Re: make kernel ignore broken SATA disk

On 12/04/2020 18:08, Stefan Bethke wrote: Am 12.04.2020 um 19:03 schrieb Slawa Olhovchenkov : Now I can't boot into single user mode anymore, ZFS just waits forever, and the kernel is printing an endless chain of SATA error messages. I really need a way to remove the broken disk before ZFS

Re: Slow zfs destroy

It may well depend on the extent of the deletes occurring. Have you tried disabling TRIM to see if it eliminates the delay?     Regards     Steve On 28/11/2019 09:59, Eugene Grosbein wrote: 28.11.2019 14:26, Steven Hartland wrote: As you mentioned it’s on SSD you could be suffering from

Re: Slow zfs destroy

As you mentioned it’s on SSD you could be suffering from poor TRIM performance from your devices if you run gstat -pd you’ll be able to get an indication if this is the case. On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 06:50, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > Hi! > > Is it normal that "zfs destroy" for one ZVOL with

Re: ZFS...

Great to hear you got your data back even after all the terrible luck you suffered! Regards Steve On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 00:49, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Michelle Sullivan wrote: > >> On 02 May 2019, at 03:39, Steven Hartland > wrote: > >> > >> > &g

Re: FreeBSD flood of 8 breakage announcements in 3 mins.

Is disagree, having them hatched causes us less work not more, as others have said one update not many, which result in one outage of systems that need patching not many. Regards Steve On Wed, 15 May 2019 at 16:48, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > Hi, Reference: > > From: Alan Somers >

Re: ZFS...

On 01/05/2019 15:53, Michelle Sullivan wrote: Paul Mather wrote: On Apr 30, 2019, at 11:17 PM, Michelle Sullivan wrote: Been there done that though with ext2 rather than UFS..  still got all my data back... even though it was a nightmare.. Is that an implication that had all your data

Re: Concern: ZFS Mirror issues (12.STABLE and firmware 19 .v. 20)

wrote: On 4/20/2019 10:50, Steven Hartland wrote: Have you eliminated geli as possible source? No; I could conceivably do so by re-creating another backup volume set without geli-encrypting the drives, but I do not have an extra set of drives of the capacity required laying around to do that. I

Re: Concern: ZFS Mirror issues (12.STABLE and firmware 19 .v. 20)

Have you eliminated geli as possible source? I've just setup an old server which has a LSI 2008 running and old FW (11.0) so was going to have a go at reproducing this. Apart from the disconnect steps below is there anything else needed e.g. read / write workload during disconnect? mps0:

Re: CARP stopped working after upgrade from 11 to 12

On 18/01/2019 10:34, Thomas Steen Rasmussen wrote: On 1/16/19 8:16 PM, Thomas Steen Rasmussen wrote: On 1/16/19 6:56 PM, Steven Hartland wrote: PS: are you going to file a PR ? Yes here https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235005 Hello all, A quick follow up

Re: CARP stopped working after upgrade from 11 to 12

On 16/01/2019 17:33, Pete French wrote: I have confirmed that pfsync is the culprit. Read on for details. Excellent work. I;m home now, so won't get a chnace to out this into practice until tomorrow unfortunately, but it's brilliant that you have confirmed it. I tried disabling pfsync and

Re: CARP stopped working after upgrade from 11 to 12

I can't see how any of those would impact carp unless pf is now incorrectly blocking carp packets, which seems unlikely from that commit. Questions: * Are you running a firewall? * What does sysctl net.inet.carp report? * What exactly does ifconfig report about your carp on both hosts? *

Re: ZFS and Megaraid SAS MFI controllers

What triggered the issue, was it a reboot and how many disks? On 18/09/2018 08:59, The Doctor via freebsd-stable wrote: This about abot the 3rd time within 3 weeks that I have hadto rebuild a server (Backup are great but long restores). What isthe 'formula' for the following: zfs i/o on your

Re: zfs boot size

The recommended size for a boot partition has been 512K for a while. We always put swap directly after it so if a resize is needed its easy without and resilvering . If your pool is made up of partitions which are only 34 block smaller than your zfs partition you're likely going to need to

