On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 12:41, Ethan notet...@gmail.com wrote:
Update: I'm stuck. Again.
To answer For curiosity's sake, what happens when you remove (rename) your
dir with the symlinks?: it finds the devices on p0 with no problem, with
the symlinks directory deleted.
After clearing the
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 16:03, Ethan notet...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 15:31, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:42:58PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 04:14, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
Although I do notice that
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:37:54PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
It seems to me that you could also use the approach of 'zpool replace' for
That is true. It seems like it then have to rebuild from parity for every
drive, though, which I think would take rather a long while, wouldn't it?
No longer than
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 04:14, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:37:54PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
It seems to me that you could also use the approach of 'zpool replace'
for
That is true. It seems like it then have to rebuild from parity for every
drive,
Hi Ethan,
Great job putting this pool back together...
I would agree with the disk-by-disk replacement by using the zpool
replace command. You can read about this command here:
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-2271/gazgd?a=view
Having a recent full backup of your data before making any
Ethan wrote:
So, current plan:
- export the pool.
- format c9t1d0 to have one slice being the entire disk.
- import. should be degraded, missing c9t1d0p0.
- replace missing c9t1d0p0 with c9t1d0 (should this be c9t1d0s0? my
understanding is that zfs will treat the two about the same, since it
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 13:22, Victor Latushkin victor.latush...@sun.comwrote:
Ethan wrote:
So, current plan:
- export the pool.
- format c9t1d0 to have one slice being the entire disk.
- import. should be degraded, missing c9t1d0p0.
- replace missing c9t1d0p0 with c9t1d0 (should this be
Ethan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 13:22, Victor Latushkin
victor.latush...@sun.com mailto:victor.latush...@sun.com wrote:
Ethan wrote:
So, current plan:
- export the pool.
- format c9t1d0 to have one slice being the entire disk.
- import. should be
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:42:58PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 04:14, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
Although I do notice that right now, it imports just fine using the p0
devices using just `zpool import q`, no longer having to use import -d with
the directory of
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 15:31, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:42:58PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 04:14, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
Although I do notice that right now, it imports just fine using the p0
devices using just
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:31:27AM -0500, Ethan wrote:
And I just realized - yes, labels 2 and 3 are in the wrong place relative to
the end of the drive; I did not take into account the overhead taken up by
truecrypt when dd'ing the data. The raw drive is 1500301910016 bytes; the
truecrypt
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 15:22, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:31:27AM -0500, Ethan wrote:
And I just realized - yes, labels 2 and 3 are in the wrong place relative
to
the end of the drive; I did not take into account the overhead taken up
by
truecrypt
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 03:37:59PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 15:22, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
I have not yet successfully imported. I can see two ways of making progress
forward. One is forcing zpool to attempt to import using slice 2 for each
disk rather than
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 16:14, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 03:37:59PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 15:22, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
I have not yet successfully imported. I can see two ways of making
progress
forward. One is
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 16:25, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 08:14:03AM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
I think
you probably want to make a slice 0 that spans the right disk sectors.
[..]
you could try zdb -l on /dev/dsk/c...p[01234] as well.
Depending on
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:48:23PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
It looks like using p0 is exactly what I want, actually. Are s2 and p0 both
the entire disk?
No. s2 depends on there being a solaris partition table (Sun or EFI),
and if there's also an fdisk partition table (disk shared with other
OS), s2
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:44:19PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
There was no partitioning on the truecrypt disks. The truecrypt volumes
occupied the whole raw disks (1500301910016 bytes each). The devices that I
gave to the zpool on linux were the whole raw devices that truecrypt exposed
(1500301647872
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 17:44, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:48:23PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
It looks like using p0 is exactly what I want, actually. Are s2 and p0
both
the entire disk?
No. s2 depends on there being a solaris partition table (Sun or EFI),
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:15:25PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
Success!
Awesome. Let that scrub finish before celebrating completely, but
this looks like a good place to stop and consider what you want for an
end state.
--
Dan.
pgph6ALkJoiw6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 18:24, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:15:25PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
Success!
Awesome. Let that scrub finish before celebrating completely, but
this looks like a good place to stop and consider what you want for an
end state.
--
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Ethan wrote:
I should have a partition table, for one thing, I suppose. The partition table
is EFI GUID Partition
Table, looking at the relevant documentation. So, I'll need to somehow shift my
zfs data down by 17408
bytes (34 512-byte LBA's, the size of the GPT's stuff
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 23:21, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us
wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Ethan wrote:
I should have a partition table, for one thing, I suppose. The partition
table is EFI GUID Partition
Table, looking at the relevant documentation. So, I'll need to somehow
Create a new empty pool on the solaris system, let it format the disks etc
ie used the disk names cXtXd0 This should put the EFI label on the disks and
then setup the partitions for you. Just encase here is an example.
Go back to the Linux box, and see if you can use tools to see the same
This is the current state of my pool:
et...@save:~# zpool import
pool: q
id: 5055543090570728034
state: UNAVAIL
status: One or more devices contains corrupted data.
action: The pool cannot be imported due to damaged devices or data.
see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-5E
config:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:06:13PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
This is the current state of my pool:
et...@save:~# zpool import
pool: q
id: 5055543090570728034
state: UNAVAIL
status: One or more devices contains corrupted data.
action: The pool cannot be imported due to damaged devices or
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:30:28PM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
c9t4d0s8 UNAVAIL corrupted data
c9t5d0s2 ONLINE
c9t2d0s8 UNAVAIL corrupted data
c9t1d0s8 UNAVAIL corrupted data
c9t0d0s8 UNAVAIL corrupted data
- zdb
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 22:35, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:30:28PM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
c9t4d0s8 UNAVAIL corrupted data
c9t5d0s2 ONLINE
c9t2d0s8 UNAVAIL corrupted data
c9t1d0s8
On Feb 16, 2010, at 7:57 PM, Ethan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 22:35, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:30:28PM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
c9t4d0s8 UNAVAIL corrupted data
c9t5d0s2 ONLINE
c9t2d0s8 UNAVAIL
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 23:24, Richard Elling richard.ell...@gmail.comwrote:
On Feb 16, 2010, at 7:57 PM, Ethan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 22:35, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:30:28PM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
c9t4d0s8 UNAVAIL
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 11:39:39PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
If slice 2 is the whole disk, why is zpool trying to using slice 8 for all
but one disk?
Because it's finding at least part of the labels for the pool member there.
Please check the partition tables of all the disks, and use zdb -l on
the
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 23:57, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 11:39:39PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
If slice 2 is the whole disk, why is zpool trying to using slice 8 for
all
but one disk?
Because it's finding at least part of the labels for the pool member
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 00:27, Ethan notet...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 23:57, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 11:39:39PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
If slice 2 is the whole disk, why is zpool trying to using slice 8 for
all
but one disk?
Because
32 matches
Mail list logo
