On Nov 26, 2009, at 12:33 AM, Miles Nordin wrote:
"re" == Richard Elling writes:
re> although a spec might say that hot-plugging works, that
re> doesn't mean the implementers support it.
hotplug means you can plug in a device after boot and use it. That's
not the same thing as being a
> "re" == Richard Elling writes:
re> although a spec might say that hot-plugging works, that
re> doesn't mean the implementers support it.
hotplug means you can plug in a device after boot and use it. That's
not the same thing as being able to unplug a device after boot.
Yes, both
> Speaking practically, do you evaluate your chipset
> and disks for hotplug support before you buy?
Yes, if someone else has shared their test results previously.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@open
On Wed, Nov 25 at 16:43, Daniel Carosone wrote:
The problem is that yanking a disk tests the failure
mode of yanking a disk.
Yes, but the point is that it's a cheap and easy test, so you might
as well do it -- just beware of what it does, and most importantly
does not, tell you. It's a valid sc
On Nov 25, 2009, at 4:43 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
[verify on real hardware and share results]
Agree 110%.
Good :)
Yanking disk controller and/or power cables is an
easy and obvious test.
The problem is that yanking a disk tests the failure
mode of yanking a disk.
Yes, but the point i
>> [verify on real hardware and share results]
> Agree 110%.
Good :)
> > Yanking disk controller and/or power cables is an
> > easy and obvious test.
> The problem is that yanking a disk tests the failure
> mode of yanking a disk.
Yes, but the point is that it's a cheap and easy test, so you mi
On Nov 24, 2009, at 2:51 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
Those are great, but they're about testing the zfs software.
There's a small amount of overlap, in that these injections include
trying to simulate the hoped-for system response (e.g, EIO) to
various physical scenarios, so it's worth look
Those are great, but they're about testing the zfs software. There's a small
amount of overlap, in that these injections include trying to simulate the
hoped-for system response (e.g, EIO) to various physical scenarios, so it's
worth looking at for scenario suggestions.
However, for most of us
On Nov 23, 2009, at 11:41 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
On Nov 23, 2009, at 9:44 AM, sundeep dhall wrote:
All,
I have a test environment with 4 internal disks and RAIDZ option.
Q) How do I simulate a sudden 1-disk failure to validate that zfs /
raidz handles things well without data errors
NB
On Mon, November 23, 2009 12:42, Eric D. Mudama wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23 at 9:44, sundeep dhall wrote:
>>All,
>>
>>I have a test environment with 4 internal disks and RAIDZ option.
>>
>>Q) How do I simulate a sudden 1-disk failure to validate that zfs / raidz
>> handles things well without data er
On Nov 23, 2009, at 9:44 AM, sundeep dhall wrote:
All,
I have a test environment with 4 internal disks and RAIDZ option.
Q) How do I simulate a sudden 1-disk failure to validate that zfs /
raidz handles things well without data errors
First, list the failure modes you expect to see.
Second,
sundeep dhall writes:
> Q) How do I simulate a sudden 1-disk failure to validate that zfs /
> raidz handles things well without data errors
>
> Options considered
> 1. suddenly pulling a disk out
> 2. using zpool offline
>
> I think both these have issues in simulating a sudden failure
why not
I would try using hdadm or cfgadm to specifically offline devices out from
under ZFS.
I have done that previously with cfgadm for systems I cannot physically access.
You can also use file backed storage to create your raidz and move, delete,
overwrite the files to simulate issues.
Shawn
On No
On Mon, Nov 23 at 9:44, sundeep dhall wrote:
All,
I have a test environment with 4 internal disks and RAIDZ option.
Q) How do I simulate a sudden 1-disk failure to validate that zfs / raidz
handles things well without data errors
Options considered
1. suddenly pulling a disk out
2. using zpo
On Mon, November 23, 2009 11:44, sundeep dhall wrote:
> All,
>
> I have a test environment with 4 internal disks and RAIDZ option.
>
> Q) How do I simulate a sudden 1-disk failure to validate that zfs / raidz
> handles things well without data errors
>
> Options considered
> 1. suddenly pulling a
All,
I have a test environment with 4 internal disks and RAIDZ option.
Q) How do I simulate a sudden 1-disk failure to validate that zfs / raidz
handles things well without data errors
Options considered
1. suddenly pulling a disk out
2. using zpool offline
I think both these have issues in s
16 matches
Mail list logo