Re: TRIM, iSCSI and %busy waves

That is very hw and use case dependent. The reason we originally sponsored the project to add TRIM to ZFS was that in our case without TRIM the performance got so bad that we had to secure erase disks every couple of weeks as they simply became so slow they where unusable. Now admittedly that

Re: TRIM, iSCSI and %busy waves

You can indeed tune things here are the relevant sysctls: sysctl -a | grep trim |grep -v kstat vfs.zfs.trim.max_interval: 1 vfs.zfs.trim.timeout: 30 vfs.zfs.trim.txg_delay: 32 vfs.zfs.trim.enabled: 1 vfs.zfs.vdev.trim_max_pending: 1 vfs.zfs.vdev.trim_max_active: 64

Re: FreeBSD 11.x fails to boot w/ SAS3 4Kn HDD and LSISAS3008 on SuperMicro X10DRH-iT

Have you tried setting dumpdev to AUTO in rc.conf to see if you can obtain a panic dump? You could also try disabling reboot on it panic using the sysctl On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 at 22:18, Rick Miller wrote: > Hi all, > > Thanks in advance to anyone that might be able to help. I

Re: disk errors: CAM status: Uncorrectable parity/CRC error

Try reducing the disk connection speed down to see if that helps. On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 at 06:49, Graham Menhennitt wrote: > G'day all, > > I'm setting up a machine running 11-Stable on a PC Engines APU2C board. > It has a 16Gb SSD as its first disk (ada0), and a Seagate

Re: The system works unstable

If you have remote console via IPMI it might be an idea to leave an active top session so you can see the last point at which the machine stopped. It may provided a pointer to bad process e.g. eating all the machine RAM.     Regards     Steve On 14/09/2017 11:30, wishmaster wrote: Hi! My

Re: 11.1 coredumping in sendfile, as used by a uwsgi process

Could you post the decoded crash info from /var/crash/... I would also create a bug report: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi?product=Base%20System     Regards     Steve On 12/09/2017 14:40, Mark Martinec wrote: A couple of days ago I have upgraded an Intel box from FreeBSD 10.3

Re: The 11.1-RC3 can only boot and attach disks in "Safe mode", otherwise gets stuck attaching

Based on your boot info you're using mps, so this could be related to mps fix committed to stable/11 today by ken@ https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/321415 re@ cc'ed as this could cause hangs for others too on 11.1-RELEASE if this is the case. Regards Steve On 24/07/2017

Re: Kernel panic

Given how old 9.1 is, even if you did investigate its unlikely it would get fixed. I'd recommend updating to 11.0-RELEASE and see if the panic still happens. On 21/06/2017 17:35, Efraín Déctor wrote: Hello. Today one of my servers crashed with a kernel panic. I got this message: panic:

Re: Formatting a 4k disk on FreeBSD with ext2

That looks like its trying to do an erase of the sectors, which is likely failing due to the device being a HW RAID, have you tried with nodiscard set? On 08/05/2017 16:42, HSR Hackspace wrote: Hi folks; I'm trying to format a 300 GB partition on x86_64 box running running BSD 10.1 with HW

Re: 10.3-stable random server reboots - finding the reason

It's not an external vulnerability in the DRAC is it as that seems to be more and more common these days On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 at 15:10, tech-lists wrote: > On 18/04/2017 13:34, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > > > 1) > > echo '-Dh -S115200' > /boot.config > > 2) > > vi

Re: Is it known problem, that zfs.ko could not be built with system compiler (clang 3.9.1) without optimization?

I seem to remember this happening when I tried it too, likely it blows the stack, what's your panic? When doing similar tracing before I've flagged the relevant methods with __noinline. On 22/02/2017 20:47, Lev Serebryakov wrote: Hello Freebsd-stable, Now if you build zfs.ko with -O0

Re: Building Kernel and World with -j

On 23/01/2017 07:24, Sergei Akhmatdinov wrote: On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:57:46 -0800 Walter Parker wrote: For decades there has always been a warning not to do parallel builds of the kernel or the world (Linux kernel builds also suggest not to do this). Every once in a while,

Re: zpool asize problem on 11.0

On 12/01/2017 22:57, Stefan Bethke wrote: Am 12.01.2017 um 23:29 schrieb Stefan Bethke : I’ve just created two pools on a freshly partitioned disk, using 11.0 amd64, and the shift appears to be 9: # zpool status -v host pool: host state: ONLINE status: One or more devices

Re: Can't boot on ZFS -- /boot/zfsloader not found

On 12/01/2017 21:12, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: Hey Steven, (Please cc: me on reply) On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Steven Hartlan The reason I'd recommend 512k for boot is to provide room for expansion moving forward, as repartitioning to upgrade is a scary / hard thing to do. Remember it

Re: Can't boot on ZFS -- /boot/zfsloader not found

On 11/01/2017 22:58, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: (Sorry I had to copy-paste this email from the archives to a new thread, because I'm not subscribed to -stable@. Would you mind cc:ing me next time please?) As your not at the boot loader stage yet for keyboard enabling legacy USB keyboard / mouse

Re: Can't boot on ZFS -- /boot/zfsloader not found

As your not at the boot loader stage yet for keyboard enabling legacy USB keyboard / mouse support in BIOS may help. If you see issues with keyboard after the kernel takes over setting hint.ehci.0.disabled=1 may help. If your installing 11.x then the guides boot partition size is out of

Re: [ZFS] files in a weird situtation

find also has -delete which avoids the exec overhead, not much of an impact here but worth noting if you're removing lots. On 18 December 2016 at 00:38, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 3:01 PM, David Marec > wrote: > > > [I had

Re: vfs.zfs.vdev.bio_delete_disable - crash while changing on the fly

Obviously this shouldn't happen but would need a stack trace to identify the cause. If you want to disable TRIM on ZFS you should really use: vfs.zfs.trim.enabled=0 On 09/12/2016 13:13, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. Recently I've encountered the issue with "slow TRIM" and Sandisk SSDs, so I

Re: zpool get all: Assertion failed / Abort (core dumped)

Are you sure your kernel and world are in sync? On 01/12/2016 23:53, Miroslav Lachman wrote: There is some minor problem with "zpool get all" command if one of two pools is unvailable: # zpool get all Assertion failed: (nvlist_lookup_nvlist(config, "feature_stats", ) == 0), file

Re: Sandisk CloudSpeed Gen. II Eco Channel SSD vs ZFS = we're in hell

On 29/11/2016 12:30, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. On 28.11.2016 23:07, Steven Hartland wrote: Check your gstat with -dp so you also see deletes, it may be that your drives have a very slow TRIM. Indeed, I see a bunch of delete operations, and when TRIM disabled my engineers report

Re: Sandisk CloudSpeed Gen. II Eco Channel SSD vs ZFS = we're in hell

Check your gstat with -dp so you also see deletes, it may be that your drives have a very slow TRIM. On 28/11/2016 17:54, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi, recently we bough a bunch of "Sandisk CloudSpeed Gen. II Eco Channel" disks (the model name by itself should already made me suspicious) for

Re: Help! two machines ran out of swap and corrupted their zpools!

At one point lz4 wasn't supported on boot, I seem to remember that may have been addressed but not 100% sure. If it hasn't and your kernel is now compressed that may explain it? Have you tried booting from a live cd and checking the status of the pool? On 22/11/2016 08:43, Pete French wrote:

Re: Help! two machines ran out of swap and corrupted their zpools!

When you say corrupt what do you mean, specifically what's the output from zpool status? One thing that springs to mind if zpool status doesn't show any issues, and: 1. You have large disks 2. You have performed an update and not rebooted since. You may be at the scenario where there's enough

Re: zfs, a directory that used to hold lot of files and listing pause

On 21/10/2016 10:04, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. On 21.10.2016 9:22, Steven Hartland wrote: On 21/10/2016 04:52, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. On 20.10.2016 21:17, Steven Hartland wrote: Do you have atime enabled for the relevant volume? I do. If so disable it and see if that helps

Re: zfs, a directory that used to hold lot of files and listing pause

On 21/10/2016 04:52, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. On 20.10.2016 21:17, Steven Hartland wrote: Do you have atime enabled for the relevant volume? I do. If so disable it and see if that helps: zfs set atime=off Nah, it doesn't help at all. As per with Jonathon what does gstat -pd and top

