Re: [zfs-discuss] Narrow escape with FAULTED disks

2010-08-23 Thread Mark Bennett
Well I do have a plan. Thanks to the portability of ZFS boot disks, I'll make two new OS disks on another machine with the next Nexcenta release, export the data pool and swap in the new ones. That way, I can at least manage a zfs scrub without killing the performance and get the Intel SSD's

[zfs-discuss] deduplication: l2arc size

2010-08-23 Thread Frank Van Damme
Hi, this has already been the source of a lot of interesting discussions, so far I haven't found the ultimate conclusion. From some discussion on this list in February, I learned that an antry in ZFS' deduplication table takes (in practice) half a KiB of memory. At the moment my data looks like

[zfs-discuss] ZFS offline ZIL corruption not detected

2010-08-23 Thread StorageConcepts
Hello, we are currently extensivly testing the DDRX1 drive for ZIL and we are going through all the corner cases. The headline above all our tests is do we still need to mirror ZIL with all current fixes in ZFS (zfs can recover zil failure, as long as you don't export the pool, with latest

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS offline ZIL corruption not detected

2010-08-23 Thread Neil Perrin
This is a consequence of the design for performance of the ZIL code. Intent log blocks are dynamically allocated and chained together. When reading the intent log we read each block and checksum it with the embedded checksum within the same block. If we can't read a block due to an IO error then

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS offline ZIL corruption not detected

2010-08-23 Thread Neil Perrin
On 08/23/10 13:12, Markus Keil wrote: Does that mean that when the begin of the intent log chain gets corrupted, all other intent log data after the corruption area is lost, because the checksum of the first corrupted block doesn't match? - Yes, but you wouldn't want to replay the