Re: [zfs-discuss] cannot destroy, volume is busy
In message <7f44e458-5d27-42b6-ac81-7f4ff61d6...@gmail.com>, Richard Elling wri tes: >The iSCSI service is not STMF. STMF will need to be disabled, or the = >volume no longer >used by STMF. > >iSCSI service is svc:/network/iscsi/target:default >STMF service is svc:/system/stmf:default Thank you for the gentle nudge with the clue stick, forgot the process I used... http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E26502_01/html/E29007/gaypf.html> >One would think that fuser would work, but in my experience, fuser = >rarely does >what I expect. fuser(1M) came up blank. >If you suspect STMF, then try > stmfadm list-lu -v Bingo! Deleted the LU and destroyed the volume. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] cannot destroy, volume is busy
# zfs list -t vol NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT rpool/dump4.00G 99.9G 4.00G - rpool/foo128 66.2M 100G16K - rpool/swap4.00G 99.9G 4.00G - # zfs destroy rpool/foo128 cannot destroy 'rpool/foo128': volume is busy I checked that the volume is not a dump or swap device and that iSCSI is disabled. On Solaris 11.1, how would I determine what's busying it? John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] HELP! RPool problem
In message , Karl Wagner writes: >The SSD was the first boot drive, and every time it tried to boot it >panicked and rebooted, ending up in a loop. I tried to change to the second >rpool drive, but either I forgot to install grub on it or it has become >corrupted (probably the first, I can be that stupid at times). > >Can anyone give me any advice on how to get this system back? Can I trick >grub, installed on the SSD, to boot from the HDD's rpool mirror? Is >something more sinister going on? Remove the broken drive, boot installation media, import the mirror drive. If it imports, you will be able to installgrub(1M). >By the way, whatever the error message is when booting, it disapears so >quickly I can't read it, so I am only guessing that this is the reason. Boot with kernel debugger so you can see the panic. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] pool metadata has duplicate children
Gregg Wonderly wrote: > Have you tried importing the pool with that drive completely unplugged? Thanks for your reply. I just tried that. zpool import now says: pool: d id: 13178956075737687211 state: FAULTED status: The pool metadata is corrupted. action: The pool cannot be imported due to damaged devices or data. The pool may be active on another system, but can be imported using the '-f' flag. see: http://illumos.org/msg/ZFS-8000-72 config: dFAULTED corrupted data raidz1-0 FAULTED corrupted data da1 ONLINE 3419704811362497180 OFFLINE da2 ONLINE da3 ONLINE da4 ONLINE Notice that in the absence of the faulted da2 the OS has assigned da3 to da2 etc. I suspect this was part of the original problem in creating a label with two da2s zdb still reports that the label has two da2 children: vdev_tree: type: 'raidz' id: 0 guid: 11828532517066189487 nparity: 1 metaslab_array: 23 metaslab_shift: 36 ashift: 9 asize: 920660480 is_log: 0 children[0]: type: 'disk' id: 0 guid: 13697627234083630557 path: '/dev/da1' whole_disk: 0 DTL: 78 children[1]: type: 'disk' id: 1 guid: 3419704811362497180 path: '/dev/da2' whole_disk: 0 DTL: 71 offline: 1 children[2]: type: 'disk' id: 2 guid: 6790266178760006782 path: '/dev/da2' whole_disk: 0 DTL: 77 children[3]: type: 'disk' id: 3 guid: 2883571222332651955 path: '/dev/da3' whole_disk: 0 DTL: 76 children[4]: type: 'disk' id: 4 guid: 16640597255468768296 path: '/dev/da4' whole_disk: 0 DTL: 75 > Which HBA are you using? How many of these disks are on same or separate > HBAs? all the disks are on the same HBA twa0: <3ware 9000 series Storage Controller> twa0: INFO: (0x15: 0x1300): Controller details:: Model 9500S-8, 8 ports, Firmware FE9X 2.08.00.006 da0 at twa0 bus 0 scbus0 target 0 lun 0 da1 at twa0 bus 0 scbus0 target 1 lun 0 da2 at twa0 bus 0 scbus0 target 2 lun 0 da3 at twa0 bus 0 scbus0 target 3 lun 0 da4 at twa0 bus 0 scbus0 target 4 lun 0 -jg ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] pool metadata has duplicate children
I seem to have managed to end up with a pool that is confused abut its children disks. The pool is faulted with corrupt metadata: pool: d state: FAULTED status: The pool metadata is corrupted and the pool cannot be opened. action: Destroy and re-create the pool from a backup source. see: http://illumos.org/msg/ZFS-8000-72 scan: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM dFAULTED 0 0 1 raidz1-0 FAULTED 0 0 6 da1 ONLINE 0 0 0 3419704811362497180 OFFLINE 0 0 0 was /dev/da2 da3 ONLINE 0 0 0 da4 ONLINE 0 0 0 da5 ONLINE 0 0 0 But if I look at the labels on all the online disks I see this: # zdb -ul /dev/da1 | egrep '(children|path)' children[0]: path: '/dev/da1' children[1]: path: '/dev/da2' children[2]: path: '/dev/da2' children[3]: path: '/dev/da3' children[4]: path: '/dev/da4' ... But the offline disk (da2) shows the older correct label: children[0]: path: '/dev/da1' children[1]: path: '/dev/da2' children[2]: path: '/dev/da3' children[3]: path: '/dev/da4' children[4]: path: '/dev/da5' zpool import -F doesnt help because none of the labels on the unfaulted disks seem to have the right label. And unless I can import the pool I cant replace the bad drive. Also zpool seems to really not want to import a raidz1 pool with one faulted drive even though that should be readable. I have read about the undocumented -V option but dont know if that would help. I got into this state when i noticed the pool was DEGRADED and was trying to replace the bad disk. I am debugging it under FreeBSD 9.1 Suggestions of things to try welcome, Im more interested in learning what went wrong than restoring the pool. I dont think I should have been able to go from one offline drive to a unrecoverable pool this easily. -jg ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] The format command crashes on 3TB disk but zpool create ok
# pstack core John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] dm-crypt + ZFS on Linux
Replacing the SANs is cost prohibitive. On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Tim Cook wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 9:49 AM, John Baxter wrote: > >> >> We have the need to encypt our data, approximately 30TB on three ZFS >> volumes under Solaris 10. The volumes currently reside on iscsi sans >> connected via 10Gb/s ethernet. We have tested Solaris 11 with ZFS encrypted >> volumes and found the performance to be very poor and have an open bug >> report with Oracle. >> >> We are a Linux shop and since performance is so poor and still no >> resolution, we are considering ZFS on Linux with dm-crypt. >> I have read once or twice that if we implemented ZFS + dm-crypt we would >> loose features, however which features are not specified. >> We currently mirror the volumes across identical iscsi sans with ZFS and >> we use hourly ZFS snapshots to update our DR site. >> >> Which features of ZFS are lost if we use dm-crypt? My guess would be they >> are related to raidz but unsure. >> >> > > Why don't you just use a SAN that supports full drive encryption? There > should be basically 0 performance overhead. > > --Tim > ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] dm-crypt + ZFS on Linux
After searching for dm-crypt and ZFS on Linux and finding too little information, I shall ask here. Please keep in mind this in the context of running this in a production environment. We have the need to encypt our data, approximately 30TB on three ZFS volumes under Solaris 10. The volumes currently reside on iscsi sans connected via 10Gb/s ethernet. We have tested Solaris 11 with ZFS encrypted volumes and found the performance to be very poor and have an open bug report with Oracle. We are a Linux shop and since performance is so poor and still no resolution, we are considering ZFS on Linux with dm-crypt. I have read once or twice that if we implemented ZFS + dm-crypt we would loose features, however which features are not specified. We currently mirror the volumes across identical iscsi sans with ZFS and we use hourly ZFS snapshots to update our DR site. Which features of ZFS are lost if we use dm-crypt? My guess would be they are related to raidz but unsure. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] horrible slow pool
Hello everybody,
I just wanted to share my experience with a (partially) broken SSD that was in
use in a ZIL mirror.
We experienced a dramatic performance problem with one of our zpools, serving
home directories. Mainly NFS clients were affected. Our SunRay infrastructure
came to a complete halt.
Finally we were able to identify one SSD as the root caus. The SSD was still
working, but quite slow.
The issue didn't trigger ZFS to detect the disk as faulty. FMA didn't detect
it, too.
We identified the broken disk by issuing "iostat -en'. After replacing the SSD,
everything went back to normal.
To prevent outages like this in the future I hacked together a "quick and
dirty" bash script to detect disks with a given rate of total errors. The
script might be used in conjunction with nagios.
Perhaps it's of use for others sa well:
###
#!/bin/bash
# check disk in all pools for errors.
# partially failing (or slow) disks
# may result in horribly degradded
# performance of zpools despite the fact
# the pool is still healthy
# exit codes
# 0 OK
# 1 WARNING
# 2 CRITICAL
# 3 UNKONOWN
OUTPUT=""
WARNING="0"
CRITICAL="0"
SOFTLIMIT="5"
HARDLIMIT="20"
LIST=$(zpool status | grep "c[1-9].*d0 " | awk '{print $1}')
for DISK in $LIST
do
ERROR=$(iostat -enr $DISK | cut -d "," -f 4 | grep "^[0-9]")
if [[ $ERROR -gt $SOFTLIMIT ]]
then
OUTPUT="$OUTPUT, $DISK:$ERROR"
WARNING="1"
fi
if [[ $ERROR -gt $HARDLIMIT ]]
then
OUTPUT="$OUTPUT, $DISK:$ERROR"
CRITICAL="1"
fi
done
if [[ $CRITICAL -gt 0 ]]
then
echo "CRITICAL: Disks with error count >= $HARDLIMIT found: $OUTPUT"
exit 2
fi
if [[ $WARNING -gt 0 ]]
then
echo "WARNING: Disks with error count >= $SOFTLIMIT found: $OUTPUT"
exit 1
fi
echo "OK: No significant disk errors found"
exit 0
###
cu
Carsten
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Sol11 time-slider / snapshot not starting [SOLVED]
-Original message- To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; From: Carsten John Sent: Tue 11-09-2012 13:08 Subject:[zfs-discuss] Sol11 time-slider / snapshot not starting [again] > Hello everybody, > > my time-slider service on a Sol11 machine died. I already > deinstalled/installed > the time-slider packeage, restarted manifest-import service etc., but no > success. > > /var/svc/log/application-time-slider:default.log: Finally I was able to fix it: - uninstall time-slider - restert manifest-import service - install time-slider - restart manifest-import service - enable time-slider service - enable snapshot services I have no clue why it has to be done exact in this order, but finally I succeeded. cu Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Sol11 time-slider / snapshot not starting [again]
Hello everybody,
my time-slider service on a Sol11 machine died. I already deinstalled/installed
the time-slider packeage, restarted manifest-import service etc., but no
success.
/var/svc/log/application-time-slider:default.log:
--snip--
[ Sep 11 12:40:04 Enabled. ]
[ Sep 11 12:40:04 Executing start method ("/lib/svc/method/time-slider start").
]
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/time-sliderd", line 10, in
main(abspath(__file__))
File "/usr/lib/../share/time-slider/lib/time_slider/timesliderd.py", line
941, in main
snapshot = SnapshotManager(systemBus)
File "/usr/lib/../share/time-slider/lib/time_slider/timesliderd.py", line 83,
in __init__
self.refresh()
File "/usr/lib/../share/time-slider/lib/time_slider/timesliderd.py", line
188, in refresh
self._rebuild_schedules()
File "/usr/lib/../share/time-slider/lib/time_slider/timesliderd.py", line
285, in _rebuild_schedules
"Details:\n" + str(message)
RuntimeError: Error reading SMF schedule instances
Details:
['/usr/bin/svcs', '-H', '-o', 'state',
'svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:monthly'] failed with exit code 1
svcs: Pattern 'svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:monthly' doesn't match
any instances
Time Slider failed to start: error 95
[ Sep 11 12:40:06 Method "start" exited with status 95. ]
--snip--
Any suggestions?
thx
Carsten
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Can the ZFS "copies" attribute substitute HW disk redundancy?