Re: zfs, a directory that used to hold lot of files and listing pause

2016 at 12:56, Steven Hartland <kill...@multiplay.co.uk> wrote: [...] When you see the stalling what does gstat -pd and top -SHz show? On my dev box: 1:38pm# uname -a FreeBSD irontree 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE #0 r307401: Mon Oct 17 10:17:22 NZDT 2016 root@irontree:/usr/obj/usr/s

Re: zfs, a directory that used to hold lot of files and listing pause

On 20/10/2016 23:48, Jonathan Chen wrote: On 21 October 2016 at 11:27, Steven Hartland <kill...@multiplay.co.uk> wrote: On 20/10/2016 22:18, Jonathan Chen wrote: On 21 October 2016 at 09:09, Peter <p...@citylink.dinoex.sub.org> wrote: [...] I see this on my pgsql_tmp dirs (wh

Re: zfs, a directory that used to hold lot of files and listing pause

On 20/10/2016 22:18, Jonathan Chen wrote: On 21 October 2016 at 09:09, Peter wrote: [...] I see this on my pgsql_tmp dirs (where Postgres stores intermediate query data that gets too big for mem - usually lots of files) - in normal operation these dirs are

Re: zfs, a directory that used to hold lot of files and listing pause

Do you have atime enabled for the relevant volume? If so disable it and see if that helps: zfs set atime=off Regards Steve On 20/10/2016 14:47, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. I have FreeBSD 10.2-STABLE r289293 (but I have observed this situation on different releases) and a zfs. I

Re: Repeatable panic on ZFS filesystem (used for backups); 11.0-STABLE

On 17/10/2016 22:50, Karl Denninger wrote: I will make some effort on the sandbox machine to see if I can come up with a way to replicate this. I do have plenty of spare larger drives laying around that used to be in service and were obsolesced due to capacity -- but what I don't know if

Re: Repeatable panic on ZFS filesystem (used for backups); 11.0-STABLE

On 17/10/2016 20:52, Andriy Gapon wrote: On 17/10/2016 21:54, Steven Hartland wrote: You're hitting stack exhaustion, have you tried increasing the kernel stack pages? It can be changed from /boot/loader.conf kern.kstack_pages="6" Default on amd64 is 4 IIRC Steve, perhaps you

Re: Repeatable panic on ZFS filesystem (used for backups); 11.0-STABLE

On 10/17/2016 15:16, Steven Hartland wrote: Be good to confirm its not an infinite loop by giving it a good bump first. On 17/10/2016 19:58, Karl Denninger wrote: I can certainly attempt setting that higher but is that not just hiding the problem rather than addressing it? On 10/17/2016 13

Re: Repeatable panic on ZFS filesystem (used for backups); 11.0-STABLE

Be good to confirm its not an infinite loop by giving it a good bump first. On 17/10/2016 19:58, Karl Denninger wrote: I can certainly attempt setting that higher but is that not just hiding the problem rather than addressing it? On 10/17/2016 13:54, Steven Hartland wrote: You're hitting

Re: Repeatable panic on ZFS filesystem (used for backups); 11.0-STABLE

You're hitting stack exhaustion, have you tried increasing the kernel stack pages? It can be changed from /boot/loader.conf kern.kstack_pages="6" Default on amd64 is 4 IIRC On 17/10/2016 19:08, Karl Denninger wrote: The target (and devices that trigger this) are a pair of 4Gb 7200RPM SATA

Re: zfs/raidz and creation pause/blocking

Almost certainly its TRIMing the drives try setting the sysctl vfs.zfs.vdev.trim_on_init=0 On 22/09/2016 12:54, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. Recently I spent a lot of time setting up various zfs installations, and I got a question. Often when creating a raidz on disks considerably big (>~

Re: NVMe as boot device.

