markm wrote: > Because the vdev tree is calling them 'disk', zfs is attempting to open > them using disk i/o instead of file i/o.
This was correct, thank you. lofiadm was useful to loopback mount the image files to provide disk i/o. > ZFS has much more opportunity to recover from device failure when it has a > redundant config. Splitting the 9T & 2T LUNs into a few separate LUNs and > then using raidz would be highly desirable. Yes, I completely agree. This configuration is something I inherited from a previous colleague, and did not make good use of ZFS. The underlying RAID system suffered a catastrophic failure, but even prior to that, we would consistently have the pools become DEGRADED when ZFS would report corruption that the underlying RAID system could not detect and repair. Thank you to all responders, and also thank you to Drive Savers who recovered the image for us. If you find yourself in the regrettable situation of having a dozen terabytes go missing one day without proper backups, I highly recommend their services. -- Kelsey _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
