Re: [zfs-discuss] Status of zpool remove in raidz and non-redundant stripes

2011-01-18 Thread Gal Buki
I second that. This is exactly what happened to me. There is a bug (ID 4852783) that is in State "6-Fix Understood" but it is unchanged since February 2010. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris

Re: [zfs-discuss] Status of zpool remove in raidz and non-redundant stripes

2009-07-10 Thread Wout Mertens
You're right - in my company (a very big one) we just stumbled across this as well and we're strongly considering not using ZFS because of it. It's easy to type zpool add when you meant zpool replace - and then you can go rebuild your box because it was the root pool. Nice. At the very least, "

Re: [zfs-discuss] Status of zpool remove in raidz and non-redundant stripes

2008-12-06 Thread Al Tobey
They also mentioned this at some of the ZFS talks at LISA 2008.The general argument is that, while plenty of hobbyists are clamoring for this, not enough paying customers are asking to make it a high enough priority to get done. If you think about it, the code is not only complicated but wi

Re: [zfs-discuss] Status of zpool remove in raidz and non-redundant stripes

2008-12-06 Thread Ross
If I remember right, the code needed for this has implications for a lot of things: - defrag - adding disks to raidz zvols - removing disks from vols - restriping volumes (to give consistent performance after expansion) In fact, I just found the question I asked a year or so back, which had a go

Re: [zfs-discuss] Status of zpool remove in raidz and non-redundant stripes

2008-12-05 Thread Miles Nordin
> "mb" == Mike Brancato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: mb> if a 4x100GB raidz only used 150GB of space, one could do mb> 'zpool remove tank c0t3d0' and data residing on c0t3d0 would mb> be migrated to other disks in the raidz. that sounds like in-place changing of stripe width, and w

Re: [zfs-discuss] Status of zpool remove in raidz and non-redundant stripes

2008-12-05 Thread Mike Brancato
Well, I knew it wasn't available. I meant to ask what is the status of the development of the feature? Not started, I presume. Is there no timeline? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [zfs-discuss] Status of zpool remove in raidz and non-redundant stripes

2008-12-05 Thread Richard Elling
Mike Brancato wrote: > I've seen discussions as far back as 2006 that say development is underway to > allow the addition and remove of disks in a raidz vdev to grow/shrink the > group. Meaning, if a 4x100GB raidz only used 150GB of space, one could do > 'zpool remove tank c0t3d0' and data resi

[zfs-discuss] Status of zpool remove in raidz and non-redundant stripes

2008-12-05 Thread Mike Brancato
I've seen discussions as far back as 2006 that say development is underway to allow the addition and remove of disks in a raidz vdev to grow/shrink the group. Meaning, if a 4x100GB raidz only used 150GB of space, one could do 'zpool remove tank c0t3d0' and data residing on c0t3d0 would be migra