On 07/29/12 14:52, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: My opinion is that complete hard drive failure and block-level media failure are two totally different things. That would depend on the recovery behavior of the drive for block-level media failure. A drive whose firmware does excessive (reports of up to 2 minutes) retries of a bad sector may be indistinguishable from a failed drive. See previous discussions of the firmware differences between desktop and enterprise drives. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Very poor small-block random write performance
On 07/19/12 19:27, Jim Klimov wrote: However, if the test file was written in 128K blocks and then is rewritten with 64K blocks, then Bob's answer is probably valid - the block would have to be re-read once for the first rewrite of its half; it might be taken from cache for the second half's rewrite (if that comes soon enough), and may be spooled to disk as a couple of 64K blocks or one 128K block (if both changes come soon after each other - within one TXG). What are the values for zfs_txg_synctime_ms and zfs_txg_timeout on this system (FreeBSD, IIRC)? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] New fast hash algorithm - is it needed?
On 07/10/12 19:56, Sašo Kiselkov wrote: Hi guys, I'm contemplating implementing a new fast hash algorithm in Illumos' ZFS implementation to supplant the currently utilized sha256. On modern 64-bit CPUs SHA-256 is actually much slower than SHA-512 and indeed much slower than many of the SHA-3 candidates, so I went out and did some testing (details attached) on a possible new hash algorithm that might improve on this situation. Is the intent to store the 512 bit hash or truncate to 256 bit? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] S11 zfs snapshot crash
I am toying with Phil Brown's zrep script.
Does anyone have an Oracle BugID for this crashdump?
#!/bin/ksh
srcfs=rpool/testvol
destfs=rpool/destvol
snap="${srcfs}@zrep_00"
zfs destroy -r $srcfs
zfs destroy -r $destfs
zfs create -V 100M $srcfs
zfs set foo:bar=foobar $srcfs
zfs create -o readonly=on $destfs
zfs snapshot $snap
zfs send -p $snap| zfs recv -vuF $destfs
# mdb unix.1 vmcore.1
> $c
zap_leaf_lookup+0x4d(ff01dd4e1888, ff01e198d500, ff000858e130)
fzap_lookup+0x9a(ff01e198d500, 1, 4b, ff000858e430, 0, 0)
zap_lookup_norm+0x131(ff01dd48c9c0, 1, f7a99e30, 1, 4b,
ff000858e430)
zap_lookup+0x2d(ff01dd48c9c0, 1, f7a99e30, 1, 4b, ff000858e430)
zfs_get_mlslabel+0x56(ff01dd48c9c0, ff000858e430, 4b)
zfs_mount_label_policy+0x62(ff01dd68cb60, ff01ceede200)
zfs_mount+0x499(ff01dd68cb60, ff01e191b500, ff000858ee20,
ff01dbfb23b8)
fsop_mount+0x22(ff01dd68cb60, ff01e191b500, ff000858ee20,
ff01dbfb23b8)
domount+0xd33(0, ff000858ee20, ff01e191b500, ff01dbfb23b8,
ff000858ee18)
mount+0xc0(ff01ce5cf3b8, ff000858ee98)
syscall_ap+0x92()
_sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x149()
# pkg info entire| grep Summary
Summary: entire incorporation including Support Repository Update
(Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 SRU 8.5).
John
groenv...@acm.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Sol11 missing snapshot facility [solved]
-Original message- To: Carsten John ; CC: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; From: Ian Collins Sent: Thu 05-07-2012 21:40 Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] Sol11 missing snapshot facility > On 07/ 5/12 11:32 PM, Carsten John wrote: > > -Original message- > > To: Carsten John; > > CC: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; > > From: Ian Collins > > Sent: Thu 05-07-2012 11:35 > > Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] Sol11 missing snapshot facility > >> On 07/ 5/12 09:25 PM, Carsten John wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Ian, > >>> > >>> yes, I already checked that: > >>> > >>> svcs -a | grep zfs > >>> disabled 11:50:39 svc:/application/time-slider/plugin:zfs-send > >>> > >>> is the only service I get listed. > >>> > >> Odd. > >> > >> How did you install? > >> > >> Is the manifest there > >> (/lib/svc/manifest/system/filesystem/auto-snapshot.xml)? > >> > > Hi Ian, > > > > I installed from CD/DVD, but it might have been in a rush, as I needed to > replace a broken machine as quick as possible. > > > > The manifest is there: > > > > > > ls /lib/svc/manifest/system/filesystem/ > > . .. auto-snapshot.xml autofs.xml > local-fs.xml minimal-fs.xml rmvolmgr.xml root-fs.xml > ufs-quota.xml usr-fs.xml > > > > Running "svcadm restart manifest-import" should load it, or give you > some idea why it won't load. > > -- > Ian. > > Hi Ian, it did the trick, but I had to uninstall/install the time-slider package. thx for the help Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Sol11 missing snapshot facility
-Original message- To: Carsten John ; CC: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; From: Ian Collins Sent: Thu 05-07-2012 11:35 Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] Sol11 missing snapshot facility > On 07/ 5/12 09:25 PM, Carsten John wrote: > > > Hi Ian, > > > > yes, I already checked that: > > > > svcs -a | grep zfs > > disabled 11:50:39 svc:/application/time-slider/plugin:zfs-send > > > > is the only service I get listed. > > > Odd. > > How did you install? > > Is the manifest there > (/lib/svc/manifest/system/filesystem/auto-snapshot.xml)? > > -- > Ian. > > Hi Ian, I installed from CD/DVD, but it might have been in a rush, as I needed to replace a broken machine as quick as possible. The manifest is there: ls /lib/svc/manifest/system/filesystem/ . .. auto-snapshot.xml autofs.xml local-fs.xml minimal-fs.xml rmvolmgr.xml root-fs.xml ufs-quota.xml usr-fs.xml thx Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Sol11 missing snapshot facility
-Original message- To: Carsten John ; CC: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; From: Ian Collins Sent: Thu 05-07-2012 09:59 Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] Sol11 missing snapshot facility > On 07/ 5/12 06:52 PM, Carsten John wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > > > > > for some reason I can not find the zfs-autosnapshot service facility any > more. I already reinstalles time-slider, but it refuses to start: > > > > > > RuntimeError: Error reading SMF schedule instances > > Details: > > ['/usr/bin/svcs', '-H', '-o', 'state', > 'svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:monthly'] failed with exit code 1 > > svcs: Pattern 'svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:monthly' doesn't > match any instances > > > Have you looked with svcs -a? > > # svcs -a | grep zfs > disabled Jul_02 svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:daily > disabled Jul_02 svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:frequent > disabled Jul_02 svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:hourly > disabled Jul_02 svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:monthly > disabled Jul_02 svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:weekly > disabled Jul_02 svc:/application/time-slider/plugin:zfs-send > > -- > Ian. > > Hi Ian, yes, I already checked that: svcs -a | grep zfs disabled 11:50:39 svc:/application/time-slider/plugin:zfs-send is the only service I get listed. thx Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Sol11 missing snapshot facility
Hello everybody, for some reason I can not find the zfs-autosnapshot service facility any more. I already reinstalles time-slider, but it refuses to start: RuntimeError: Error reading SMF schedule instances Details: ['/usr/bin/svcs', '-H', '-o', 'state', 'svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:monthly'] failed with exit code 1 svcs: Pattern 'svc:/system/filesystem/zfs/auto-snapshot:monthly' doesn't match any instances did anybody know a way to get the services back again? thx Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Interaction between ZFS intent log and mmap'd files
On 07/04/12 16:47, Nico Williams wrote: I don't see that the munmap definition assures that anything is written to "disk". The system is free to buffer the data in RAM as long as it likes without writing anything at all. Oddly enough the manpages at the Open Group don't make this clear. So I think it may well be advisable to use msync(3C) before munmap() on MAP_SHARED mappings. However, I think all implementors should, and probably all do (Linux even documents that it does) have an implied msync(2) when doing a munmap(2). I really makes no sense at all to have munmap(2) not imply msync(3C). This assumes msync() has the behavior you expect. See: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/msync.html In particular, the paragraph starting with "For mappings to files, ...". ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots slow on sol11? SOLVED
-Original message- To: Jim Klimov ; CC: ZFS Discussions ; From: Carsten John Sent: Wed 27-06-2012 08:48 Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots slow on sol11? > -Original message- > CC: ZFS Discussions ; > From: Jim Klimov > Sent: Tue 26-06-2012 22:34 > Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots slow on sol11? > > 2012-06-26 23:57, Carsten John wrote: > > > Hello everybody, > > > > > > I recently migrated a file server (NFS & Samba) from OpenSolaris (Build > 111) > > to Sol11. > > > (After?) the move we are facing random (or random looking) outages of > > our Samba... > > > > As for the timeouts, check if your tuning (i.e. the migrated files > > like /etc/system) don't enforce long TXG syncs (default was 30sec) > > or something like that. > > > > Find some DTrace scripts to see if ZIL is intensively used during > > these user-profile writes, and if these writes are synchronous - > > maybe an SSD/DDR logging device might be useful for this scenario? > > > > Regarding the zfs-auto-snapshot, it is possible to install the old > > scripted package from OpenSolaris onto Solaris 10 at least; I did > > not have much experience with newer releases yet (timesliderd) so > > can't help better. > > > > HTH, > > //Jim Klimov > > > > ___ > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > > > Hi everybody, > > in the meantime I was able to eliminate the snapshots. I disabled snapshot, > but > the issue still persists. I will now check Jim's suggestions. > > thx so far > > > Carsten > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > We finally found the reason (thanks, wireshark). It was, in fact, not zfs nor solaris related. Due to a problem with a dhcp3-relay, the clients got an initial DHCP IP by DHCPDISCOVER, but couldn't renew their IP via DHCPREQUEST when the maximum lease time was reached. This resulted in a short loss of connectivity, until the client got a new IP (actually the same as before) via DHCPDISCOVER. The problem only showed up, if the client tried to write to the fileserver in the period of time when the IP was lost (usually when firefox or thunderbird tried to write to their disk cache). thanks for the suggestions Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots slow on sol11?
-Original message- CC: ZFS Discussions ; From: Jim Klimov Sent: Tue 26-06-2012 22:34 Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots slow on sol11? > 2012-06-26 23:57, Carsten John wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > > > I recently migrated a file server (NFS & Samba) from OpenSolaris (Build > > 111) > to Sol11. > > (After?) the move we are facing random (or random looking) outages of > our Samba... > > As for the timeouts, check if your tuning (i.e. the migrated files > like /etc/system) don't enforce long TXG syncs (default was 30sec) > or something like that. > > Find some DTrace scripts to see if ZIL is intensively used during > these user-profile writes, and if these writes are synchronous - > maybe an SSD/DDR logging device might be useful for this scenario? > > Regarding the zfs-auto-snapshot, it is possible to install the old > scripted package from OpenSolaris onto Solaris 10 at least; I did > not have much experience with newer releases yet (timesliderd) so > can't help better. > > HTH, > //Jim Klimov > > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > Hi everybody, in the meantime I was able to eliminate the snapshots. I disabled snapshot, but the issue still persists. I will now check Jim's suggestions. thx so far Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] snapshots slow on sol11?
Hello everybody, I recently migrated a file server (NFS & Samba) from OpenSolaris (Build 111) to Sol11. This the move we are facing random (or random looking) outages of our Samba. As we have moved several folders (like Desktop and ApplicationData) out of the usual profile to a folder inside the users home share, the setup is sensible about timeouts. From time to time users are getting the infamous Windows "Delayed Write Failure". After checking nearly every parameter that came to my mind in the last days, the zfs-auto-snapshot mechanism inside Solaris 11 came to my attention. We had hourly and daily snapshot enabled and discovered that the snapshots are not rotated as expected. As there were known issues (if I remember correctly) with timesliderd in OpenIndiana and we had the old zfs-auto-snap mechanism (without timesliderd) running without any problems before the update, I'm wondering if the are any known (performance) issues with the stuff in Solaris 11. thx Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Migrating 512 byte block zfs root pool to 4k disks
On 06/16/12 12:23, Richard Elling wrote: On Jun 15, 2012, at 7:37 AM, Hung-Sheng Tsao Ph.D. wrote: by the way when you format start with cylinder 1 donot use 0 There is no requirement for skipping cylinder 0 for root on Solaris, and there never has been. Maybe not for core Solaris, but it is still wise advice if you plan to use Oracle ASM. See section 3.3.1.4, 2c: http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/install.112/e24616/storage.htm#CACHGBAH ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Migrating 512 byte block zfs root pool to 4k disks
On 06/15/12 15:52, Cindy Swearingen wrote: Its important to identify your OS release to determine if booting from a 4k disk is supported. In addition, whether the drive is really 4096p or 512e/4096p. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] (fwd) Re: ZFS NFS service hanging on Sunday morning
In message <201206141413.q5eedvzq017...@mklab.ph.rhul.ac.uk>, tpc...@mklab.ph.r hul.ac.uk writes: >Memory: 2048M phys mem, 32M free mem, 16G total swap, 16G free swap My WAG is that your "zpool history" is hanging due to lack of RAM. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Is there an actual newsgroup for zfs-discuss?