Yes but you need to boot with efi as that's the old thing mode that supports nvme boot. We have an nvme only ZFS box and it works fine On Thursday, 15 September 2016, Andrey Cherkashin wrote: > Hi, > > I know FreeBSD supports NVMe as root device, but does it support it as >

Re: zfs crash under load on 11-Prerelease r305056

That file is not accessible On 03/09/2016 10:51, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote: Hi all. Got one host without keyboard so can't dump it. Screenshot: http://limb0.b1t.name/incoming/IMG_20160903_120545.jpg This is MINIMAL kernel with minor additions.

Re: Panic on BETA1 in the ZFS subsystem

On 21/07/2016 13:52, Andriy Gapon wrote: On 21/07/2016 15:25, Karl Denninger wrote: The crash occurred during a backup script operating, which is (roughly) the following: zpool import -N backup (mount the pool to copy to) iterate over a list of zfs filesystems and... zfs rename fs@zfs-base

Re: Panic on BETA1 in the ZFS subsystem

The panic was due to stack exhaustion, why it was so deep not looked. On 20/07/2016 15:32, Karl Denninger wrote: The panic occurred during a zfs send/receive operation for system backup. I've seen this one before, unfortunately, and it appears that it's still there -- may be related to

Re: FreeBSD 10.3 slow boot on Supermicro X11SSW-F

Does adding the following to /boot/loader.conf make any difference? hw.memtest.tests="0" On 28/06/2016 14:59, Miroslav Lachman wrote: I installed FreeBSD 10.3 on brand new machine Supermicro X11SSW-F. It sits on top of 4x 1TB Samsung SSDs on ZFS RAIDZ2. The booting is painfully slow from BTX

Re: ZFS and NVMe, trim caused stalling

On 17/05/2016 08:49, Borja Marcos wrote: On 05 May 2016, at 16:39, Warner Losh wrote: What do you think? In some cases it’s clear that TRIM can do more harm than good. I think it’s best we not overreact. I agree. But with this issue the system is almost unusable for now.

Re: HP DL 585 / ACPI ID / ECC Memory / Panic

I wouldn't rule out a bad cpu as we had a very similar issue and that's what it was. Quick way to confirm is to move all the dram from the disabled CPU to one of the other CPUs and see if the issue stays away with the current CPU still disabled. If that's the case it's likely the on chip memory

Re: booting from separate zfs pool

I thought that was in 10.3 as well? On 28/04/2016 11:55, krad wrote: I think the new pivotroot type stuff in 11 may help a lot with this https://www.freebsd.org/news/status/report-2015-10-2015-12.html#Root-Remount On 28 April 2016 at 10:31, Malcolm Herbert wrote: On Thu,

Re: A gpart(8) mystery on 10.3-RELEASE

On 05/04/2016 23:09, Warren Block wrote: On Tue, 5 Apr 2016, Steven Hartland wrote: On 05/04/2016 20:48, Warren Block wrote: Actually, the more I think about it, using bootcode -p to write the entire EFI partition seems dangerous. Unless it is surprisingly smart, it will wipe out any

Re: A gpart(8) mystery on 10.3-RELEASE

On 05/04/2016 20:48, Warren Block wrote: On Tue, 5 Apr 2016, Boris Samorodov wrote: 05.04.16 12:30, Trond Endrestøl пишет: What am I doing wrong? Can't gpart(8) write both the pmbr and the efi image as a single command? Is it an off-by-one error in gpart(8)? gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr

Re: Skylake Loader Performance 10.3-BETA3

On 07/03/2016 16:43, Will Green wrote: On 4 Mar 2016, at 18:49, Mark Dixon wrote: Will Green sundivenetworks.com> writes: I am happy to test patches and/or current on this server if that helps. If you want more details on the motherboard/system I have started a post on

Re: 10.3-BETA2 panic on boot with GCE NVMe

Is have an inkling that r293673 may be at fault here, can you try reverting that change and see if it fixes the issue? On 22/02/2016 16:35, Andy Carrel via freebsd-stable wrote: I've created a 10.3-BETA2 image for Google Compute Engine using swills' script and am getting a panic on boot when

Re: FreeBSD 10.3 BETA1&2 does not boot on Mac Pro 2008

On 14/02/2016 00:47, claudiu vasadi wrote: Hello all, While trying to boot 10.3 amd64 uefi disk1 BETA1 and BETA2 iso on a Mac Pro 2008, I get the following message: BETA1 - http://s76.photobucket.com/user/da1_27/media/10.3-BETA1_zpswjatgfg2.jpg.html BETA2 -

