On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Roch - PAE wrote:
I assume the rsync is not issuing fsyncs (and it's files are
not opened O_DSYNC). If so, rsync just works against the
filesystem cache and does not commit the data to disk.
You might want to run sync(1M) after a successful rsync.
A larger rsync would presumably have blocked. It's just
that the amount of data you needs to rsync fitted in a couple of
transaction groups.
Thanks for the hints but this would make our worst nightmares become true.
At least they could because it means that we would have to check every
application handling critical data and I think it's not the apps
responsibility. Up to a certain amount like a database transaction but not
any further. There's always a time window where data might be cached in
memory but I would argue that caching several GB of data, in our case
written data, with thousands of files in unbuffered memory circumvents all
the build in reliability of ZFS.
I'm in a way still hoping that it's a iSCSI related Problem as detecting
dead hosts in a network can be a non trivial problem and it takes quite
some time for TCP to timeout and inform the upper layers. Just a
guess/hope here that FC-AL, ... do better in this case
Thomas
-----------------------------------------------------------------
GPG fingerprint: B1 EE D2 39 2C 82 26 DA A5 4D E0 50 35 75 9E ED
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