In message <008c01cd4812$7399c180$5acd4480$@net>, David Combs writes: >Actual newsgroup for zfs-discuss? Did you try Gmane's interface? http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=jo43q0%24no50%241%40tr22n12.aset.psu.edu> John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Spare drive inherited cksum errors?
In message <4fc509e8.8080...@jvm.de>, Stephan Budach writes: >If now I'd only knew how to get the actual S11 release level of my box. >Neither uname -a nor cat /etc/release does give me a clue, since they >display all the same data when run on different hosts that are on >different updates. $ pkg info entire John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Advanced Format HDD's - are we there yet? (or - how to buy a drive that won't be teh sux0rs on zfs)
On 05/29/12 07:26, bofh wrote: ashift:9 is that standard? Depends on what the drive reports as physical sector size. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Advanced Format HDD's - are we there yet? (or - how to buy a drive that won't be teh sux0rs on zfs)
On 05/29/12 08:35, Nathan Kroenert wrote: Hi John, Actually, last time I tried the whole AF (4k) thing, it's performance was worse than woeful. But admittedly, that was a little while ago. The drives were the seagate green barracuda IIRC, and performance for just about everything was 20MB/s per spindle or worse, when it should have been closer to 100MB/s when streaming. Things were worse still when doing random... I'm actually looking to put in something larger than the 3*2TB drives (triple mirror for read perf) this pool has in it - preferably 3 * 4TB drives. (I don't want to put in more spindles - just replace the current ones...) I might just have to bite the bullet and try something with current SW. :). Raw read from one of the mirrors: # timex dd if=/dev/rdsk/c0t2d0s2 of=/dev/null bs=1024000 count=1 1+0 records in 1+0 records out real 49.26 user 0.01 sys0.27 filebench filemicro_seqread reports an impossibly high number (4GB/s) so the ARC is likely handling all reads. The label on the boxes I bought say: 1TB 32MB INTERNAL KIT 7200 ST310005N1A1AS-RK S/N: ... PN:9BX1A8-573 The drives in the box were really ST1000DM003-9YN162 with 64MB of cache. I have multiple pools on each disk so the cache should be disabled. The drive reports 512 byte logical sectors and 4096 physical sectors. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Advanced Format HDD's - are we there yet? (or - how to buy a drive that won't be teh sux0rs on zfs)
On 05/28/12 08:48, Nathan Kroenert wrote: Looking to get some larger drives for one of my boxes. It runs exclusively ZFS and has been using Seagate 2TB units up until now (which are 512 byte sector). Anyone offer up suggestions of either 3 or preferably 4TB drives that actually work well with ZFS out of the box? (And not perform like rubbish)... I'm using Oracle Solaris 11 , and would prefer not to have to use a hacked up zpool to create something with ashift=12. Are you replacing a failed drive or creating a new pool? I had a drive in a mirrored pool recently fail. Both drives were 1TB Seagate ST310005N1A1AS-RK with 512 byte sectors. All the 1TB Seagate boxed drives I could find with the same part number on the box (with factory seals in place) were really ST1000DM003-9YN1 with 512e/4196p. Just being cautious, I ended up migrating the pools over to a pair of the new drives. The pools were created with ashift=12 automatically: $ zdb -C | grep ashift ashift: 12 ashift: 12 ashift: 12 Resilvering the three pools concurrently went fairly quickly: $ zpool status scan: resilvered 223G in 2h14m with 0 errors on Tue May 22 21:02:32 2012 scan: resilvered 145G in 4h13m with 0 errors on Tue May 22 23:02:38 2012 scan: resilvered 153G in 3h44m with 0 errors on Tue May 22 22:30:51 2012 What performance problem do you expect? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import [UPDATE]
Hello everybody, just to let you know what happened in the meantime: I was able to open a Service Request at Oracle. The issue is a known bug (Bug 6742788 : assertion panic at: zfs:zap_deref_leaf) The bug has bin fixed (according to Oracle support) since build 164, but there is no fix for Solaris 11 available so far (will be fixed in S11U7?). There is a workaround available that works (partly), but my system crashed again when trying to rebuild the offending zfs within the affected zpool. At the moment I'm waiting for a so called "interim diagnostic relief" patch cu Carsten -- Max Planck Institut fuer marine Mikrobiologie - Network Administration - Celsiustr. 1 D-28359 Bremen Tel.: +49 421 2028568 Fax.: +49 421 2028565 PGP public key:http://www.mpi-bremen.de/Carsten_John.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import [ORACLE should notice this]
-Original message- To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; From: John D Groenveld Sent: Fri 30-03-2012 21:47 Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import [ORACLE should notice this] > In message <4f735451.2020...@oracle.com>, Deepak Honnalli writes: > > Thanks for your reply. I would love to take a look at the core > > file. If there is a way this can somehow be transferred to > > the internal cores server, I can work on the bug. > > > > I am not sure about the modalities of transferring the core > > file though. I will ask around and see if I can help you here. > > How to Upload Data to Oracle Such as Explorer and Core Files [ID 1020199.1] > > John > groenv...@acm.org > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > Hi John, in the meantime I managed to open a service request at Oracle. There is a webportal https://supportfiles.sun.com. There you can upload the files... cu Carsten -- Max Planck Institut fuer marine Mikrobiologie - Network Administration - Celsiustr. 1 D-28359 Bremen Tel.: +49 421 2028568 Fax.: +49 421 2028565 PGP public key:http://www.mpi-bremen.de/Carsten_John.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import [ORACLE should notice this]
In message <4f735451.2020...@oracle.com>, Deepak Honnalli writes: > Thanks for your reply. I would love to take a look at the core > file. If there is a way this can somehow be transferred to > the internal cores server, I can work on the bug. > > I am not sure about the modalities of transferring the core > file though. I will ask around and see if I can help you here. How to Upload Data to Oracle Such as Explorer and Core Files [ID 1020199.1] John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Good tower server for around 1,250 USD?
In message <4f7571de.7080...@netdemons.com>, Erik Trimble writes: >Oracle (that is, if Oracle hasn't completely stopped selling support >contracts for Solaris for non-Oracle hardware already). Still available on Oracle Store: https://shop.oracle.com/pls/ostore/f?p=dstore:product:2091882785479247::NO:RP,6:P6_LPI:27242443094470222098916> John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Puzzling problem with zfs receive exit status
-Original message- To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; From: Borja Marcos Sent: Thu 29-03-2012 11:49 Subject:[zfs-discuss] Puzzling problem with zfs receive exit status > > Hello, > > I hope someone has an idea. > > I have a replication program that copies a dataset from one server to another > one. The replication mechanism is the obvious one, of course: > > zfs send -Ri from snapshot(n-1) snapshot(n) > file > scp file remote machine (I do it this way instead of using a pipeline so that > a > network error won't interrupt a receive data stream) > and on the remote machine, > zfs receive -Fd pool > > It's been working perfectly for months, no issues. However, yesterday we > began > to see something weird: the zfs receive being executed on the remote machine > is > exiting with an exit status of 1, even though the replication is finished, > and > I see the copied snapshots on the remote machine. > > Any ideas? It's really puzzling. It seems that the replication is working (a > zfs list -t snapshot shows the new snapshots correctly applied to the > dataset) > but I'm afraid there's some kind of corruption. > > The OS is Solaris, SunOS 5.10 Generic_141445-09 i86pc i386 i86pc. > > Any ideas? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > > > Borja. > > > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > Hi Borja, did you try to check the snapshot file with zstreamdump? It will validate the checksums. Perhaps the information here http://blog.richardelling.com/2009/10/check-integrity-of-zfs-send-streams.html might be useful for you. Carsten -- Max Planck Institut fuer marine Mikrobiologie - Network Administration - Celsiustr. 1 D-28359 Bremen Tel.: +49 421 2028568 Fax.: +49 421 2028565 PGP public key:http://www.mpi-bremen.de/Carsten_John.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import [ORACLE should notice this]
In message , =?utf- 8?Q?Carsten_John?= writes: >I just spent about an hour (or two) trying to file a bug report regarding the >issue without success. > >Seems to me, that I'm too stupid to use this "MyOracleSupport" portal. > >So, as I'm getting paid for keeping systems running and not clicking through f >lash overloaded support portals searching for CSIs, I'm giving the relevant in >formation to the list now. If the Flash interface is broken, try the non-Flash MOS site: http://SupportHTML.Oracle.COM/> John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import [ORACLE should notice this]
-Original message- To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; From: Deepak Honnalli Sent: Wed 28-03-2012 09:12 Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import > Hi Carsten, > > This was supposed to be fixed in build 164 of Nevada (6742788). If > you are still seeing this > issue in S11, I think you should raise a bug with relevant details. > As Paul has suggested, > this could also be due to incomplete snapshot. > > I have seen interrupted zfs recv's causing weired bugs. > > Thanks, > Deepak. Hi Deepak, I just spent about an hour (or two) trying to file a bug report regarding the issue without success. Seems to me, that I'm too stupid to use this "MyOracleSupport" portal. So, as I'm getting paid for keeping systems running and not clicking through flash overloaded support portals searching for CSIs, I'm giving the relevant information to the list now. Perhaps, someone at Oracle, reading the list, is able to file a bug report, or contact me off list. Background: Machine A - Sun X4270 - Opensolaris Build 111b - zpool version 14 - primary file server - sending snapshots via zfs send - direct attached Sun J4400 SAS JBODs with totally 40 TB storage Machine B - Sun X4270 - Solaris 11 - zpool version 33 - mirror server - receiving snapshots via zfs receive - FC attached Storagetek FLX280 storage Incident: After a zfs send/receive run machine B had a hanging zfs receive process. To get rid of the process, I rebooted the machine. During reboot the kernel panics, resulting in a reboot loop. To bring up the system, I rebooted single user, removed /etc/zfs/zpool.cache and rebooted again. The damaged pool can imported readonly, giving a warning: $>zpool import -o readonly=on san_pool cannot set property for 'san_pool/home/someuser': dataset is read-only cannot set property for 'san_pool/home/someotheruser': dataset is read-only The ZFS debugger zdb does not give any additional information: $>zdb -d -e san_pool Dataset san_pool [ZPL], ID 18, cr_txg 1, 36.0K, 11 objects The issue can reproduced by trying to import the pool r/w, resulting in a kernel panic. The fmdump utility gives the following information for the relevant UUID: $>fmdump -Vp -u 91da1503-74c5-67c2-b7c1-d4e245e4d968 TIME UUID SUNW-MSG-ID Mar 28 2012 12:54:26.563203000 91da1503-74c5-67c2-b7c1-d4e245e4d968 SUNOS-8000-KL TIME CLASS ENA Mar 28 12:54:24.2698 ireport.os.sunos.panic.dump_available 0x Mar 28 12:54:05.9826 ireport.os.sunos.panic.dump_pending_on_device 0x nvlist version: 0 version = 0x0 class = list.suspect uuid = 91da1503-74c5-67c2-b7c1-d4e245e4d968 code = SUNOS-8000-KL diag-time = 1332932066 541092 de = fmd:///module/software-diagnosis fault-list-sz = 0x1 __case_state = 0x1 topo-uuid = 3b4117e0-0ac7-cde5-b434-b9735176d591 fault-list = (array of embedded nvlists) (start fault-list[0]) nvlist version: 0 version = 0x0 class = defect.sunos.kernel.panic certainty = 0x64 asru = sw:///:path=/var/crash/.91da1503-74c5-67c2-b7c1-d4e245e4d968 resource = sw:///:path=/var/crash/.91da1503-74c5-67c2-b7c1-d4e245e4d968 savecore-succcess = 1 dump-dir = /var/crash dump-files = vmdump.0 os-instance-uuid = 91da1503-74c5-67c2-b7c1-d4e245e4d968 panicstr = BAD TRAP: type=e (#pf Page fault) rp=ff002f6dcc50 addr=20 occurred in module "zfs" due to a NULL pointer dereference panicstack = unix:die+d8 () | unix:trap+152b () | unix:cmntrap+e6 () | zfs:zap_leaf_lookup_closest+45 () | zfs:fzap_cursor_retrieve+cd () | zfs:zap_cursor_retrieve+195 () | zfs:zfs_purgedir+4d () | zfs:zfs_rmnode+57 () | zfs:zfs_zinactive+b4 () | zfs:zfs_inactive+1a3 () | genunix:fop_inactive+b1 () | genunix:vn_rele+58 () | zfs:zfs_unlinked_drain+a7 () | zfs:zfsvfs_setup+f1 () | zfs:zfs_domount+152 () | zfs:zfs_mount+4e3 () | genunix:fsop_mount+22 () | genunix:domount+d2f () | genunix:mount+c0 () | genunix:syscall_ap+92 () | unix:brand_sys_sysenter+1cf () | crashtime = 1332931339 panic-time = March 28, 2012 12:42:19 PM CEST CEST (end fault-list[0]) fault-status = 0x1 severity = Major __ttl = 0x1 __tod = 0x4f72ede2 0x2191cbb8 The 'first view' debugger output looks like: mdb unix.0 vmcore.0 Loading modules: [ unix genunix specfs dtrace mac cpu.generic uppc pcplusmp scsi_vhci zfs mpt sd ip hook neti arp usba uhci sockfs qlc fctl s1394 kssl lofs random idm sppp crypto sata fcip cpc fcp ufs logindmux ptm ] > $c zap_leaf_lookup_closest+0x45(ff0728eac588, 0, 0, ff
Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import
-Original message-
To: ZFS Discussions ;
From: Paul Kraus
Sent: Tue 27-03-2012 15:05
Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 3:14 AM, Carsten John wrote:
> > Hallo everybody,
> >
> > I have a Solaris 11 box here (Sun X4270) that crashes with a kernel panic
> during the import of a zpool (some 30TB) containing ~500 zfs filesystems
> after
> reboot. This causes a reboot loop, until booted single user and removed
> /etc/zfs/zpool.cache.
