Frank Cusack wrote:
If you can't run build 48 or later, then you can workaround the problem
by not mounting the filesystem in between the 'rollback' and the 'recv':

cookies# zfs set mountpoint=none export/zone/www/html
cookies# zfs rollback export/zone/www/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
milk# zfs send -i @4 export/zone/www/[EMAIL PROTECTED] | ssh cookies zfs recv
export/zone/www/html

Let me know if one of those options works for you.

Setting mountpoint=none works, but once I set the mountpoint option back
it fails again.  That is, I successfully send the incremental, reset the
mountpoint option, rollback and send and it fails.

I don't follow... could you list the exact sequence of commands you used and their output? I think you're saying that you were able to successfully receive the @[EMAIL PROTECTED] incremental, but when you tried the @[EMAIL PROTECTED] incremental without doing mountpoint=none, the recv failed. So you're saying that you need mountpoint=none for any incremental recv's, not just @[EMAIL PROTECTED]

So I guess there is a filesystem access somewhere somehow immediately after
the rollback. I can't run b48 (any idea if -F will be in 11/06?).

I don't think so.  Look for it in Solaris 10 update 4.

However, I really do this via
a script which does a rollback then immediately does the send.  This script
always fails.

It sounds like the mountpoint=none trick works for you, so can't you just incorporate it into your script? Eg:

while (want to send snap) {
        zfs set mountpoint=none destfs
        zfs rollback [EMAIL PROTECTED]
        zfs send -i @bla [EMAIL PROTECTED] | ssh desthost zfs recv bla
        zfs inherit mountpoint destfs
        sleep ...
}

readonly=on doesn't help.  That is,

cookies# zfs set readonly=on export/zone/www/html
cookies# zfs rollback export/zone/www/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
milk# zfs send ...
 ... destination has been modified ...

This implies that you are hitting 6343779 (or some other bug) which is causing your fs to be modified, rather than some spurious process. But I would expect that to be rare, so it would be surprising if you see this happening with many different snapshots.

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

Reply via email to