Thanks for the replies.
I guess I misunderstood the manual:
zpool replace [-f] pool old_device [new_device]
Replaces old_device with new_device. This is equivalent to attaching
new_device, waiting for it to resilver, and then detaching old_device.
The size of new_device must be greater than or equal to the minimum size of
all the devices in a mirror or raidz configuration.
new_device is required if the pool is not redundant. If new_device is not
specified, it defaults to old_device. This form of replacement is useful after
an existing disk has failed and has been physically replaced. In this case, the
new disk may have the same /dev/dsk path as the old device, even though it is
actually a different disk. ZFS recognizes this.
In the last paragraph it stated failed and physically removed etc. Also in the
first paragraph it stated resilver.
To summarize, "zpool replace" can replace a disk in any vdev type without
compromising redundancy. If the new disk fails (during resilvering) the old
pool remains in it's original state. After resilvering the new disk the old one
gets detached. All this time the pool remains in it's original state. (off
course no other factor kicks in)
PS. Why can't I see the comments from Bob and Jerry and others made after the
last comment from Ross? I can see the comments in the text based site at
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2008-September but not at
http://www.opensolaris.org/ at which I'm currently posting this message.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