> >
> >
> > From /var/adm/messages:
> >
> > savecore: [ID 570001 auth.error] reboot after panic: BAD TRAP: type=e (#pf
> Page fault) rp=ff002f9cec50 addr=20 occurred in module "zfs" due to a
> NULL
> pointer dereference
> > savecore: [ID 882351 auth.error] Saving compressed system crash dump in
> /var/crash/vmdump.2
> >
>
> I ran into a very similar problem with Solaris 10U9 and the
> replica (zfs send | zfs recv destination) of a zpool of about 25 TB of
> data. The problem was an incomplete snapshot (the zfs send | zfs recv
> had been interrupted). On boot the system was trying to import the
> zpool and as part of that it was trying to destroy the offending
> (incomplete) snapshot. This was zpool version 22 and destruction of
> snapshots is handled as a single TXG. The problem was that the
> operation was running the system out of RAM (32 GB worth). There is a
> fix for this and it is in zpool 26 (or newer), but any snapshots
> created while the zpool is at a version prior to 26 will have the
> problem on-disk. We have support with Oracle and were able to get a
> loaner system with 128 GB RAM to clean up the zpool (it took about 75
> GB RAM to do so).
>
> If you are at zpool 26 or later this is not your problem. If you
> are at zpool < 26, then test for an incomplete snapshot by importing
> the pool read only, then `zdb -d | grep '%'` as the incomplete
> snapshot will have a '%' instead of a '@' as the dataset / snapshot
> separator. You can also run the zdb against the _un_imported_ zpool
> using the -e option to zdb.
>
> See the following Oracle Bugs for more information.
>
> CR# 6876953
> CR# 6910767
> CR# 7082249
>
> CR#7082249 has been marked as a duplicate of CR# 6948890
>
> P.S. I have a suspect that the incomplete snapshot was also corrupt in
> some strange way, but could never make a solid determination of that.
> We think what caused the zfs send | zfs recv to be interrupted was
> hitting an e1000g Ethernet device driver bug.
>
> --
> {1-2-3-4-5-6-7-}
> Paul Kraus
> -> Senior Systems Architect, Garnet River ( http://www.garnetriver.com/ )
> -> Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company (
> http://www.sloctheater.org/ )
> -> Technical Advisor, Troy Civic Theatre Company
> -> Technical Advisor, RPI Players
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
Hi,
this scenario seems to fit. The machine that was sending the snapshot is on
OpenSolaris Build 111b (which is running zpool version 14).
I rebooted the receiving machine due to a hanging "zfs receive" that couldn't
be killed.
zdb -d -e does not give any useful information:
zdb -d -e san_pool
Dataset san_pool [ZPL], ID 18, cr_txg 1, 36.0K, 11 objects
When importing the pool readonly, I get an error about two datasets:
zpool import -o readonly=on san_pool
cannot set property for 'san_pool/home/someuser': dataset is read-only
cannot set property for 'san_pool/home/someotheruser': dataset is read-only
As this is a mirror machine, I still have the option to destroy the pool and
copy over the stuff via send/receive from the primary. But nobody knows how
long this will work until I'm hit again
If an interrupted send/receive can screw up a 30TB target pool, then
send/receive isn't an option for replication data at all, furthermore it should
be flagged as "don't use it if your target pool might contain any valuable data"
I wil reproduce the crash once more and try to file a bug report for S11 as
recommended by Deepak (not so easy these days...).
thanks
Carsten
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import
Hallo everybody, I have a Solaris 11 box here (Sun X4270) that crashes with a kernel panic during the import of a zpool (some 30TB) containing ~500 zfs filesystems after reboot. This causes a reboot loop, until booted single user and removed /etc/zfs/zpool.cache. >From /var/adm/messages: savecore: [ID 570001 auth.error] reboot after panic: BAD TRAP: type=e (#pf Page fault) rp=ff002f9cec50 addr=20 occurred in module "zfs" due to a NULL pointer dereference savecore: [ID 882351 auth.error] Saving compressed system crash dump in /var/crash/vmdump.2 This is what mdb tells: mdb unix.2 vmcore.2 Loading modules: [ unix genunix specfs dtrace mac cpu.generic uppc pcplusmp scsi_vhci zfs mpt sd ip hook neti arp usba uhci sockfs qlc fctl s1394 kssl lofs random fcp idm sata fcip cpc crypto ufs logindmux ptm sppp ] $c zap_leaf_lookup_closest+0x45(ff0700ca2a98, 0, 0, ff002f9cedb0) fzap_cursor_retrieve+0xcd(ff0700ca2a98, ff002f9ceed0, ff002f9cef10) zap_cursor_retrieve+0x195(ff002f9ceed0, ff002f9cef10) zfs_purgedir+0x4d(ff0721d32c20) zfs_rmnode+0x57(ff0721d32c20) zfs_zinactive+0xb4(ff0721d32c20) zfs_inactive+0x1a3(ff0721d3a700, ff07149dc1a0, 0) fop_inactive+0xb1(ff0721d3a700, ff07149dc1a0, 0) vn_rele+0x58(ff0721d3a700) zfs_unlinked_drain+0xa7(ff07022dab40) zfsvfs_setup+0xf1(ff07022dab40, 1) zfs_domount+0x152(ff07223e3c70, ff0717830080) zfs_mount+0x4e3(ff07223e3c70, ff07223e5900, ff002f9cfe20, ff07149dc1a0) fsop_mount+0x22(ff07223e3c70, ff07223e5900, ff002f9cfe20, ff07149dc1a0) domount+0xd2f(0, ff002f9cfe20, ff07223e5900, ff07149dc1a0, ff002f9cfe18) mount+0xc0(ff0713612c78, ff002f9cfe98) syscall_ap+0x92() _sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x149() I can import the pool readonly. The server is a mirror for our primary file server and is synced via zfs send/receive. I saw a similar effect some time ago on a opensolaris box (build 111b). That time my final solution was to copy over the read only mounted stuff to a newly created pool. As it is the second time this failure occures (on different machines) I'm really concerned about overall reliability Any suggestions? thx Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Good tower server for around 1,250 USD?
In message , Bob Friesenhahn writes: >Almost all of the systems listed on the HCL are defunct and no longer >purchasable except for on the used market. Obtaining an "approved" >system seems very difficult. In spite of this, Solaris runs very well >on many non-approved modern systems. http://www.oracle.com/webfolder/technetwork/hcl/data/s11ga/systems/views/nonoracle_systems_all_results.mfg.page1.html> >I don't know what that means as far as the ability to purchase Solaris >"support". I believe it must pass the HCTS before Oracle will support Solaris running on third-party hardware. http://www.oracle.com/webfolder/technetwork/hcl/hcts/index.html> John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Good tower server for around 1,250 USD?
laotsu said: > well check this link > > https://shop.oracle.com/pls/ostore/product?p1=3DSunFireX4270M2server&p2=3D&p= > 3=3D&p4=3D&sc=3Docom_x86_SunFireX4270M2server&tz=3D-4:00 > > you may not like the price Hahahah! Thanks for the laugh. The dual 10Gbe PCI card breaks my budget. I'm not going to try to configure a server and see how much it costs... I can't even get to the site from my country btw. I had to use a proxy through my company in America to get pricing. Oracle doesn't want to sell certain things everywhere or they don't know how to run a website. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Good tower server for around 1,250 USD?
On Fri Mar 23 at 10:06:12 2012 laot...@gmail.com wrote: > well > use component of x4170m2 as example you will be ok > intel cpu > lsi sas controller non raid > sas 72rpm hdd > my 2c That sounds too vague to be useful unless I could afford an X4170M2. I can't build a custom box and I don't have the resources to go over the parts list and order something with the same components. Thanks though. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Good tower server for around 1,250 USD?
Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, The Honorable Senator and Mrs. John Blutarsky wrote: > > > > This will be a do-everything machine. I will use it for development, hosting > > various apps in zones (web, file server, mail server etc.) and running other > > systems (like a Solaris 11 test system) in VirtualBox. Ultimately I would > > like to put it under Solaris support so I am looking for something > > officially approved. The problem is there are so many systems on the HCL I > > don't know where to begin. One of the Supermicro super workstations looks > > Almost all of the systems listed on the HCL are defunct and no longer > purchasable except for on the used market. In my third world country some of these are still found new in box and sold at "just released" prices. I'm surprised to hear about the state of the HCL, but that is good info to be aware of. Why aren't they maintaining it? If you can find a system can you at least depend on their statement that they support it? Or is even that unknown? I would think if somebody buys a 5 year old new server based on them showing Premier support available and then they refuse to support it there would be the possibility of interesting legal action. > Obtaining an "approved" system seems very difficult. Because of the list being out of date and so the systems are no longer available, or because systems available now don't show up on the list? > In spite of this, Solaris runs very well on many non-approved modern > systems. Yes, I have entitlements from Sun so I am running an Update 8 box on a custom build with no problems. It wasn't built for Solaris or ZFS but works great. After reading the horror stories on the list I don't want to take a chance and buy the wrong machine and then have ZFS fail or Oracle tell me they don't support the machine. Thanks for your post. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Good tower server for around 1,250 USD?
Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm thinking about spending around 1,250 USD for a tower format (desk side) server with RAM but without disks. I'd like to have 16G ECC RAM as a minimum and ideally 2 or 3 times that amount and I'd like for the case to have room for at least 6 drives, more would be better but not essential. I want to run Solaris 10 and possibly upgrade to Solaris 11 if I like it. Right now I have nothing to run Solaris 11 on and I know Solaris 10 well enough to know it will do what I want. This will be a do-everything machine. I will use it for development, hosting various apps in zones (web, file server, mail server etc.) and running other systems (like a Solaris 11 test system) in VirtualBox. Ultimately I would like to put it under Solaris support so I am looking for something officially approved. The problem is there are so many systems on the HCL I don't know where to begin. One of the Supermicro super workstations looks good and I know they have good a reputation but Dell has better sales channels where I live and I could get one of those or even an HP more easily than a Supermicro as far as I know. I will be checking more on this. I have a bunch of white box systems but I don't know anybody capable of building a server grade box so I'm probably going to buy off the shelf. Can anybody tell me is what I am looking for going to be available at this price point and if not, what should I expect to pay? If you have experience with any of the commodity server towers good or bad with Solaris and ZFS I'd like to hear your opinions. I am refraining for asking for advice on drives because I see the list has a few thousand posts archived on this topic and until I go over some of those I don't want to ask about that subject just yet. Thanks for the help. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Any recommendations on Perc H700 controller on Dell Rx10 ?
