Re: [zfs-discuss] incorrect/conflicting suggestion in error message on a faulted pool

2008-04-09 Thread Haudy Kazemi
I have reported this bug here: 
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6685676

I think this bug may be related, but I do not see where to add a note to 
an existing bug report: 
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6633592
(both bugs refer to ZFS-8000-2Q however my report shows a FAULTED pool 
instead of a DEGRADED pool.)

Thanks,

-hk

Haudy Kazemi wrote:
 Hello,

 I'm writing to report what I think is an incorrect or conflicting 
 suggestion in the error message displayed on a faulted pool that does 
 not have redundancy (equiv to RAID0?).  I ran across this while testing 
 and learning about ZFS on a clean installation of NexentaCore 1.0.

 Here is how to recreate the scenario:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ mkfile 200m testdisk1 testdisk2
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo zpool create mybigpool $PWD/testdisk1 $PWD/testdisk2
 Password:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
   pool: mybigpool
  state: ONLINE
  scrub: none requested
 config:

 NAME  STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
 mybigpool ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  ONLINE   0 0 0

 errors: No known data errors
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo zpool scrub mybigpool
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
   pool: mybigpool
  state: ONLINE
  scrub: scrub completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Apr  7 22:09:29 2008
 config:

 NAME  STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
 mybigpool ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  ONLINE   0 0 0

 errors: No known data errors

 Up to here everything looks fine.  Now lets destroy one of the virtual 
 drives:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ rm testdisk2
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
   pool: mybigpool
  state: ONLINE
  scrub: scrub completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Apr  7 22:09:29 2008
 config:

 NAME  STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
 mybigpool ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  ONLINE   0 0 0

 errors: No known data errors

 Okay, still looks fine, but I haven't tried to read/write to it yet.  
 Try a scrub.

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo zpool scrub mybigpool
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
   pool: mybigpool
  state: FAULTED
 status: One or more devices could not be opened.  Sufficient replicas 
 exist for
 the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state.
 action: Attach the missing device and online it using 'zpool online'.
see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-2Q
  scrub: scrub completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Apr  7 22:10:36 2008
 config:

 NAME  STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
 mybigpool FAULTED  0 0 0  
 insufficient replicas
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  UNAVAIL  0 0 0  cannot 
 open

 errors: No known data errors
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$

 There we go.  The pool has faulted as I expected to happen because I 
 created it as a non-redundant pool.  I think it was the equivalent of a 
 RAID0 pool with checksumming, at least it behaves like one.  The key to 
 my reporting this is that the status message says One or more devices 
 could not be opened.  Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue 
 functioning in a degraded state. while the message further down to the 
 right of the pool name says insufficient replicas.

 The verbose status message is wrong in this case.  From other forum/list 
 posts looks like that status message is also used for degraded pools, 
 which isn't a problem, but here we have a faulted pool.  Here's an 
 example of the same status message used appropriately: 
 http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2006-April/031298.html

 Is anyone else able to reproduce this?  And if so, is there a ZFS bug 
 tracker to report this too? (I didn't see a public bug tracker when I 
 looked.)

 Thanks,

 Haudy Kazemi
 ___
 zfs-discuss mailing list
 zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
 http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
   

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] incorrect/conflicting suggestion in error message on a faulted pool

2008-04-09 Thread Neil Perrin
Haudy,

Thanks for reporting this bug and helping to improve ZFS.
I'm not sure either how you could have added a note to an
existing report. Anyway I've gone ahead and done that for you
in the Related Bugs field. Though opensolaris doesn't reflect it yet

Neil.


Haudy Kazemi wrote:
 I have reported this bug here: 
 http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6685676
 
 I think this bug may be related, but I do not see where to add a note to 
 an existing bug report: 
 http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6633592
 (both bugs refer to ZFS-8000-2Q however my report shows a FAULTED pool 
 instead of a DEGRADED pool.)
 
 Thanks,
 
 -hk
 
 Haudy Kazemi wrote:
 Hello,

 I'm writing to report what I think is an incorrect or conflicting 
 suggestion in the error message displayed on a faulted pool that does 
 not have redundancy (equiv to RAID0?).  I ran across this while testing 
 and learning about ZFS on a clean installation of NexentaCore 1.0.

 Here is how to recreate the scenario:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ mkfile 200m testdisk1 testdisk2
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo zpool create mybigpool $PWD/testdisk1 
 $PWD/testdisk2
 Password:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
   pool: mybigpool
  state: ONLINE
  scrub: none requested
 config:

 NAME  STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
 mybigpool ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  ONLINE   0 0 0

 errors: No known data errors
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo zpool scrub mybigpool
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
   pool: mybigpool
  state: ONLINE
  scrub: scrub completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Apr  7 22:09:29 2008
 config:

 NAME  STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
 mybigpool ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  ONLINE   0 0 0

 errors: No known data errors

 Up to here everything looks fine.  Now lets destroy one of the virtual 
 drives:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ rm testdisk2
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
   pool: mybigpool
  state: ONLINE
  scrub: scrub completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Apr  7 22:09:29 2008
 config:

 NAME  STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
 mybigpool ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  ONLINE   0 0 0

 errors: No known data errors

 Okay, still looks fine, but I haven't tried to read/write to it yet.  
 Try a scrub.

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo zpool scrub mybigpool
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ zpool status mybigpool
   pool: mybigpool
  state: FAULTED
 status: One or more devices could not be opened.  Sufficient replicas 
 exist for
 the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state.
 action: Attach the missing device and online it using 'zpool online'.
see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-2Q
  scrub: scrub completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Mon Apr  7 22:10:36 2008
 config:

 NAME  STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
 mybigpool FAULTED  0 0 0  
 insufficient replicas
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk1  ONLINE   0 0 0
   /export/home/kaz/testdisk2  UNAVAIL  0 0 0  cannot 
 open

 errors: No known data errors
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$

 There we go.  The pool has faulted as I expected to happen because I 
 created it as a non-redundant pool.  I think it was the equivalent of a 
 RAID0 pool with checksumming, at least it behaves like one.  The key to 
 my reporting this is that the status message says One or more devices 
 could not be opened.  Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue 
 functioning in a degraded state. while the message further down to the 
 right of the pool name says insufficient replicas.

 The verbose status message is wrong in this case.  From other forum/list 
 posts looks like that status message is also used for degraded pools, 
 which isn't a problem, but here we have a faulted pool.  Here's an 
 example of the same status message used appropriately: 
 http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2006-April/031298.html

 Is anyone else able to reproduce this?  And if so, is there a ZFS bug 
 tracker to report this too? (I didn't see a public bug tracker when I 
 looked.)

 Thanks,

 Haudy Kazemi
 ___
 zfs-discuss mailing list
 zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
 http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
   
 
 ___
 zfs-discuss mailing list
 zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
 http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss