Richard, > Joubert Nel wrote: > >> If the device was actually in use on another > system, I > >> would expect that libdiskmgmt would have warned > you about > >> this when you ran "zpool create". > > AFAIK, libdiskmgmt is not multi-node aware. It does > know about local > uses of the disk. Remote uses of the disk, > especially those shared with > other OSes, is a difficult problem to solve where > there are no standards. > Reason #84612 why I hate SANs. > > > When I ran "zpool create", the pool got created > without a warning. > > If the device was not currently in use, why wouldn't > it proceed? > > > What is strange, and maybe I'm naive here, is that > there was no "formatting" of this physical disk so > I'm optimistic that the data is still recoverable > from it, even though the new pool shadows it. > > > > Or is this way off mark? > > If you define formatting as writing pertinent > information to the disk > such that ZFS works, then it was formatted. The > uberblock and its replicas > only take a few iops.
What I meant is that when I do "zpool create" on a disk, the entire contents of the disk doesn't seem to be overwritten/destroyed. I.e. I suspect that if I didn't copy any data to this disk, a large portion of what was on it is potentially recoverable. If so, is there a tool that can help with such recovery? Joubert This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
