> Everything is detected correctly, everything comes up correctly. See
> a new option (reload) in the RC script for hast.
same here - have patched the master databse achines, all came up fine,
everything running erfectly, have flip-flopped between the two machines
with no ill effects whatsoever,
On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:26:15 -0700 Freddie Cash wrote:
FC> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Mikolaj Golub
wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:08:16 -0700 Freddie Cash wrote:
>> FC> Once the deadlock patches above are MFC'd to -STABLE, I can do an
>> FC> upgrade cycle and test them.
>>
>> C
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Mikolaj Golub wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:08:16 -0700 Freddie Cash wrote:
> FC> Once the deadlock patches above are MFC'd to -STABLE, I can do an
> FC> upgrade cycle and test them.
>
> Committed to STABLE.
Updated src tree to r220537. Recompiled world, kern
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:08:16 -0700 Freddie Cash wrote:
FC> Once the deadlock patches above are MFC'd to -STABLE, I can do an
FC> upgrade cycle and test them.
Committed to STABLE.
--
Mikolaj Golub
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://l
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Mikolaj Golub wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:08:16 -0700 Freddie Cash wrote:
>
> FC> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 1:44 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I just committed a fix for a problem that might look like a deadlock.
> >> With trociny@ patch and my la
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:08:16 -0700 Freddie Cash wrote:
FC> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 1:44 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek
wrote:
>>
>> I just committed a fix for a problem that might look like a deadlock.
>> With trociny@ patch and my last fix (to GEOM GATE and hastd) do you
>> still have any issues?
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 1:44 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 01:36:32PM -0700, Freddie Cash wrote:
>> [Not sure which list is most appropriate since it's using HAST + ZFS
>> on -RELEASE, -STABLE, and -CURRENT. Feel free to trim the CC: on
>> replies.]
>>
>> I'm having a he
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 01:36:32PM -0700, Freddie Cash wrote:
> [Not sure which list is most appropriate since it's using HAST + ZFS
> on -RELEASE, -STABLE, and -CURRENT. Feel free to trim the CC: on
> replies.]
>
> I'm having a hell of a time making this work on real hardware, and am
> not rulin
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:22 AM, Pete French wrote:
>> The other 5% of the time, the hastd crashes occurred either when
>> importing the ZFS pool, or when running multiple parallel rsyncs to
>> the pool. hastd was always shown as the last running process in the
>> backtrace onscreen.
>
> This is w
> This looks like a different problem. If you have this again please provide the
> output of 'procstat -kka'.
Will do...
-pete.
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send a
> The other 5% of the time, the hastd crashes occurred either when
> importing the ZFS pool, or when running multiple parallel rsyncs to
> the pool. hastd was always shown as the last running process in the
> backtrace onscreen.
This is what I am seeing - did you manage to reproduce this with the
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:40:11 +0100 Pete French wrote:
>> Yes, you may hit it only on hast devices creation. The workaround is to
>> avoid
>> using 'hastctl role primary all', start providers one by one instead.
PF> Interesting to note that I just hit a lockup in hast (the discs froze
PF> u
> Yes, you may hit it only on hast devices creation. The workaround is to avoid
> using 'hastctl role primary all', start providers one by one instead.
Interesting to note that I just hit a lockup in hast (the discs froze
up - could not run hastctl or zpool import, and could not kill
them). I have
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 5:16 AM, Mikolaj Golub wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 10:52:08 -0700 Freddie Cash wrote:
>
> FC> hastd backtrace is here:
> FC> http://www.sd73.bc.ca/downloads/crash/hast-backtrace.png
>
> It is not a hastd crash, but a kernel crash triggered by hastd process.
Ah, interesti
> It is not a hastd crash, but a kernel crash triggered by hastd process.
>
> I am not sure I got the same crash as you but apparently the race is possible
> in g_gate on device creation.
>
> I got the following crash starting many hast providers simultaneously:
This is very interestng to me - my
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 10:47:22 +0100 Pete French wrote:
>> It is not a hastd crash, but a kernel crash triggered by hastd process.
>>
>> I am not sure I got the same crash as you but apparently the race is
>> possible
>> in g_gate on device creation.
>>
>> I got the following crash starting
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 15:16:15 +0300 Mikolaj Golub wrote to Freddie Cash:
MG> The attached patch fixes the issue in my case.
The patch is committed to current.
--
Mikolaj Golub
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mail
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 10:52:08 -0700 Freddie Cash wrote:
FC> hastd backtrace is here:
FC> http://www.sd73.bc.ca/downloads/crash/hast-backtrace.png
It is not a hastd crash, but a kernel crash triggered by hastd process.
I am not sure I got the same crash as you but apparently the race is possibl
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 01:36:32PM -0700, Freddie Cash wrote:
>> I've tried with FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE, 8-STABLE, 8-STABLE w/ZFSv28
>> patches, and 9-CURRENT (after the ZFSv28 commit). Things work well
>> until I start hastd. Then eith
Hi,
2011/3/24 Freddie Cash :
> The hardware is fairly standard fare:
> - SuperMicro H8DGi-F motherboard
> - AMD Opteron 6100-series CPU (8-cores @ 2.0 GHz)
> - 8 GB DDR3 SDRAM
> - 64 GB Kingston V-Series SSD for the OS install (using ahci(4) and
> the motherboard SATA controller)
> - 3x Super
> So, please, someone, somewhere, share a success story, where you're
> using FreeBSD, ZFS, and HAST. Let me know that it does work. I'm
> starting to lose faith in my abilities here. :(
I ran our main database for the old company using ZFS on top of HAST
without any problems at all. Had a sing
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 01:36:32PM -0700, Freddie Cash wrote:
> I've tried with FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE, 8-STABLE, 8-STABLE w/ZFSv28
> patches, and 9-CURRENT (after the ZFSv28 commit). Things work well
> until I start hastd. Then either the system locks up, or hastd causes
> a kernel panic, or hastd
[Not sure which list is most appropriate since it's using HAST + ZFS
on -RELEASE, -STABLE, and -CURRENT. Feel free to trim the CC: on
replies.]
I'm having a hell of a time making this work on real hardware, and am
not ruling out hardware issues as yet, but wanted to get some
reassurance that some
23 matches
Mail list logo
