On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, Carsten Aulbert wrote:
after the disk was exchanged, I ran 'zpool clear' and another zpoo scrub
afterwards...
and guess what, now another vdev shows similar problems:
Ugh!
Now, the big question is, what could be faulty. fmadm only shows vdev checksum
problems, right now
Hi all,
after the disk was exchanged, I ran 'zpool clear' and another zpoo scrub
afterwards...
and guess what, now another vdev shows similar problems:
s13:~# zpool status
pool: atlashome
state: DEGRADED
Hi Ross,
On Friday 27 November 2009 21:31:52 Ross Walker wrote:
> I would plan downtime to physically inspect the cabling.
There is not much cabling as the disks are directly connected to a large
backplane (Sun Fire X4500)
Cheers
Carsten
___
zfs-
On Nov 27, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Carsten Aulbert > wrote:
On Friday 27 November 2009 18:45:36 Carsten Aulbert wrote:
I was too fast, now it looks completely different:
scrub: resilver completed after 4h3m with 0 errors on Fri Nov 27
18:46:33
2009
[...]
s13:~# zpool status
pool: atlashome
state
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Carsten Aulbert wrote:
Now the big question:
(1) zpool clear or
(2) bring in the spare again (or exchange two more disks)?
Opinions?
Since "applications are unaffected" (good sign!), I would save all
notes regarding current status, do 'zpool clear', 'zpool scrub' and
t
On Friday 27 November 2009 18:45:36 Carsten Aulbert wrote:
I was too fast, now it looks completely different:
scrub: resilver completed after 4h3m with 0 errors on Fri Nov 27 18:46:33
2009
[...]
s13:~# zpool status
pool: atlashome
state: DEGRADED
status: One or
Hi Bob
On Friday 27 November 2009 17:19:22 Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>
> It is interesting that in addition to being in the same vdev, the
> disks encountering serious problems are all target 6. Besides
> something at the zfs level, there could be some some issue at the
> device driver, or underlyi
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Carsten Aulbert wrote:
At the very least, I would consider physically replacing c1t6d0.
That's an option and see if I can let the system repair more of the errors.
Regarding the error with a named disk, there is only one disk named in the
output so far.
Definitely repla
Hi all,
On Thursday 26 November 2009 17:38:42 Cindy Swearingen wrote:
> Did anything about this configuration change before the checksum errors
> occurred?
>
No, This machine is running in this configuration for a couple of weeks now
> The errors on c1t6d0 are severe enough that your spare kick
> Hi all,
>
> on a x4500 with a relatively well patched Sol10u8
>
> # uname -a
> SunOS s13 5.10 Generic_141445-09 i86pc i386 i86pc
>
> I've started a scrub after about 2 weeks of operation
> and have a lot of
> checksum errors:
>
> s13:~# zpool status
>
On Nov 26, 2009, at 2:35 AM, Carsten Aulbert wrote:
Hi all,
on a x4500 with a relatively well patched Sol10u8
# uname -a
SunOS s13 5.10 Generic_141445-09 i86pc i386 i86pc
I've started a scrub after about 2 weeks of operation and have a lot
of
checksum errors:
s13:~# zpool status
pool: a
Hi all,
on a x4500 with a relatively well patched Sol10u8
# uname -a
SunOS s13 5.10 Generic_141445-09 i86pc i386 i86pc
I've started a scrub after about 2 weeks of operation and have a lot of
checksum errors:
s13:~# zpool status
pool: atlashome
12 matches
Mail list logo
