Hi!
You were right. It turns out that the disks were not part of a pool yet. One of
them had previously been used in a pool in another machine, but one of them had
been used somewhere else (Ubuntu or OS X), and that explains it. After I put
them to use in a pool, 'format' show what I expected:
Hello Jan
BTW: Can someone explain why this:
8. c6t72d0 ATA-WDC WD6400AAKS--3B01 cyl 38909 alt 2 hd 255 sec
126
is not shown the same way as this:
4. c6t68d0 ATA-WDC WD6400AAKS-2-3B01-596.17GB
Why the cylinder/sector in line 8?
As I know this is depending on the Format
On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Jan Hellevik wrote:
The disk in question is c6t70d0 - it shows consistently higher %b and asvc_t
than the other disks in the pool. The output is from a 'zfs receive' after
about 3 hours.
The two c5dx disks are the 'rpool' mirror, the others belong to the 'backup'
pool.
Hi!
On Feb 1, 2012, at 7:43 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Jan Hellevik wrote:
The disk in question is c6t70d0 - it shows consistently higher %b and asvc_t
than the other disks in the pool. The output is from a 'zfs receive' after
about 3 hours.
The two c5dx disks are the
Hi Jan,
These commands will tell you if FMA faults are logged:
# fmdump
# fmadm faulty
This command will tell you if errors are accumulating on this
disk:
# fmdump -eV | more
Thanks,
Cindy
On 02/01/12 11:20, Jan Hellevik wrote:
I suspect that something is wrong with one of my disks.
This
On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Jan Hellevik wrote:
Are all of the disks the same make and model?
They are different makes - I try to make pairs of different brands to minimise
risk.
Does your pairing maintain the same pattern of disk type across all
the pairings?
Some modern disks use 4k sectors
On Feb 1, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Jan Hellevik wrote:
Are all of the disks the same make and model?
They are different makes - I try to make pairs of different brands to
minimise risk.
Does your pairing maintain the same pattern of disk type
