Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bug - should I be worried about this?
On 06/28/10 08:15 PM, Gabriele Bulfon wrote: I found this today: http://blog.lastinfirstout.net/2010/06/sunoracle-finally-announces-zfs-data.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feedutm_campaign=Feed%3A+LastInFirstOut+%28Last+In%2C+First+Out%29utm_content=FriendFeed+Bot How can I be sure my Solaris 10 systems are fine? Is latest OpenSolaris (134) safe? Did you read the Sunsolve document? b134 is not vulnerable. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bug - should I be worried about this?
Yes, I did read it. And what worries me is patches availability... -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bug - should I be worried about this?
mmmI double checked some of the running systems. Most of them have the first patch (sparc-122640-05 and x86-122641-06), but not the second one (sparc-142900-09 and x86-142901-09)... ...I feel I'm right in the middle of the problem... How much am I risking?! These systems are all mirrored via zpool... Would this really make me safe without patching?? : set zfs:zfs_immediate_write_sz=10 set zfs:zvol_immediate_write_sz=10 Or a Log would be preferred? *sweat* These systems are all running for years nowand I considered them safe... Have I been at risk all this time?! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bug - should I be worried about this?
On 28-6-2010 12:13, Gabriele Bulfon wrote: *sweat* These systems are all running for years nowand I considered them safe... Have I been at risk all this time?! They're still running, are they not? So, stop sweating. g But you're right about the changed patching service from Oracle. It sucks big time. Safety patches should be available, even it the OS is free. You can't expect users to run unsafe systems just because they have not payed for the OS. After all, it's Oracle (SUN) who gives away the OS. -- + All that's really worth doing is what we do for others (Lewis Carrol) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bug - should I be worried about this?
Yes...they're still running...but being aware that a power failure causing an unexpected poweroff may make the pool unreadable is a pain Yes. Patches should be available. Or adoption may be lowering a lot... -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bug - should I be worried about this?
On 28.06.10 16:16, Gabriele Bulfon wrote: Yes...they're still running...but being aware that a power failure causing an unexpected poweroff may make the pool unreadable is a pain Pool integrity is not affected by this issue. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bug - should I be worried about this?
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 05:16 -0700, Gabriele Bulfon wrote: Yes...they're still running...but being aware that a power failure causing an unexpected poweroff may make the pool unreadable is a pain Yes. Patches should be available. Or adoption may be lowering a lot... I don't have access to the information, but if this problem is the same one I think it is, then the pool does not become unreadable. Rather, its state after such an event represents a *consistent* state from some point of time *earlier* than that confirmed fsync() (or a write on a file opened with O_SYNC or O_DSYNC). For most users, this is not a critical failing. For users using databases or requiring transactional integrity for data stored on ZFS, then yes, this is a very nasty problem indeed. I suspect that this is the problem I reported earlier in my blog (http://gdamore.blogspot.com) about certain kernels having O_SYNC and O_DSYNC problems. I can't confirm this though, because I don't have access to the SunSolve database to read the report. (This is something I'll have to check into fixing... it seems like my employer ought to have access to that information...) - Garrett ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bug - should I be worried about this?
Oh well, thanks for this answer. It makes me feel much better! What are eventual risks? Gabriele Bulfon - Sonicle S.r.l. Tel +39 028246016 Int. 30 - Fax +39 028243880 Via Felice Cavallotti 16 - 20089, Rozzano - Milano - ITALY http://www.sonicle.com -- Da: Victor Latushkin A: Gabriele Bulfon Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Data: 28 giugno 2010 16.14.12 CEST Oggetto: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bug - should I be worried about this? On 28.06.10 16:16, Gabriele Bulfon wrote: Yes...they're still running...but being aware that a power failure causing an unexpected poweroff may make the pool unreadable is a pain Pool integrity is not affected by this issue. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
