On Tue, 6 Jul 2010, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
what I'm saying is that there are several posts in here where the only
solution is to boot onto a live cd and then do an import, due to
metadata corruption. This should be doable from the installed system
Ah, I understand now.
A couple of thing
> You can do this with "zpool scrub". It visits every allocated block
> and
> verifies that everything is correct. It's not the same as fsck in that
> scrub can detect and repair problems with the pool still online and
> all
> datasets mounted, whereas fsck cannot handle mounted filesystems.
>
> I
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
Hi all
With several messages in here about troublesome zpools, would there be a
good reason to be able to fsck a pool? As in, check the whole thing
instead of having to boot into live CDs and whatnot?
You can do this with "zpool scrub". It vi
- Original Message -
> From: "Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk"
> To: "OpenSolaris ZFS discuss"
> Sent: Tuesday, 6 July, 2010 6:35:51 PM
> Subject: [zfs-discuss] ZFS fsck?
> Hi all
>
> With several messages in here about troublesome zpools, would there be
Hi all
With several messages in here about troublesome zpools, would there be a good
reason to be able to fsck a pool? As in, check the whole thing instead of
having to boot into live CDs and whatnot?
Vennlige hilsener / Best regards
roy
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
(+47) 97542685
r...@karlsbakk.n
Hi,
>> *everybody* is interested in the flag days page. Including me.
>> Asking me to "raise the priority" is not helpful.
>
>> From my perspective, it's a surprise that 'everybody' is interested, as I'm
> not seeing a lot of people complaining that the flag day page is not updating.
> Only a co
Hi James
James C. McPherson wrote:
> *everybody* is interested in the flag days page. Including me.
> Asking me to "raise the priority" is not helpful.
>From my perspective, it's a surprise that 'everybody' is interested, as I'm
not seeing a lot of people complaining that the flag day page is not
Nigel Smith wrote:
On Thu Nov 5 14:38:13 PST 2009, Gary Mills wrote:
It would be nice to see this information at:
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+on/126-130
but it hasn't changed since 23 October.
Well it seems we have an answer:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-d
On Thu Nov 5 14:38:13 PST 2009, Gary Mills wrote:
> It would be nice to see this information at:
> http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+on/126-130
> but it hasn't changed since 23 October.
Well it seems we have an answer:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2009-Novem
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Robert Milkowski wrote:
>
> fyi
>
> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>>
>> XXX wrote:
>>>
>>> | Have you actually tried to roll-back to previous uberblocks when you
>>> | hit the issue? I'm asking as I haven't yet heard about any case
>>> | of the issue witch was not solved
fyi
Robert Milkowski wrote:
XXX wrote:
| Have you actually tried to roll-back to previous uberblocks when you
| hit the issue? I'm asking as I haven't yet heard about any case
| of the issue witch was not solved by rolling back to a previous
| uberblock. The problem though was that the way to
Thanks for taking the time to write this - very useful info :)
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Hi Gary
I will let 'website-discuss' know about this problem.
They normally fix issues like that.
Those pages always seemed to just update automatically.
I guess it's related to the website transition.
Thanks
Nigel Smith
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 03:04:05PM -0700, Tim Haley wrote:
> Robert Milkowski wrote:
> >I think that most people including ZFS developers agree with you that
> >losing an access to entire pool is not acceptable. And this has been
> >fixed in snv_126 so now in those rare circumstances you should b
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Miles Nordin wrote:
"csb" == Craig S Bell writes:
csb> Two: If you lost data with another filesystem, you may have
csb> overlooked it and blamed the OS or the application,
yeah, but with ZFS you often lose the whole pool in certain
classes of
repeatable real-wor
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009, Miles Nordin wrote:
"rm" == Robert Milkowski writes:
rm> Personally I don't blame Sun that implementing the CR took so
rm> long as it mostly affected home users with cheap hardware from
rm> BestBuy like sources
no, many of the reports were FC SAN's.
Do you have
Hi Robert
I think you mean snv_128 not 126 :-)
6667683 need a way to rollback to an uberblock from a previous txg
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6667683
http://hg.genunix.org/onnv-gate.hg/rev/8aac17999e4d
Regards
Nigel Smith
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
Miles Nordin wrote:
"rm" == Robert Milkowski writes:
rm> Personally I don't blame Sun that implementing the CR took so
rm> long as it mostly affected home users with cheap hardware from
rm> BestBuy like sources
no, many of the reports were FC SAN's.
rm> and eve
Miles Nordin wrote:
"csb" == Craig S Bell writes:
csb> Two: If you lost data with another filesystem, you may have
csb> overlooked it and blamed the OS or the application,
yeah, but with ZFS you often lose the whole pool in certain classes of
repeatable real-world failures, like hotswap d
> "rm" == Robert Milkowski writes:
rm> Personally I don't blame Sun that implementing the CR took so
rm> long as it mostly affected home users with cheap hardware from
rm> BestBuy like sources
no, many of the reports were FC SAN's.
rm> and even then it was relatively rare.
> "csb" == Craig S Bell writes:
csb> Two: If you lost data with another filesystem, you may have
csb> overlooked it and blamed the OS or the application,
yeah, but with ZFS you often lose the whole pool in certain classes of
repeatable real-world failures, like hotswap disks with flake
Orvar Korvar wrote:
Does this putback mean that I have to upgrade my zpool, or is it a zfs tool? If
I missed upgrading my zpool I am smoked?
The putback did not bump zpool or zfs versions. You shouldn't have to upgrade
your pool.
-tim
___
zfs-di
Tim Haley wrote:
Robert Milkowski wrote:
There is another CR (don't have its number at hand) which is about
implementing a delayed re-use on just freed blocks which should allow
for more data to be recovered in such a case as above. Although I'm
not sure if it has been implemented yet.
IMH
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Kevin Walker wrote:
Hi all,
Just subscribed to the list after a debate on our helpdesk lead me to
the posting about ZFS corruption and the need for a fsck repair tool
of some kind...
Has there been any update on this?
I guess the discussion started after someo
Kevin Walker wrote:
Hi all,
Just subscribed to the list after a debate on our helpdesk lead me to the
posting about ZFS corruption and the need for a fsck repair tool of some
kind...
Has there been any update on this?
I guess the discussion started after someone read an article on OSNE
Joerg just posted a lengthy answer to the fsck question:
http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/6071-No,-ZFS-really-doesnt-need-a-fsck.html
Good stuff. I see two answers to "nobody complained about lying hardware
before ZFS".
One: The user has never tried another filesystem that tests for end-to-en
Also, read this:
http://c0t0d0s0.org/archives/6067-PSARC-2009479-zpool-recovery-support.html
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Such a functionality is in the ZFS code now. It will be available later for us
http://c0t0d0s0.org/archives/6067-PSARC-2009479-zpool-recovery-support.html
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.or
ZFS scrub will detect many types of error in your data or the filesystem
metadata.
If you have sufficient redundancy in your pool and the errors were not due to
dropped or misordered writes, then they can often be automatically corrected
during the scrub.
If ZFS detects an error from which it
Hi all,
Just subscribed to the list after a debate on our helpdesk lead me to the
posting about ZFS corruption and the need for a fsck repair tool of some
kind...
Has there been any update on this?
Kind regards,
Kevin Walker
Coreix Limited
DDI: (+44) 0207 183 1725 ext 90
Mobile: (+44) 0
30 matches
Mail list logo
