On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 11:39:30AM -0600, Albert Chin wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 11:10:20AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 11/20/2007 10:11:50 AM: > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 10:01:49AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Resilver and scrub are broken and restart when a snapshot is created > > > > -- the current workaround is to disable snaps while resilvering, > > > > the ZFS team is working on the issue for a long term fix. > > > > > > But, no snapshot was taken. If so, zpool history would have shown > > > this. So, in short, _no_ ZFS operations are going on during the > > > resilvering. Yet, it is restarting. > > > > > > > Does 2007-11-20.02:37:13 actually match the expected timestamp of > > the original zpool replace command before the first zpool status > > output listed below? > > No. We ran some 'zpool status' commands after the last 'zpool > replace'. The 'zpool status' output in the initial email is from this > morning. The only ZFS command we've been running is 'zfs list', 'zpool > list tww', 'zpool status', or 'zpool status -v' after the last 'zpool > replace'.
I think the 'zpool status' command was resetting the resilvering. We upgraded to b77 this morning which did not exhibit this problem. Resilvering is now done. > Server is on GMT time. > > > Is it possible that another zpool replace is further up on your > > pool history (ie it was rerun by an admin or automatically from some > > service)? > > Yes, but a zpool replace for the same bad disk: > 2007-11-20.00:57:40 zpool replace tww c0t600A0B80002999660000059E4668CBD3d0 > c0t600A0B8000299966000006584741C7C3d0 > 2007-11-20.02:35:22 zpool detach tww c0t600A0B8000299966000006584741C7C3d0 > 2007-11-20.02:37:13 zpool replace tww c0t600A0B80002999660000059E4668CBD3d0 > c0t600A0B8000299CCC000006734741CD4Ed0 > > We accidentally removed c0t600A0B8000299966000006584741C7C3d0 from the > array, hence the 'zpool detach'. > > The last 'zpool replace' has been running for 15h now. > > > -Wade > > > > > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 11/20/2007 09:58:19 AM: > > > > > > > > > On b66: > > > > > # zpool replace tww c0t600A0B80002999660000059E4668CBD3d0 \ > > > > > c0t600A0B8000299CCC000006734741CD4Ed0 > > > > > < some hours later> > > > > > # zpool status tww > > > > > pool: tww > > > > > state: DEGRADED > > > > > status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The > > pool > > > > will > > > > > continue to function, possibly in a degraded state. > > > > > action: Wait for the resilver to complete. > > > > > scrub: resilver in progress, 62.90% done, 4h26m to go > > > > > < some hours later> > > > > > # zpool status tww > > > > > pool: tww > > > > > state: DEGRADED > > > > > status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The > > pool > > > > will > > > > > continue to function, possibly in a degraded state. > > > > > action: Wait for the resilver to complete. > > > > > scrub: resilver in progress, 3.85% done, 18h49m to go > > > > > > > > > > # zpool history tww | tail -1 > > > > > 2007-11-20.02:37:13 zpool replace tww > > > > c0t600A0B80002999660000059E4668CBD3d0 > > > > > c0t600A0B8000299CCC000006734741CD4Ed0 > > > > > > > > > > So, why did resilvering restart when no zfs operations occurred? I > > > > > just ran zpool status again and now I get: > > > > > # zpool status tww > > > > > pool: tww > > > > > state: DEGRADED > > > > > status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The > > pool > > > > will > > > > > continue to function, possibly in a degraded state. > > > > > action: Wait for the resilver to complete. > > > > > scrub: resilver in progress, 0.00% done, 134h45m to go > > > > > > > > > > What's going on? > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > > > > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > > > > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > > > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > > > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > > _______________________________________________ > > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > > > > -- > albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > -- albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
