On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 00:27, Ethan <notet...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 23:57, Daniel Carosone <d...@geek.com.au> wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 11:39:39PM -0500, Ethan wrote: >> > If slice 2 is the whole disk, why is zpool trying to using slice 8 for >> all >> > but one disk? >> >> Because it's finding at least part of the labels for the pool member >> there. >> >> Please check the partition tables of all the disks, and use zdb -l on >> the various partitions, to make sure that you haven't got funny >> offsets or other problems hiding the data from import. >> >> In a default solaris label, s2 and s8 start at cylinder 0 but are >> vastly different sizes. You need to arrange for your labels to match >> however the data you copied got laid out. >> >> > Can I explicitly tell zpool to use slice 2 for each device? >> >> Not for import, only at creation time. On import, devices are chosen >> by inspection of the zfs labels within. zdb -l will print those for >> you; when you can see all 4 labels for all devices your import has a >> much better chance of success. >> >> -- >> Dan. >> > > How would I go about arranging labels? > I only see labels 0 and 1 (and do not see labels 2 and 3) on every device, > for both slices 8 (which makes sense if 8 is just part of the drive; the zfs > devices take up the whole drive) and slice 2 (which doesn't seem to make > sense to me). > > Since only two of the four labels are showing up for each of the drives on > both slice 2 and slice 8, I guess that causes zpool to not have a preference > between slice 2 and slice 8? So it just picks whichever it sees first, which > happened to be slice 2 for one of the drives, but 8 for the others? (I am > really just guessing at this.) > > So, on one hand, the fact that it says slice 2 is online for one drive > makes me think that if I could get it to use slice 2 for the rest maybe it > would work. > On the other hand, the fact that I can't see labels 2 and 3 on slice 2 for > any drive (even the one that says it's online) is worrisome and I want to > figure out what's up with that. > > Labels 2 and 3 _do_ show up (and look right) in zdb -l running in zfs-fuse > on linux, on the truecrypt volumes. > > If it might just be a matter of arranging the labels so that the beginning > and end of a slice are in the right place, that sounds promising, although I > have no idea how I go about arranging labels. Could you point me in the > direction of what utility I might use or some documentation to get me > started in that direction? > > Thanks, > -Ethan >
And I just realized - yes, labels 2 and 3 are in the wrong place relative to the end of the drive; I did not take into account the overhead taken up by truecrypt when dd'ing the data. The raw drive is 1500301910016 bytes; the truecrypt volume is 1500301647872 bytes. Off by 262144 bytes - I need a slice that is sized like the truecrypt volume.
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