In message , Sriram Narayanan writes: >At work, I have an R510, and R610 and an R710 - all with the H700 PERC >controller. BTW with some effort, Dell's sales critter will sell you the H200 LSI SAS HBA as a replacement for the H700 LSI MegaRAID controller for those boxes. >Based on experiments, it seems like there is no way to bypass the PERC >controller - it seems like one can only access the individual disks if >they are set up in RAID0 each. Did you try deleting all of the RAID0 Virtual Disks and then enabling JBOD? # MegaCli -AdpSetProp -EnableJBOD -1 -aALL # MegaCli -PDMakeJBOD -PhysDrv[E0:S0,E1:S1,...] -aALL John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zfs send/receive script
Hello everybody, I set up a script to replicate all zfs filesystems (some 300 user home directories in this case) within a given pool to a "mirror" machine. The basic idea is to send the snapshots incremental if the corresponding snapshot exists on the remote side or send a complete snapshot if no corresponding previous snapshot is available Thee setup basically works, but form time to time (within a run over all filesystems) I get error messages like: "cannot receive new filesystem stream: dataset is busy" or "cannot receive incremental filesystem stream: dataset is busy" The complete script is available under: http://pastebin.com/AWevkGAd does anybody have a suggestion what might cause the dataset to be busy? thx Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zfs import from i86 to sparc
Hi everybody, are there any problems to expect if we try to export/import a zfs pool from opensolaris (intel) (zpool version 14) to solaris 10 (sparc) (zpool version 19)? thanks Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] 4k sector support in Solaris 11?
In message <4f435ca9.8010...@tuneunix.com>, nathank writes: >Is there actually a fix to allow manual setting of ashift now that I No. http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E23824_01/html/821-1462/zpool-1m.html> John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] 4k sector support in Solaris 11?
In message , Dave Pooser writes: >If I want to use a batch of new Seagate 3TB Barracudas with Solaris 11, I'm using the Seagate's 3TB external drive with S11. Seagate Expansion 3 TB USB 3.0 Desktop External Hard Drive STAY3000102 >will zpool let me create a new pool with ashift=12 out of the box or will Yes. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] What is your data error rate?
On 01/25/12 09:08, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: Assuming the failure rate of drives is not linear, but skewed toward higher failure rate after some period of time (say, 3 yrs) ... See section 3.1 of the Google study: http://research.google.com/archive/disk_failures.pdf although section 4.2 of the Carnegie Mellon study is much more supportive of the assumption. http://www.usenix.org/events/fast07/tech/schroeder/schroeder.pdf ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] What is your data error rate?
On 01/24/12 17:06, Gregg Wonderly wrote: What I've noticed, is that when I have my drives in a situation of small airflow, and hence hotter operating temperatures, my disks will drop quite quickly. While I *believe* the same thing and thus have over provisioned airflow in my cases (for both drives and memory), there are studies which failed to find a strong correlation between drive temperature and failure rates: http://research.google.com/archive/disk_failures.pdf http://www.usenix.org/events/fast07/tech/schroeder.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Data loss by memory corruption?
On 01/16/12 11:08, David Magda wrote:
The conclusions are hardly unreasonable:
While the reliability mechanisms in ZFS are able to provide reasonable
robustness against disk corruptions, memory corruptions still remain a
serious problem to data integrity.
I've heard the same thing said ("use ECC!") on this list many times over
the years.
I believe the whole paragraph quoted from the USENIX paper above is
important:
While the reliability mechanisms in ZFS are able to
provide reasonable robustness against disk corruptions,
memory corruptions still remain a serious problem to
data integrity. Our results for memory corruptions in-
dicate cases where bad data is returned to the user, oper-
ations silently fail, and the whole system crashes. Our
probability analysis shows that one single bit flip has
small but non-negligible chances to cause failures such
as reading/writing corrupt data and system crashing.
The authors provide probability calculations in section 6.3
for single bit flips. ECC provides detection and correction
of single bit flips.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs read-ahead and L2ARC
On 01/08/12 10:15, John Martin wrote: I believe Joerg Moellenkamp published a discussion several years ago on how L1ARC attempt to deal with the pollution of the cache by large streaming reads, but I don't have a bookmark handy (nor the knowledge of whether the behavior is still accurate). http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5329-Some-insight-into-the-read-cache-of-ZFS-or-The-ARC.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs read-ahead and L2ARC
On 01/08/12 20:10, Jim Klimov wrote: Is it true or false that: ZFS might skip the cache and go to disks for "streaming" reads? I don't believe this was ever suggested. Instead, if data is not already in the file system cache and a large read is made from disk should the file system put this data into the cache? BTW, I chose the term streaming to be a subset of sequential where the access pattern is sequential but at what appears to be artificial time intervals. The suggested pre-read of the entire file would be a simple sequential read done as quickly as the hardware allows. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs read-ahead and L2ARC
On 01/08/12 11:30, Jim Klimov wrote: However for smaller servers, such as home NASes which have about one user overall, pre-reading and caching files even for a single use might be an objective per se - just to let the hard-disks spin down. Say, if I sit down to watch a movie from my NAS, it is likely that for 90 or 120 minutes there will be no other IO initiated by me. The movie file can be pre-read in a few seconds, and then most of the storage system can go to sleep. Isn't this just a more extreme case of prediction? In addition to the file system knowing there will only be one client reading 90-120 minutes of (HD?) video that will fit in the memory of a small(er) server, now the hard drive power management code also knows there won't be another access for 90-120 minutes so it is OK to spin down the hard drive(s). ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs read-ahead and L2ARC
On 01/08/12 09:30, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: In the case of your MP3 collection... Probably the only thing you can do is to write a script which will simply go read all the files you predict will be read soon. The key here is the prediction - There's no way ZFS or solaris, or any other OS in the present day is going to intelligently predict which files you'll be requesting soon. The other prediction is whether the blocks will be reused. If the blocks of a streaming read are only used once, then it may be wasteful for a file system to allow these blocks to placed in the cache. If a file system purposely chooses to not cache streaming reads, manually scheduling a "pre-read" of particular files may simply cause the file to be read from disk twice: on the manual pre-read and when it is read again by the actual application. I believe Joerg Moellenkamp published a discussion several years ago on how L1ARC attempt to deal with the pollution of the cache by large streaming reads, but I don't have a bookmark handy (nor the knowledge of whether the behavior is still accurate). ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Can I create a mirror for a root rpool?
In message , "Anonymous R emailer (austria)" writes: >On Solaris 10 If I install using ZFS root on only one drive is there a way >to add another drive as a mirror later? Sorry if this was discussed >already. I searched the archives and couldn't find the answer. Thank you. http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E23823_01/html/819-5461/ggset.html#gkdep> | How to Create a Mirrored ZFS Root Pool (Postinstallation) John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <4ebbfb5...@oracle.com>, Cindy Swearingen writes: >CR 7102272: > > ZFS storage pool created on a 3 TB USB 3.0 device has device label >problems > >Let us know if this is still a problem in the OS11 FCS release. I finally got upgraded from Solaris 11 Express SRU 12 to S11 FCS. Solaris 11 11/11 still spews the "I/O request is not aligned with 4096 disk sector size" warnings but zpool(1M) create's label persists and I can export and import between systems. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <4e9db04b.80...@oracle.com>, Cindy Swearingen writes: >This is CR 7102272. What is the title of this BugId? I'm trying to attach my Oracle CSI to it but Chuck Rozwat and company's support engineer can't seem to find it. Once I get upgraded from S11x SRU12 to S11, I'll reproduce on a more recent kernel build. Thanks, John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <4e9db04b.80...@oracle.com>, Cindy Swearingen writes: >This is CR 7102272. Anyone out there have Western Digital's competing 3TB Passport drive handy to duplicate this bug? John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <4e9da8b1.7020...@oracle.com>, Cindy Swearingen writes: >1. If you re-create the pool on the whole disk, like this: > ># zpool create foo c1t0d0 > >Then, resend the prtvtoc output for c1t0d0s0. # zpool create snafu c1t0d0 # zpool status snafu pool: snafu state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM snafu ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t0d0ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # prtvtoc /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0s0 * /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0s0 partition map * * Dimensions: *4096 bytes/sector * 732566642 sectors * 732566631 accessible sectors * * Flags: * 1: unmountable * 10: read-only * * Unallocated space: * First SectorLast * Sector CountSector * 6 250 255 * * First SectorLast * Partition Tag FlagsSector CountSector Mount Directory 0 400256 732549997 732550252 8 1100 732550253 16384 732566636 >We should be able to tell if format is creating a dummy label, >which means the ZFS data is never getting written to this disk. >This would be a bug. # zdb -l /dev/dsk/c1t0d0s0 LABEL 0 failed to unpack label 0 LABEL 1 failed to unpack label 1 LABEL 2 failed to unpack label 2 LABEL 3 failed to unpack label 3 >2. You are running this early S11 release: > >SunOS 5.11 151.0.1.12 i386 > >You might retry this on more recent bits, like the EA release, >which I think is b 171. Doubtful I'll find time to install EA before S11 FCS's November launch. >I'll still file the CR. Thank you. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <4e9d98b1.8040...@oracle.com>, Cindy Swearingen writes: >I'm going to file a CR to get this issue reviewed by the USB team >first, but if you could humor me with another test: > >Can you run newfs to create a UFS file system on this device >and mount it? # uname -srvp SunOS 5.11 151.0.1.12 i386 # zpool destroy foobar # newfs /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0s0 newfs: construct a new file system /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0s0: (y/n)? y The device sector size 4096 is not supported by ufs! John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <201110150202.p9f22w2n000...@elvis.arl.psu.edu>, John D Groenveld writes: >I'm baffled why zpool import is unable to find the pool on the >drive, but the drive is definitely functional. Per Richard Elling, it looks like ZFS is unable to find the requisite labels for importing. John groenv...@acm.org # prtvtoc /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0s2 * /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0s2 partition map * * Dimensions: *4096 bytes/sector * 63 sectors/track * 255 tracks/cylinder * 16065 sectors/cylinder * 45599 cylinders * 45597 accessible cylinders * * Flags: * 1: unmountable * 10: read-only * * Unallocated space: * First SectorLast * Sector CountSector * 0 16065 16064 * * First SectorLast * Partition Tag FlagsSector CountSector Mount Directory 0 200 16065 732483675 732499739 2 501 0 732515805 732515804 8 101 0 16065 16064 # zpool create -f foobar c1t0d0s0 # zpool status foobar pool: foobar state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM foobar ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t0d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # zdb -l /dev/dsk/c1t0d0s0 LABEL 0 failed to unpack label 0 LABEL 1 failed to unpack label 1 LABEL 2 failed to unpack label 2 LABEL 3 failed to unpack label 3 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
As a sanity check, I connected the drive to a Windows 7 installation. I was able to partition, create an NTFS volume on it, eject and remount it. I also tried creating the zpool on my Solaris 10 system, exporting and trying to import the pool on my Solaris 11X system and again no love. I'm baffled why zpool import is unable to find the pool on the drive, but the drive is definitely functional. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <4e970387.3040...@oracle.com>, Cindy Swearingen writes: >Any USB-related messages in /var/adm/messages for this device? Negative. cfgadm(1M) shows the drive and format->fdisk->analyze->read runs merrily. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <201110131150.p9dbo8yk011...@acsinet22.oracle.com>, Casper.Dik@oracl e.com writes: >What is the partition table? I thought about that so I reproduced with the legacy SMI label and a Solaris fdisk partition with ZFS on slice 0. Same result as EFI; once I export the pool I cannot import it. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <4e95e10f.9070...@oracle.com>, Cindy Swearingen writes: >In the steps below, you're missing a zpool import step. >I would like to see the error message when the zpool import >step fails. "zpool import" returns nothing. The truss shows it poking around c1t0d0 fdisk partitions and Solaris slices presumably hunting for pools. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
In message <4e95cb2a.30...@oracle.com>, Cindy Swearingen writes:
>What is the error when you attempt to import this pool?
