I think of that cheers Mark, some time the most obvious options get
completely passed by, alt boot environment it is.
Thanks Steve.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
ht
OK, the Pool is died and i had create a new one :-)
regards ré
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
I moved my home directories to a new disk and then mounted the disk using a
legacy mount point over /export/home. Here is the output of the zfs list:
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
rpool 55.8G 11.1G83K /rpool
rpool/ROOT 21.1G 11.1G19K legac
Hi Steve,
Couple of options.
Create a new boot environment on the SSD, and this will copy the data over.
Or
zfs send -R rp...@backup | zfs recv altpool
I'd use the alt boot environment, rather than the send and receive.
Cheers,
-Mark.
On 19/09/2010, at 5:37 PM, Steve Arkley wrote:
> He
On 18/09/10 15:25, George Wilson wrote:
Tom Bird wrote:
In my case, other than an hourly snapshot, the data is not
significantly changing.
It'd be nice to see a response other than "you're doing it wrong",
rebuilding 5x the data on a drive relative to its capacity is clearly
erratic behaviour
On 19 September, 2010 - Markus Kovero sent me these 0,5K bytes:
> Hi,
>
> > The drives and the chassis are fine, what I am questioning is how can it
> > be "resilvering" more data to a device than the capacity of the device?
>
> If data on pool has changed during resilver, resilver counter wil
Hi,
> The drives and the chassis are fine, what I am questioning is how can it
> be "resilvering" more data to a device than the capacity of the device?
If data on pool has changed during resilver, resilver counter will not update
accordingly, and it will show resilvering 100% for needed time
Hello folks,
I ordered a bunch of 128Gb SSD's the other day, placed 2 in PC, another in a
windoz laptop and I thought I'd place one in my opensolaris laptop, should be
straightforward or so I thought.
The problem I seem to be running into is that the partition the rpool is on is
130Gb, SSD onc
17 matches
Mail list logo
