Tim Haley wrote:
Ian Collins wrote:
Ian Collins wrote:
Tim Haley wrote:
Brent Jones wrote:
On the sending side, I CAN kill the ZFS send process, but the remote
side leaves its processes going, and I CANNOT kill -9 them. I also
cannot reboot the receiving system, at init 6, the system will ju
>>
>>
> After examining the dump we got from you (thanks again), we're relatively
> sure you are hitting
>
> 6826836 Deadlock possible in dmu_object_reclaim()
>
> This was introduced in nv_111 and fixed in nv_113.
>
> Sorry for the trouble.
>
> -tim
>
>
Do you know when new builds will show up on
Brent Jones wrote:
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Richard Lowe wrote:
Brent Jones writes:
I've had similar issues with similar traces. I think you're waiting on
a transaction that's never going to come.
I thought at the time that I was hitting:
CR 6367701 "hang because tx_state_t is in
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Richard Lowe wrote:
> Brent Jones writes:
>
>
> I've had similar issues with similar traces. I think you're waiting on
> a transaction that's never going to come.
>
> I thought at the time that I was hitting:
> CR 6367701 "hang because tx_state_t is inconsistent
Brent Jones writes:
>>
>> I haven't figured out a way to identify the problem, still trying to
>> find a 100% way to reproduce this problem.
>> Seemingly the more snapshots I send at a given time, the likelihood of
>> this happening goes up, but, correlation is not causation :)
>>
>> I might try
>
> I haven't figured out a way to identify the problem, still trying to
> find a 100% way to reproduce this problem.
> Seemingly the more snapshots I send at a given time, the likelihood of
> this happening goes up, but, correlation is not causation :)
>
> I might try to open a support case with
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Ian Collins wrote:
> Ian Collins wrote:
>>
>> Tim Haley wrote:
>>>
>>> Brent Jones wrote:
On the sending side, I CAN kill the ZFS send process, but the remote
side leaves its processes going, and I CANNOT kill -9 them. I also
cannot reboot the rec
Ian Collins wrote:
Tim Haley wrote:
Brent Jones wrote:
On the sending side, I CAN kill the ZFS send process, but the remote
side leaves its processes going, and I CANNOT kill -9 them. I also
cannot reboot the receiving system, at init 6, the system will just
hang trying to unmount the file sys
>
> Well, I think I found a specific file system that is causing this.
> I kicked off a zpool scrub to see if there might be corruption on
> either end, but that takes well over 40 hours on these servers.
>
>
> --
> Brent Jones
> br...@servuhome.net
>
It turns out that the file system I believed w
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Tim Haley wrote:
> Brent Jones wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>> I had been running snv_106 for about 3 or 4 months on a pair of X4540's.
>> I would ship snapshots from the primary server to the secondary server
>> nightly, which was working really well.
>>
>> However, I h
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Tim Haley wrote:
> Brent Jones wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>> I had been running snv_106 for about 3 or 4 months on a pair of X4540's.
>> I would ship snapshots from the primary server to the secondary server
>> nightly, which was working really well.
>>
>> However, I h
Tim Haley wrote:
Brent Jones wrote:
On the sending side, I CAN kill the ZFS send process, but the remote
side leaves its processes going, and I CANNOT kill -9 them. I also
cannot reboot the receiving system, at init 6, the system will just
hang trying to unmount the file systems.
I have to phys
Brent Jones wrote:
Hello all,
I had been running snv_106 for about 3 or 4 months on a pair of X4540's.
I would ship snapshots from the primary server to the secondary server
nightly, which was working really well.
However, I have upgraded to 2009.06, and my replication scripts appear
to "hang" w
Brent Jones wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
Brent Jones wrote:
On the sending side, I CAN kill the ZFS send process, but the remote
side leaves its processes going, and I CANNOT kill -9 them. I also
cannot reboot the receiving system, at init 6, the system wil
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
> Brent Jones wrote:
>>
>> On the sending side, I CAN kill the ZFS send process, but the remote
>> side leaves its processes going, and I CANNOT kill -9 them. I also
>> cannot reboot the receiving system, at init 6, the system will just
>> hang tr
Brent Jones wrote:
On the sending side, I CAN kill the ZFS send process, but the remote
side leaves its processes going, and I CANNOT kill -9 them. I also
cannot reboot the receiving system, at init 6, the system will just
hang trying to unmount the file systems.
I have to physically cut power t
Hello all,
I had been running snv_106 for about 3 or 4 months on a pair of X4540's.
I would ship snapshots from the primary server to the secondary server
nightly, which was working really well.
However, I have upgraded to 2009.06, and my replication scripts appear
to "hang" when performing zfs se
17 matches
Mail list logo