"cannot import 'foo': no such pool available"
John
groenv...@acm.org
# format -e
Searching for disks...done
AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS:
0. c1t0d0
/pci@0,0/pci108e,6676@2,1/hub@7/storage@2/disk@0,0
1. c8t0d0
/pci@0,0/pci108e,6676@5/disk@0,0
2. c8t1d0
/pci@0,0/pci108e,6676@5/disk@1,0
Specify disk (enter its number): ^C
# zpool create foo c1t0d0
# zfs create foo/bar
# zfs list -r foo
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
foo 126K 2.68T32K /foo
foo/bar31K 2.68T31K /foo/bar
# zpool export foo
# zfs list -r foo
cannot open 'foo': dataset does not exist
# truss -t open zpool import foo
open("/var/ld/ld.config", O_RDONLY) Err#2 ENOENT
open("/lib/libumem.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/lib/libc.so.1", O_RDONLY)= 3
open("/lib/libzfs.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/usr/lib/fm//libtopo.so", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/lib/libxml2.so.2", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/lib/libpthread.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/lib/libz.so.1", O_RDONLY)= 3
open("/lib/libm.so.2", O_RDONLY)= 3
open("/lib/libsocket.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/lib/libnsl.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/usr/lib//libshare.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/usr/lib/locale/en_US.UTF-8/LC_MESSAGES/SUNW_OST_SGS.mo", O_RDONLY) Err#2
ENOENT
open("/usr/lib/locale/en_US.UTF-8/LC_MESSAGES/SUNW_OST_OSLIB.mo", O_RDONLY)
Err#2 ENOENT
open("/usr/lib/locale/en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-8.so.3", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/usr/lib/locale/en_US.UTF-8/methods_unicode.so.3", O_RDONLY) = 3
open("/dev/zfs", O_RDWR)= 3
open("/etc/mnttab", O_RDONLY) = 4
open("/etc/dfs/sharetab", O_RDONLY) = 5
open("/lib/libavl.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 6
open("/lib/libnvpair.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 6
open("/lib/libuutil.so.1", O_RDONLY)= 6
open64("/dev/rdsk/", O_RDONLY) = 6
/3: openat64(6, "c8t0d0s0", O_RDONLY) = 9
/3: open("/lib/libadm.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 15
/9: openat64(6, "c8t0d0s2", O_RDONLY) = 13
/5: openat64(6, "c8t1d0s0", O_RDONLY) = 10
/7: openat64(6, "c8t1d0s2", O_RDONLY) = 14
/8: openat64(6, "c1t0d0s0", O_RDONLY) = 7
/4: openat64(6, "c1t0d0s2", O_RDONLY) Err#5 EIO
/8: open("/lib/libefi.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 15
/3: openat64(6, "c1t0d0", O_RDONLY) = 9
/5: openat64(6, "c1t0d0p0", O_RDONLY) = 10
/9: openat64(6, "c1t0d0p1", O_RDONLY) = 13
/7: openat64(6, "c1t0d0p2", O_RDONLY) Err#5 EIO
/4: openat64(6, "c1t0d0p3", O_RDONLY) Err#5 EIO
/7: openat64(6, "c1t0d0s8", O_RDONLY) = 14
/2: openat64(6, "c7t0d0s0", O_RDONLY) = 8
/6: openat64(6, "c7t0d0s2", O_RDONLY) = 12
/1: Received signal #20, SIGWINCH, in lwp_park() [default]
/3: openat64(6, "c7t0d0p0", O_RDONLY) = 9
/4: openat64(6, "c7t0d0p1", O_RDONLY) = 11
/5: openat64(6, "c7t0d0p2", O_RDONLY) = 10
/6: openat64(6, "c8t0d0p0", O_RDONLY) = 12
/6: openat64(6, "c8t0d0p1", O_RDONLY) = 12
/6: openat64(6, "c8t0d0p2", O_RDONLY) Err#5 EIO
/6: openat64(6, "c8t0d0p3", O_RDONLY) Err#5 EIO
/6: openat64(6, "c8t0d0p4", O_RDONLY) Err#5 EIO
/6: openat64(6, "c8t1d0p0", O_RDONLY) = 12
/8: openat64(6, "c7t0d0p3", O_RDONLY) = 7
/6: openat64(6, "c8t1d0p1", O_RDONLY) = 12
/6: openat64(6, "c8t1d0p2", O_RDONLY) Err#5 EIO
/6: openat64(6, "c8t1d0p3", O_RDONLY) Err#5 EIO
/6: openat64(6, "c8t1d0p4", O_RDONLY) Err#5 EIO
/9: openat64(6, "c7t0d0p4", O_RDONLY) = 13
/7: openat64(6, "c7t0d0s1", O_RDONLY) = 14
/1: open("/usr/share/locale/en_US.UTF-8/LC_MESSAGES/SUNW_OST_OSCMD.cat",
O_RDONLY) Err#2 ENOENT
open("/usr/lib/locale/en_US.UTF-8/LC_MESSAGES/SUNW_OST_OSCMD.mo", O_RDONLY)
Err#2 ENOENT
cannot import 'foo': no such pool available
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] weird bug with Seagate 3TB USB3 drive
Banging my head against a Seagate 3TB USB3 drive. Its marketing name is: Seagate Expansion 3 TB USB 3.0 Desktop External Hard Drive STAY3000102 format(1M) shows it identify itself as: Seagate-External-SG11-2.73TB Under both Solaris 10 and Solaris 11x, I receive the evil message: | I/O request is not aligned with 4096 disk sector size. | It is handled through Read Modify Write but the performance is very low. However, that's not my big issue as I will use the zpool-12 hack. My big issue is that once I zpool(1M) export the pool from my W2100z running S10 or my Ultra 40 running S11x, I can't import it. I thought weird USB connectivity issue, but I can run "format -> analyze -> read" merrily. Anyone seen this bug? John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] bad seagate drive?
On 09/12/11 10:33, Jens Elkner wrote: Hmmm, at least if S11x, ZFS mirror, ICH10 and cmdk (IDE) driver is involved, I'm 99.9% confident, that "a while" turns out to be some days or weeks, only - no matter what Platinium-Enterprise-HDDs you use ;-) On Solaris 11 Express with a dual drive mirror, ICH10 and the AHCI driver (not sure why you would purposely choose to run in IDE mode) resilvering a 1TB drive (Seagate ST310005N1A1AS-RK) went at a rate of 3.2GB/min. Deduplication was not enabled. Only hours for a 55% full mirror, not days or weeks. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] BAD WD drives - defective by design?
http://wdc.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1397/~/difference-between-desktop-edition-and-raid-%28enterprise%29-edition-drives ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Kernel panic on zpool import. 200G of data inaccessible!
In message <1313687977.77375.yahoomail...@web121903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>, Stu Wh itefish writes: >Nope, not a clue how to do that and I have installed Windows on this box inste >ad of Solaris since I can't get my data back from ZFS. >I have my two drives the pool is on disconnected so if this ever gets resolved > I can reinstall Solaris and start learning again. I believe you can configure VirtualBox for Windows to pass thru the disk with your unimportable rpool to guest OSs. Can OpenIndiana or FreeBSD guest import the pool? Does Solaris 11X crash at the same place when run from within VirtualBox? John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Kernel panic on zpool import. 200G of data inaccessible!
In message <1313431448.5331.yahoomail...@web121911.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>, Stu Whi tefish writes: >I'm sorry, I don't understand this suggestion. > >The pool that won't import is a mirror on two drives. Disconnect all but the two mirrored drives that you must import and try to import from a S11X LiveUSB. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] matching zpool versions to development builds
Is there a list of zpool versions for development builds? I found: http://blogs.oracle.com/stw/entry/zfs_zpool_and_file_system where it says Solaris 11 Express is zpool version 31, but my system has BEs back to build 139 and I have not done a zpool upgrade since installing this system but it reports on the current development build: # zpool upgrade -v This system is currently running ZFS pool version 33. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] snapshots in solaris11 express
Hello everybody, is there any known way to configure the point-in-time *when* the time-slider will snapshot/rotate? With hundreds of zfs filesystems, the daily snapshot rotation slows down a big file server significantly, so it would be better to have the snapshots rotated outside the usual workhours. As as I found out so far, the first snapshot is taken when the service is restartet and then the next occurs 24 hour later (as supposed). Do I need to restart the service at 2:00 AM to get the desired result (not a big deal deal with /usr/bin/at, but not as straight forward as I would exspect). Any suggestions? thx Carsten -- Max Planck Institut fuer marine Mikrobiologie - Network Administration - Celsiustr. 1 D-28359 Bremen Tel.: +49 421 2028568 Fax.: +49 421 2028565 PGP public key:http://www.mpi-bremen.de/Carsten_John.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] The open sourced ZFS test suite
Hi, To the best of my knowledge, the ZFS test suite (SUNWstc-fs-zfs, as opposed to ztest) hasn't seen any development outside of Oracle since it was open sourced in late '09. Is there anyone in the community actively doing development with this test suite? Is anyone using it or a derivative version for testing? -- John Wren Kennedy Delphix 275 Middlefield Road, Suite 50 Menlo Park, CA 94025 http://www.delphix.com/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] replace zil drive [SOLVED}
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/28/11 02:55, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: >> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- >> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Carsten John >> >> Now I'm wondering about the best option to replace the HDD with the SSD: > > What version of zpool are you running? If it's >= 19, then you could > actually survive a complete ZIL device failure. So you should simply > offline or detach or whatever the HDD and then either attach or add the new > SDD. Attach would be mirror, add would be two separate non-mirrored > devices. Maybe better performance, maybe not. > > If it's zpool < 19, then you absolutely do not want to degrade to > non-mirrored status. First attach the new SSD, then when it's done, detach > the HDD. > Worked like a charm. Detached the HDD, physically replaced the HDD with the new SSD and added the new SSD to the pool's log. thx for the suggestions Carsten - -- Max Planck Institut fuer marine Mikrobiologie - - Network Administration - Celsiustr. 1 D-28359 Bremen Tel.: +49 421 2028568 Fax.: +49 421 2028565 PGP public key:http://www.mpi-bremen.de/Carsten_John.html -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk4JilAACgkQsRCwZeehufvfhACdF0yae2NGDKrNEswRmW4NVEFv K5sAn0EnuAyOa9Z7ytNQQZF9QPJPjgeZ =fVxi -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] replace zil drive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/28/11 02:55, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: >> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- >> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Carsten John >> >> Now I'm wondering about the best option to replace the HDD with the SSD: > > What version of zpool are you running? If it's >= 19, then you could > actually survive a complete ZIL device failure. So you should simply > offline or detach or whatever the HDD and then either attach or add the new > SDD. Attach would be mirror, add would be two separate non-mirrored > devices. Maybe better performance, maybe not. > > If it's zpool < 19, then you absolutely do not want to degrade to > non-mirrored status. First attach the new SSD, then when it's done, detach > the HDD. > Sorry, sent encrypted before I'm currently running: zpool upgrade -v This system is currently running ZFS pool version 31 So, detaching the HDD seems to be a safe option. thx Carsten - -- Max Planck Institut fuer marine Mikrobiologie - - Network Administration - Celsiustr. 1 D-28359 Bremen Tel.: +49 421 2028568 Fax.: +49 421 2028565 PGP public key:http://www.mpi-bremen.de/Carsten_John.html -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk4Je/EACgkQsRCwZeehufuHwwCglTkFJPT54dUhyyh/rqWMhFLy sIQAn3VaJw5uDKCdhI917PDzKLb81zfY =wtA6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] replace zil drive
bin65MpxTCk5V.bin Description: PGP/MIME version identification encrypted.asc Description: OpenPGP encrypted message ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] replace zil drive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello everybody, some time ago a SSD within a ZIL mirror died. As I had no SSD available to replace it, I dropped in a normal SAS harddisk to rebuild the mirror. In the meantime I got the warranty replacement SSD. Now I'm wondering about the best option to replace the HDD with the SSD: 1. Remove the log mirror, put the new disk in place, add log mirror 2. Pull the HDD, forcing the mirror to fail, replace the HDD with the SSD Unfortunately I have no free slot in the JBOD available (want to keep the ZIL in the same JBAD as the rest of the pool): 3. Put additional temporary SAS HDD in free slot of different JBOD, replace the HDD in the ZIL mirror with temporary HDD, pull now unused HDD, use free slot for SSD, replace temporary HDD with SSD. Any suggestions? thx Carsten - -- Max Planck Institut fuer marine Mikrobiologie - - Network Administration - Celsiustr. 1 D-28359 Bremen Tel.: +49 421 2028568 Fax.: +49 421 2028565 PGP public key:http://www.mpi-bremen.de/Carsten_John.html -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk4ISy8ACgkQsRCwZeehufs9MQCfetuYQwjbqH2Rb7qyY8G4vxaQ TvUAoNcHPnHED1Ykat8VHF8EJIRiPmct =jwZQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Resizing ZFS partition, shrinking NTFS?
