On 2019-04-08 20:55, Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 08.04.2019 20:21, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> 09.04.2019 7:00, Kevin P. Neal wrote:
>>
My guess (given that only ada1 is reporting a blocksize mismatch) is that
your disks reported a 512B native blocksize. In the absence of any
On 08.04.2019 20:21, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 09.04.2019 7:00, Kevin P. Neal wrote:
>
>>> My guess (given that only ada1 is reporting a blocksize mismatch) is that
>>> your disks reported a 512B native blocksize. In the absence of any
>>> override,
>>> ZFS will then build an ashift=9 pool.
>
>
09.04.2019 7:00, Kevin P. Neal wrote:
>> My guess (given that only ada1 is reporting a blocksize mismatch) is that
>> your disks reported a 512B native blocksize. In the absence of any override,
>> ZFS will then build an ashift=9 pool.
[skip]
> smartctl 7.0 2018-12-30 r4883 [FreeBSD
On 2019-Apr-07 16:36:40 +0100, tech-lists wrote:
>storage ONLINE 0 0 0
> raidz1-0 ONLINE 0 0 0
>replacing-0 ONLINE 0 0 1.65K
> ada2 ONLINE 0 0 0
> ada1 ONLINE 0 0 0 block size: 512B
The patch was committed to head on March 11 and flagged for MFC, but it
hasn't be merged to stable yet. I've been running this modification on
11.2-R and 12.0-R using the affected devices as system disks for a
little over two months without issue. Can someone merge this into
stable/11 and
Yes, I still do remember it, just need to find time to port the feature.
Of course the root cause there is much more complicated (we can not assume to
have contigous space above 1MB), but we mostly can cope...
Sent from my iPhone
> On 8 Apr 2019, at 09:44, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote:
>
>> Am
Am 16.05.2017 um 18:26 schrieb Harry Schmalzbauer:
Bezüglich Toomas Soome's Nachricht vom 16.05.2017 18:20 (localtime):
On 16. mai 2017, at 19:13, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote:
Bezüglich Toomas Soome's Nachricht vom 16.05.2017 18:00 (localtime):
On 16. mai 2017, at 18:45, Harry Schmalzbauer