Re: UEFI & ZFS

On 12/02/2016 20:36, Thomas Laus wrote: I have a new Asus H170-Plus-D3 motherboard that will be used for a DOM0 Xen Server. It uses an Intel i5-6300 processor and a Samsung 840 EVO SSD. I would like to use ZFS on this new installation. The Xen Kernel does not have UEFI support at this time,

Re: 10-STABLE hangups frequently

Some more information about your enviroment would be helpful: 1. What revision of stable/10 are you running? 2. What workloads are you running? 3. What's the output of procstat -k -k when this happens (assuming its possible to run)? 4. What's the output of sysctl -a |grep vnode, usually and when

Re: LSI SAS 3108 RAID Controller

Try adding this to /boot/loader.conf: hw.mfi.mrsas_enable="1" Regards Steve On 02/02/2016 17:06, Zara Kanaeva wrote: Dear list, I have one Fujitsu server with LSI SAS 3108 RAID Controller. These LSI SAS 3108 RAID Controller is supported by the mpr driver

Re: make clean failure on 10-stable amd64]

Investigating, strangely enough this builds and cleans just fine from buildenv. On 29/01/2016 17:47, Glen Barber wrote: CC'd smh, who committed an update recently in this file. I have confirmed the failure (but do not understand why I did not see it when testing the patch...). Steven, can

Re: make clean failure on 10-stable amd64]

On 29/01/2016 18:24, John wrote: On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 06:10:26PM +, Glen Barber wrote: On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 05:47:46PM +, Glen Barber wrote: CC'd smh, who committed an update recently in this file. I have confirmed the failure (but do not understand why I did not see it when

Re: ICH5 ATA DMA timeouts

Check cables and devices are in good condition. These things are usually a connectivity issue or device failing On 06/12/2015 03:06, Perry Hutchison wrote: Does anyone know the condition of the ICH5 ATA support in FreeBSD 10? In preparing to repurpose an elderly Dell Dimension 4600 from

Re: LACP with 3 interfaces.

On 17/11/2015 15:26, Johan Hendriks wrote: Hello all We have a NFS server witch has three network ports. We have bonded these interfaces as a lagg interface, but when we use the server it looks like only two interfaces are used. This is our rc.conf file ifconfig_igb0="up"

Re: Bug 204641 - 10.2 UNMAP/TRIM not available on a zfs zpool that uses iSCSI disks, backed on a zpool file target

On 17/11/2015 22:08, Christopher Forgeron wrote: I just submitted this as a bug: ( https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204641 ) ..but I thought I should bring it to the list's attention for more exposure - If that's a no-no, let me know, as I have a few others that are related

Re: ZFS, SSDs, and TRIM performance

case large amounts are freed to avoid this kind of starvation. -- Nicolas On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Steven Hartland <kill...@multiplay.co.uk> wrote: If you running NVMe, are you running a version which has this: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision=285767 I'm pretty sur

Re: ZFS, SSDs, and TRIM performance

If you running NVMe, are you running a version which has this: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision=285767 I'm pretty sure 10.2 does have that, so you should be good, but best to check. Other questions: 1. What does "gstat -d -p" show during the stalls? 2. Do you have any other zfs

Re: help with partitioning - huge stripesize

As you say using RAID for ZFS is a bad idea, so ideally change the hardware. If not see if your RAID controller has a stripe size option to help or just ignore the warning, its just a warning as it will be non-optimal performance. On 12/10/2015 12:46, Marko Cupać wrote: Hi, I've got HP

Re: Dell NVMe issues

On 06/10/2015 19:03, Jim Harris wrote: On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Steven Hartland <kill...@multiplay.co.uk <mailto:kill...@multiplay.co.uk>> wrote: Also looks like nvme exposes a timeout_period sysctl you could try increasing that as it could be too small for a fu

Re: Dell NVMe issues

As a guess you're timing out the full disk TRIM request. Try: sysctl vfs.zfs.vdev.trim_on_init=0 and then re-run the create. On 06/10/2015 16:18, Sean Kelly wrote: Back in May, I posted about issues I was having with a Dell PE R630 with 4x800GB NVMe SSDs. I would get kernel panics due to the