In message <444915109.61308252125289.JavaMail.Twebapp@sf-app1>, Clive Meredith writes: >I currently run a duel boot machine with a 45Gb partition for Win7 Ultimate an >d a 25Gb partition for OpenSolaris 10 (134). I need to shrink NTFS to 20Gb an >d increase the ZFS partion to 45Gb. Is this possible please? I have looked a >t using the partition tool in OpenSolaris but both partition are locked, even >under admin. Win7 won't allow me to shrink the dynamic volume, as the Finsh b >utton is always greyed out, so no luck in that direction. Shrink the NTFS filesystem first. I've used the Knoppix LiveCD against a defragmented NTFS. Then use beadm(1M) to duplicate your OpenSolaris BE to a USB drive and also send snapshots of any other rpool ZFS there. Then I would boot the USB drive, run format, fdisk and recreate the Solaris fdisk partition on your system, recreate the rpool on slice 0 of that fdisk partition, use beadm(1M) to copy your BE back to your new rpool, and then restore any other ZFS from those snapshots. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Compatibility between Sun-Oracle Fishworks appliance zfs and other zfs implementations
In message <4dddc270.6060...@u.washington.edu>, Matt Weatherford writes: >amount of $ on. This is a great box and we love it, although the EDU >discounts that Sun used to provide for hardware and support contracts >seem to have dried up so the cost of supporting it moving forward is >still unknown. Ask Keith Block and company's sales critter about "Hardware from Oracle - Pricing for Education (HOPE)": http://www.oracle.com/ocom/groups/public/@ocom/documents/webcontent/364419.pdf> John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] 350TB+ storage solution
following are some thoughts if it's not too late: > 1 SuperMicro 847E1-R1400LPB I guess you meant the 847E1[b]6[/b]-R1400LPB, the SAS1 version makes no sense > 1 SuperMicro H8DG6-F not the best choice, see below why > 171 Hitachi 7K3000 3TB I'd go for the more environmentally friendly Ultrastar 5K3000 version - with that many drives you wont mind the slower rotation but WILL notice a difference in power and cooling cost > 1 LSI SAS 9202-16e this is really only a very expensive gadget to be honest, there's really no point to it - especially true when you start looking for the necessary cables that use a connector who's still in "draft" specification... stick to the excellent LSI SAS9200-8e, of which you will need at least 3 in your setup, one to connect each of the 3 JBODS - with them filled with fast drives like you chose, you will need two links (one for the front and one for the back backplane) as daisychainig the backplanes together would oversaturate a single link. if you'd want to take advantage of the dual expanders on your JBOD backplanes for additional redundancy in case of expander or controller failure, you will need 6 of those LSI SAS9200-8e - this is where your board isn't ideal as it has a 3/1/2 PCIe x16/x8/x4 configuration while you'd need 6 PCIe x8 - something the X8DTH-6F will provide, as well as the onboard LSI SAS2008 based HBA for the two backplanes in the server case. > 1 LSI SAS 9211-4i > 2 OCZ 64GB SSD Vertex 3 > 2 OCZ 256GB SSD Vertex 3 if these are meant to be connected together and used as ZIL+L2ARC, then I'd STRONGLY urge you to get the following instead: 1x LSI MegaRAID SAS 9265-8i 1x LSI FastPath licence 4-8x 120GB or 240GB Vertex 3 Max IOPS Edition, whatever suits the budget this solution allows you to push around 400k IOPS to the cache, more than likely way more than the stated appication of the system will need > 1 NeterionX3120SR0001 I don't know this card personally but since it's not listed as supported (http://www.sun.com/io_technologies/nic/NIC1.html) I'd be careful > My question is what is the optimum way of dividing > these drives across vdevs? I would do 14 x 12 drive raidz2 + 3 spare = 140*3TB = ~382TiB usable this would allow for a logical mapping of drives to vdevs, giving you in each case 2 vdevs in the front and 1 in the back with the 9 drive blocks in the back of the JBODs used as 3 x 4/4/1, giving the remaining 2 x 12 drive vdevs plus one spare per case > I could also go with 2TB drives and add an extra 45 > JBOD chassis. This would significantly decrease cost, > but I'm running a gauntlet by getting very close to > minimum useable space. > > 12 x 18 drive raidz2 I would never do vdevs that large, it's just an accident waiting to happen! hopefully these recommendations help you with your project. in any case, it's huge - the biggest system I worked on (which I actually have at home, go figure) only has a bit over 100TB in the following configuration: 6 x 12 drive raidz2 of Hitachi 5K3000 2TB 3 Norco 4224 with a HP SAS Expander in each Supermicro X8DTi-LN4F with 3x LSI SAS9200-8e so yeah, I based my thoughts on my own system but considering that it's been running smoothly for a while now (and that I had a very similar setup with smaller drives and older controllers before), I'm confident in my suggestions Regards from Switzerland, voyman -- 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] Changed ACL behavior in snv_151 ?
> -Original Message- > From: Frank Lahm [mailto:frankl...@googlemail.com] > Sent: 25 January 2011 14:50 > To: Ryan John > Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Changed ACL behavior in snv_151 ? > John, > welcome onboard! > 2011/1/25 Ryan John : >> I’m sharing file systems using a smb and nfs, and since I’ve upgraded to >> snv_151, when I do a chmod from an NFS client, I lose all the NFSv4 ACLs. > <http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=134162> > I'd summarize as follows: > in order to play nice with Windows ACL semantics via builtin CIFS, > they choose the approach of throwing away ACLs on chmod(). Makes > Windows happy, others not so. > -f Hi Frank, This really breaks our whole setup. Under snv_134 our users were happy with Windows ACLs, and NFSv3 and NFSv4 Linux clients. They all worked very well together. The only problem we had with the deny ACLs, was when using the MacOS "Finder" I don't think there's a way we can tell our users not to do a chmod. Was it a result of PSARC/2009/029 ? http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/PSARC/2010/029/20100126_mark.shellenbaum If so, I think that was implemented around snv_137. This would also mean it's the same in Illumos. Regards John ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Changed ACL behavior in snv_151 ?
I’m using /usr/bin/chmod From: phil.har...@gmail.com [mailto:phil.har...@gmail.com] Sent: 25 January 2011 14:50 To: Ryan John; zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Changed ACL behavior in snv_151 ? Which chmod are you using? (check your PATH) - Reply message - From: "Ryan John" To: "zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org" Subject: [zfs-discuss] Changed ACL behavior in snv_151 ? Date: Tue, Jan 25, 2011 13:31 Hi, I’m sharing file systems using a smb and nfs, and since I’ve upgraded to snv_151, when I do a chmod from an NFS client, I lose all the NFSv4 ACLs. Here’s what I see on a Solaris nfs client: $ ls -lVd ACLtest/ drwxrwx---+ 4 root bsse-it5 Nov 19 14:03 ACLtest/ user:ryanj:rwxpdDaARWcCos:fd-:allow user:noddy:rwxpdDaARWcCos:fd-:allow owner@:rwxp--aARWcCos:---:allow group@:rwxp--a-R-c--s:---:allow everyone@:--a-R-c--s:---:allow $ chmod 770 ACLtest/ $ ls -lVd ACLtest/ drwxrwx--- 4 root bsse-it5 Nov 19 14:03 ACLtest/ owner@:rwxp--aARWcCos:---:allow group@:rwxp--a-R-c--s:---:allow everyone@:--a-R-c--s:---:allow Same happens from a Linux or Solaris client I have aclinherit set to passthrough Anyone any ideas? On a snv_134 system, the ACLs are retained. Regards John ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Changed ACL behavior in snv_151 ?
Hi, I'm sharing file systems using a smb and nfs, and since I've upgraded to snv_151, when I do a chmod from an NFS client, I lose all the NFSv4 ACLs. Here's what I see on a Solaris nfs client: $ ls -lVd ACLtest/ drwxrwx---+ 4 root bsse-it5 Nov 19 14:03 ACLtest/ user:ryanj:rwxpdDaARWcCos:fd-:allow user:noddy:rwxpdDaARWcCos:fd-:allow owner@:rwxp--aARWcCos:---:allow group@:rwxp--a-R-c--s:---:allow everyone@:--a-R-c--s:---:allow $ chmod 770 ACLtest/ $ ls -lVd ACLtest/ drwxrwx--- 4 root bsse-it5 Nov 19 14:03 ACLtest/ owner@:rwxp--aARWcCos:---:allow group@:rwxp--a-R-c--s:---:allow everyone@:--a-R-c--s:---:allow Same happens from a Linux or Solaris client I have aclinherit set to passthrough Anyone any ideas? On a snv_134 system, the ACLs are retained. Regards John ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zfs roolback
I'm trying to rollback from a bad patch install on Solaris 10. From the failsafe BE I tried to rollback, but zfs is asking me to provide allow rollback permissions. It's hard for me to tell exactly because the messages are scrolling off the screen before I can read them. Any help would be appreciated. -- 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] How do you use >1 partition on x86?