Re: Dell NVMe issues

Also looks like nvme exposes a timeout_period sysctl you could try increasing that as it could be too small for a full disk TRIM. Under CAM SCSI da support we have a delete_max which limits the max single request size for a delete it may be we need something similar for nvme as well to

Re: [FreeBSD-Announce] FreeBSD Errata Notice FreeBSD-EN-15:16.pw

Typo they should be: https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/EN-15:16/pw.patch https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/EN-15:16/pw.patch.asc On 17/09/2015 09:20, Pietro Cerutti wrote: On 2015-09-16 23:31, FreeBSD Errata Notices wrote: # fetch https://security.FreeBSD.org/patches/EN-15:26/pw.patch #

Re: KSTACK_PAGES stuck at 2 despite options KSTACK_PAGES=4

This should be fixed by r286223 in HEAD. I'll MFC to stable/10 after the relevant time-out. Thanks again for the report :) Regards Steve On 31/07/2015 22:21, Trond Endrestøl wrote: stable/10, i386, r286139, 4 GiB RAM, custom kernel loudly claims: ZFS NOTICE: KSTACK_PAGES is 2 which

Re: KSTACK_PAGES stuck at 2 despite options KSTACK_PAGES=4

Thanks for the report Trond, I've reproduced this and am investigating. On 31/07/2015 22:21, Trond Endrestøl wrote: stable/10, i386, r286139, 4 GiB RAM, custom kernel loudly claims: ZFS NOTICE: KSTACK_PAGES is 2 which could result in stack overflow panic! Please consider adding 'options

Re: 10.2-Beta i386..what's wrong..?

What's the panic? As your using ZFS I'd lay money on the fact your blowing the stack, which would require kernel built with: options KSTACK_PAGES=4 Regards Steve On 22/07/2015 08:10, Holm Tiffe wrote: Hi, yesterday I've decided to to put my old Workstation in my shack and to

Re: Problems adding Intel 750 to zfs pool

Be aware that kern.geom.dev.delete_max_sectors will still come into play here hence the large request will still get chunked. This is good to prevent excessively long running individual BIO's which would result in user operations being uncancelable. Regards Steve On 21/07/2015

Re: Problems adding Intel 750 to zfs pool

This will almost certainly be due to slow TRIM support on the device. Try setting the sysctl vfs.zfs.vdev.trim_on_init to 0 before adding the devices. On 18/07/2015 05:35, dy...@techtangents.com wrote: Hi, I've installed an Intel 750 400GB NVMe PCIe SSD in a Dell R320 running FreeBSD

Re: Problems adding Intel 750 to zfs pool

min Trimming drives before addition to a system is definitely worthwhile. Will On 20 Jul 2015, at 10:28, Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk wrote: This will almost certainly be due to slow TRIM support on the device. Try setting the sysctl vfs.zfs.vdev.trim_on_init to 0 before adding

Re: wrong patch number in releng/10.1?

You kernel hasn't been rebuilt then. On 10/06/2015 11:23, Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! I see the same: uname says: 10.1p10 What does the following say when run from your source directory: grep BRANCH sys/conf/newvers.sh BRANCH=RELEASE-p11 ___

Re: wrong patch number in releng/10.1?

What does the following say when run from your source directory: grep BRANCH sys/conf/newvers.sh Regards Steve On 10/06/2015 10:20, Palle Girgensohn wrote: Also # uname -a FreeBSD pingpongdb 10.1-RELEASE-p10 FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p10 #0: Wed May 13 06:54:13 UTC 2015

Re: zfs, cam sticking on failed disk

On 07/05/2015 09:07, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: I have zpool of 12 vdev (zmirrors). One disk in one vdev out of service and stop serving reuquest: dT: 1.036s w: 1.000s L(q) ops/sr/s kBps ms/rw/s kBps ms/w %busy Name 0 0 0 00.0 0 00.0