In message <1026474698.131288014974214.javamail.tweb...@sf-app1>, Bill Werner w rites: >So when I built my new workstation last year, I partitioned the one and only d >isk in half, 50% for Windows, 50% for 2009.06. Now, I'm not using Windows, s >o I'd like to use the other half for another ZFS pool, but I can't figure out >how to access it. Use beadm(1M) to duplicate your BE to a USB disk, then boot it, then format/fdisk your workstation disk, then use beadm(1M) to duplicate your BE back to your workstation disk. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] BugID 6961707
In message <201008112022.o7bkmc2j028...@elvis.arl.psu.edu>, John D Groenveld wr ites: >I'm stumbling over BugID 6961707 on build 134. I see the bug has been stomped in build 150. Awesome! http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6961707> In which build did it first arrive? Thanks, John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] pool died during scrub
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jeff Bacon wrote: > I have a bunch of sol10U8 boxes with ZFS pools, most all raidz2 8-disk > stripe. They're all supermicro-based with retail LSI cards. > > I've noticed a tendency for things to go a little bonkers during the > weekly scrub (they all scrub over the weekend), and that's when I'll > lose a disk here and there. OK, fine, that's sort of the point, and > they're SATA drives so things happen. > > I've never lost a pool though, until now. This is Not Fun. > >> ::status > debugging crash dump vmcore.0 (64-bit) from ny-fs4 > operating system: 5.10 Generic_142901-10 (i86pc) > panic message: > BAD TRAP: type=e (#pf Page fault) rp=fe80007cb850 addr=28 occurred > in module "zfs" due to a NULL pointer dereference > dump content: kernel pages only >> $C > fe80007cb960 vdev_is_dead+2() > fe80007cb9a0 vdev_mirror_child_select+0x65() > fe80007cba00 vdev_mirror_io_start+0x44() > fe80007cba30 zio_vdev_io_start+0x159() > fe80007cba60 zio_execute+0x6f() > fe80007cba90 zio_wait+0x2d() > fe80007cbb40 arc_read_nolock+0x668() > fe80007cbbd0 dmu_objset_open_impl+0xcf() > fe80007cbc20 dsl_pool_open+0x4e() > fe80007cbcc0 spa_load+0x307() > fe80007cbd00 spa_open_common+0xf7() > fe80007cbd10 spa_open+0xb() > fe80007cbd30 pool_status_check+0x19() > fe80007cbd80 zfsdev_ioctl+0x1b1() > fe80007cbd90 cdev_ioctl+0x1d() > fe80007cbdb0 spec_ioctl+0x50() > fe80007cbde0 fop_ioctl+0x25() > fe80007cbec0 ioctl+0xac() > fe80007cbf10 _sys_sysenter_post_swapgs+0x14b() > > pool: srv > id: 9515618289022845993 > state: UNAVAIL > status: One or more devices are missing from the system. > action: The pool cannot be imported. Attach the missing > devices and try again. >see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-6X > config: > > srvUNAVAIL missing device > raidz2 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F2CCE1Fd0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F34F5FAd0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F48D399d0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F485EC3d0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F492E42d0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F48549Bd0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F370919d0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F484245d0 ONLINE > raidz2 ONLINE > c2t5F000B5C8187d0 ONLINE > c2t5F000B5C8157d0 ONLINE > c2t5F000B5C9101d0 ONLINE > c2t5F000B5C8167d0 ONLINE > c2t5F000B5C9120d0 ONLINE > c2t5F000B5C9151d0 ONLINE > c2t5F000B5C9170d0 ONLINE > c2t5F000B5C9180d0 ONLINE > raidz2 ONLINE > c2t5000C50010A88E76d0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5000DCD308Cd0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F1F456Dd0 ONLINE > c2t5000C50010920E06d0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F20C81Fd0 ONLINE > c2t5000C5001F3C7735d0 ONLINE > c2t5000C500113BC008d0 ONLINE > c2t5000C50014CD416Ad0 ONLINE > > Additional devices are known to be part of this pool, though > their > exact configuration cannot be determined. > > > All of this would be ok... except THOSE ARE THE ONLY DEVICES THAT WERE > PART OF THE POOL. How can it be missing a device that didn't exist? > > A "zpool import -fF" results in the above kernel panic. This also > creates /etc/zfs/zpool.cache.tmp, which then results in the pool being > imported, which leads to a continuous reboot/panic cycle. > > I can't obviously use b134 to import the pool without logs, since that > would imply upgrading the pool first, which is hard to do if it's not > imported. > > My zdb skills are lacking - zdb -l gets you about so far and that's it. > (where the heck are the other options to zdb even written down, besides > in the code?) > > OK, so this isn't the end of the world, but it's 15TB of data I'd really > rather not have to re-copy across a 100Mbit line. It really more > concerns me that ZFS would do this in the first place - it's not > supposed to corrupt itself!! > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss Hi Jeff, looks similar to a crash I had here at our site a few month ago. Same symptoms, no actual solution. We had to recover from a rsync backup server. We had the logs on an mirrored SSD and an additional SSD as cache. The machine (SUN 4270 with SUN J4400 JBODS and SUN SAS disks) crashed in the same manner (core dumping while trying to import the pool). After booting into single user mode we found the log pool mirror corrupted (one disk unavailbale). Even after replacing the disk and resilvering the log mirror we were not able to import the pool. I suggest that it may has been related to memory (perhaps a lack of memory). all the best
Re: [zfs-discuss] VM's on ZFS - 7210
Wouldn't it be possible to saturate the SSD ZIL with enough backlogged sync writes? What I mean is, doesn't the ZIL eventually need to make it to the pool, and if the pool as a whole (spinning disks) can't keep up with 30+ vm's of write requests, couldn't you fill up the ZIL that way? -- 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] Opensolaris is apparently dead
In message <4c6c4e30.7060...@ianshome.com>, Ian Collins writes: >If you count Monday this week as lately, we have never had to wait more >than 24 hours for replacement drives for our 45x0 or 7000 series Same here, but two weeks ago for a failed drive in an X4150. Last week SunSolve was sending my service order requests to /dev/null, but someone manually entered after I submitted web feedback. John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] BugID 6961707
I'm stumbling over BugID 6961707 on build 134. OpenSolaris Development snv_134 X86 Via the b134 Live CD, when I try to "zpool import -f -F -n rpool" I get this helpful panic. panic[cpu4]/thread=ff006cd06c60: zfs: allocating allocated segment(offset=95698377728 size=16384) ff006cd06580 genunix:vcmn_err+2c () ff006cd06670 zfs:zfs_panic_recover+ae () ff006cd06710 zfs:space_map_add+d3 () ff006cd067c0 zfs:space_map_load+470 () ff006cd06820 zfs:metaslab_activate+95 () ff006cd068e0 zfs:metaslab_group_alloc+246 () ff006cd069a0 zfs:metaslab_alloc_dva+2aa () ff006cd06a40 zfs:metaslab_alloc+9c () ff006cd06a80 zfs:zio_dva_allocate+57 () ff006cd06ab0 zfs:zio_execute+8d () ff006cd06b50 genunix:taskq_thread+248 () ff006cd06b60 unix:thread_start+8 () While I wait for SunSolve to forward my service request to the right engineer, has anyone here hit this and gotten it resolved? Is the pool corrupted on disk? John groenv...@acm.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Optimal Disk configuration
I know this is potentially a loaded question, but what is generally considered the optimal disk configuration for ZFS. I have 48 disks on 2 RAID controllers (2x24). The RAID controller can do RAID 0/1/5/6/10/50/60 or JBOD. What is generally considered the optimal configuration for the disks. JBOD, RAID zvols on both controllers. -- John ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Need ZFS master!
Hello all. I am new...very new to opensolaris and I am having an issue and have no idea what is going wrong. So I have 5 drives in my machine. all 500gb. I installed open solaris on the first drive and rebooted. . Now what I want to do is ad a second drive so they are mirrored. How does one do this!!! I am getting no where and need some help. -- 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] mount zfs boot disk on another server?
Could you import it back on the original server with Zpool import -f newpool rpool? Jay -Original Message- From: Brandon High [mailto:bh...@freaks.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 2:19 PM To: Seaman, John Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] mount zfs boot disk on another server? On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Jay Seaman wrote: > zpool import > > to get the id number of the non-native rpool You'll get the names and IDs for any un-imported pools. > then use > zpool import -f -R /mnt newpool That should work. You may have to put the pool id after the -R argument though. You're renaming to pool in the process, so it may not work in the original host afterwards, since it expects the pool name to be rpool. You could boot a system off the LiveCD (which doesn't have an rpool) and import it without changing the name. -B -- Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com The information in this Internet e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee(s). Access to this Internet e-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of it is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and immediately and permanently delete it and destroy any copies of it that were printed out. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice contained in this Internet e-mail is subject to the terms and conditions expressed in any applicable governing ING terms of business or client engagement letter. Visit us at www.ing.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Dedup performance hit
Howdy all, I too dabbled with dedup and found the performance poor with only 4gb ram. I've since disabled dedup and find the performance better but "zpool list" still shows a 1.15x dedup ratio. Is this still a hit on disk io performance? Aside from copying the data off and back onto the filesystem, is there another way to de-dedup the pool? Thanks, John On Jun 13, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: > Hernan F wrote: >> Hello, I tried enabling dedup on a filesystem, and moved files into it to >> take advantage of it. I had about 700GB of files and left it for some hours. >> When I returned, only 70GB were moved. >> >> I checked zpool iostat, and it showed about 8MB/s R/W performance (the old >> and new zfs filesystems are in the same pool). So I disabled dedup for a few >> seconds and instantly the performance jumped to 80MB/s >> >> It's Athlon64 x2 machine with 4GB RAM, it's only a fileserver (4x1TB SATA >> for ZFS). arcstat.pl shows 2G for arcsz, top shows 13% CPU during the 8MB/s >> transfers. >> Is this normal behavior? Should I always expect such low performance, or is >> there anything wrong with my setup? >> Thanks in advance, >> Hernan >> > You are severely RAM limited. In order to do dedup, ZFS has to maintain a > catalog of every single block it writes and the checksum for that block. This > is called the Dedup Table (DDT for short). > So, during the copy, ZFS has to (a) read a block from the old filesystem, (b) > check the current DDT to see if that block exists and (c) either write the > block to the new filesytem (and add an appropriate DDT entry for it), or > write a metadata update with the dedup reference block reference. > > Likely, you have two problems: > > (1) I suspect your source filesystem has lots of blocks (that is, it's likely > made up smaller-sized files). Lots of blocks means lots of seeking back and > forth to read all those blocks. > > (2) Lots of blocks also means lots of entries in the DDT. It's trivial to > overwhelm a 4GB system with a large DDT. If the DDT can't fit in RAM, then > it has to get partially refreshed from disk. > > Thus, here's what's likely going on: > > (1) ZFS reads a block and it's checksum from the old filesystem > (2) it checks the DDT to see if that checksum exists > (3) finding that the entire DDT isn't resident in RAM, it starts a cycle to > read the rest of the (potential) entries from the new filesystems' metadata. > That is, it tries to reconstruct the DDT from disk. Which involves a HUGE > amount of random seek reads on the new filesystem. > > In essence, since you likely can't fit the DDT in RAM, each block read from > the old filesystem forces a flurry of reads from the new filesystem. Which > eats up the IOPS that your single pool can provide. It thrashes the disks. > Your solution is to either buy more RAM, or find something you can use as an > L2ARC cache device for your pool. Ideally, it would be an SSD. However, in > this case, a plain hard drive would do OK (NOT one already in a pool).To > add such a device, you would do: 'zpool add tank mycachedevice' > > > > > -- > Erik Trimble > Java System Support > Mailstop: usca22-123 > Phone: x17195 > Santa Clara, CA > Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800) > > ___ > 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
[zfs-discuss] don't mount a zpool on boot
Can I make a pool not mount on boot? I seem to recall reading somewhere how to do it, but can't seem to find it now. -- John ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs mount -a kernel panic
OK, I got a core dump, what do I do with it now? It is 1.2G in size. On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 10:54 AM, John Andrunas wrote: > Hmmm... no coredump even though I configured it. > > Here is the trace though I will see what I can do about the coredump > > r...@cluster:/export/home/admin# zfs mount vol2/vm2 > > panic[cpu3]/thread=ff001f45ec60: BAD TRAP: type=e (#pf Page fault) > rp=ff001f45e950 addr=30 occurred in module "zfs" due to a NULL > pointer deree > > zpool-vol2: #pf Page fault > Bad kernel fault at addr=0x30 > pid=1469, pc=0xf795d054, sp=0xff001f45ea48, eflags=0x10296 > cr0: 8005003b cr4: 6f8 > cr2: 30cr3: 500cr8: c > > rdi: 0 rsi: ff05208b2388 rdx: ff001f45e888 > rcx: 0 r8: 3000900ff r9: 198f5ff6 > rax: 0 rbx: 200 rbp: ff001f45ea50 > r10: c0130803 r11: ff001f45ec60 r12: ff05208b2388 > r13: ff0521fc4000 r14: ff050c0167e0 r15: ff050c0167e8 > fsb: 0 gsb: ff04eb9b8080 ds: 4b > es: 4b fs: 0 gs: 1c3 > trp: e err: 2 rip: f795d054 > cs: 30 rfl: 10296 rsp: ff001f45ea48 > ss: 38 > > ff001f45e830 unix:die+dd () > ff001f45e940 unix:trap+177b () > ff001f45e950 unix:cmntrap+e6 () > ff001f45ea50 zfs:ddt_phys_decref+c () > ff001f45ea80 zfs:zio_ddt_free+55 () > ff001f45eab0 zfs:zio_execute+8d () > ff001f45eb50 genunix:taskq_thread+248 () > ff001f45eb60 unix:thread_start+8 () > > syncing file systems... done > skipping system dump - no dump device configured > rebooting... > > > On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Michael Schuster > wrote: >> On 19.05.10 17:53, John Andrunas wrote: >>> >>> Not to my knowledge, how would I go about getting one? (CC'ing discuss) >> >> man savecore and dumpadm. >> >> Michael >>> >>> >>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Mark J Musante >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Do you have a coredump? Or a stack trace of the panic? >>>> >>>> On Wed, 19 May 2010, John Andrunas wrote: >>>> >>>>> Running ZFS on a Nexenta box, I had a mirror get broken and apparently >>>>> the metadata is corrupt now. If I try and mount vol2 it works but if >>>>> I try and mount -a or mount vol2/vm2 is instantly kernel panics and >>>>> reboots. Is it possible to recover from this? I don't care if I lose >>>>> the file listed below, but the other data in the volume would be >>>>> really nice to get back. I have scrubbed the volume to no avail. Any >>>>> other thoughts. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> zpool status -xv vol2 >>>>> pool: vol2 >>>>> state: ONLINE >>>>> status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data >>>>> corruption. Applications may be affected. >>>>> action: Restore the file in question if possible. Otherwise restore the >>>>> entire pool from backup. >>>>> see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-8A >>>>> scrub: none requested >>>>> config: >>>>> >>>>> NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM >>>>> vol2 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>>> mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>>> c3t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>>> c3t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>>> >>>>> errors: Permanent errors have been detected in the following files: >>>>> >>>>> vol2/v...@snap-daily-1-2010-05-06-:/as5/as5-flat.vmdk >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> John >>>>> ___ >>>>> zfs-discuss mailing list >>>>> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org >>>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> markm >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> michael.schus...@oracle.com http://blogs.sun.com/recursion >> Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion' >> > > > > -- > John > -- John ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