Re: zfs, cam sticking on failed disk

On 07/05/2015 15:28, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 05/07/15 14:32, Steven Hartland wrote: I wouldn't have thought so, I would expect that to only have an effect on removal media such as CDROM drives, but no harm in trying ;-) zpool offline -t zroot da19 That might work but it also might just

Re: zfs, cam sticking on failed disk

On 07/05/2015 13:51, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 01:46:40PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: Yes in theory new requests should go to the other vdev, but there could be some dependency issues preventing that such as a syncing TXG. Currenly this pool must not have write

Re: zfs, cam sticking on failed disk

On 07/05/2015 13:44, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 01:35:05PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: On 07/05/2015 13:05, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 01:00:40PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: On 07/05/2015 11:46, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07

Re: zfs, cam sticking on failed disk

On 07/05/2015 13:05, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 01:00:40PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: On 07/05/2015 11:46, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 11:38:46AM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: How I can cancel this 24 requst? Why this requests don't timeout

Re: zfs, cam sticking on failed disk

On 07/05/2015 14:10, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 02:05:11PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: On 07/05/2015 13:51, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 01:46:40PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: Yes in theory new requests should go to the other vdev

Re: zfs, cam sticking on failed disk

On 07/05/2015 14:29, Ronald Klop wrote: On Thu, 07 May 2015 15:23:58 +0200, Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk wrote: On 07/05/2015 14:10, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 02:05:11PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: On 07/05/2015 13:51, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote

Re: zfs, cam sticking on failed disk

On 07/05/2015 11:46, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 11:38:46AM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: How I can cancel this 24 requst? Why this requests don't timeout (3 hours already)? How I can forced detach this disk? (I am lready try `camcontrol reset`, `camconrol rescan

Re: zfs, cam sticking on failed disk

On 07/05/2015 10:50, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:41:43AM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: On 07/05/2015 09:07, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: I have zpool of 12 vdev (zmirrors). One disk in one vdev out of service and stop serving reuquest: dT: 1.036s w: 1.000s L(q

Re: File-Backed ZFS Kernel Panic still in 10.1-RELEASE (PR 195061)

Looks like it got lost in the tubes, sitting with me to get info across to re@ On 26/04/2015 16:29, Will Green wrote: Thanks Steven. I’ll hold off releasing the updated tutorials for now. On 21 Apr 2015, at 17:45, Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk wrote: I did actually request

Re: File-Backed ZFS Kernel Panic still in 10.1-RELEASE (PR 195061)

I did actually request this back in November, but I don't seem to have had a reply so I'll chase. On 21/04/2015 16:23, Will Green wrote: Hello, I have been updating my ZFS tutorials for use on FreeBSD 10.1. To allow users to experiment with ZFS I use file-backed ZFS pools. On FreeBSD 10.1

Re: Adaptec 7805H drivers

On 20/04/2015 00:25, Phil Murray wrote: Hi Ian, Thanks for the suggestion, I tried that but had no luck Try hint.ahcich.X.disabled=1 instead, where X is the relevant channel. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: Significant memory leak in 9.3p10?

On 26/03/2015 23:47, J David wrote: In our case, On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Kevin Oberman rkober...@gmail.com wrote: This is just a shot in the dark and not a really likely one, but I have had issues with Firefox leaking memory badly. I can free the space by killing firefox and

Re: Problems with openssl 1.0.2 update

On 23/03/2015 14:38, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 23.03.2015 15:14, Dewayne Geraghty wrote: On 24/03/2015 12:16 AM, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: On 23.03.2015 13:40, Guido Falsi wrote: On 03/23/15 11:33, Gerhard Schmidt wrote: Hi, we experiencing a

Re: ZFS hanging on too hard

- Original Message - From: Daniel O'Connor docon...@gsoft.com.au Hi all, I'm trying to setup a ZFS mirror system with a USB disk as backup. The backup disk is a ZFS pool which I am zfs send'ing to. However I find that if the disk is disconnected while mounted then things go pear

Re: ZFS hanging on too hard

- Original Message - From: Daniel O'Connor docon...@gsoft.com.au On 14/10/2013, at 2:32, Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk wrote: First pool is not your pool name its backupA so try: zpool online backupA /dev/da0 If that still fails try: zpool online backupA 1877640355 I

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >