...and let the resilver complete.
-- richard
Hi !
pool: zfs_raid
state: ONLINE
scrub: resilver completed after 16h34m with 0 errors on Fri May 21 05:39:42
2010
config:
NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
zfs_raidONLINE 0 0 0
raidz1
Now, I just have to do the same drive replacement for
the 2 other failing drives...
For information, current iostat results :
extended device statistics errors ---
r/sw/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b s/w h/w trn tot
device
Hi,
I known that ZFS is aware of I/O errors, and can alert or disable a crappy disk.
However, ZFS didn't notice at all these service time problems.
I think it is a good idea to integrate service time triggers in ZFS !
What to you think ?
Best regards !
Philippe
--
This message posted from
Hi,
Actually, it seems a common problem with WD EARS drives (advanced format) !
Please, see this other OpenSolaris thread :
https://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=126637
It is worth investigating !
I quote :
Just replacing back, and here is the iostat for the new EARS drive:
One question : if I halt the server, and change the
order of the disks on the SATA array, will RAIDZ
still detect the array fine
Yes, it will.
Hi !
I've done the moves this morning, and the high service times followed the disks
!
So, I have 3 disks to replace urgently !!
I'm
I'm starting with the replacement of the very bad
disk, and hope the resilvering won't take too long !!
Replacing c7t2d0, I get the following :
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
zfs_raid DEGRADED 0 0 0
raidz1 DEGRADED 0
Current status :
pool: zfs_raid
state: DEGRADED
status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The pool will
continue to function, possibly in a degraded state.
action: Wait for the resilver to complete.
scrub: resilver in progress for 0h17m, 3,72% done, 7h22m to go
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Philippe
c7t2d0s0/o FAULTED 0 0 0 corrupted data
When I've done the zpool replace, I had to add -f to force, because
ZFS told that these was a ZFS label on the
On May 20, 2010, at 4:12 AM, Philippe wrote:
I'm starting with the replacement of the very bad
disk, and hope the resilvering won't take too long !!
Replacing c7t2d0, I get the following :
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
zfs_raid DEGRADED 0 0
On May 20, 2010, at 4:46 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Philippe
c7t2d0s0/o FAULTED 0 0 0 corrupted data
When I've done the zpool replace, I had to add -f to
On May 20, 2010, at 4:24 AM, Philippe wrote:
Current status :
pool: zfs_raid
state: DEGRADED
status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The pool will
continue to function, possibly in a degraded state.
action: Wait for the resilver to complete.
scrub: resilver in
Any idea ?
action: Wait for the resilver to complete.
-- richard
Very fine ! And thank you a lot for your answers !
Philippe
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
On 20/05/2010 12:46, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
Also, since you've got s0 on there, it means you've got some partitions on
that drive.
There are always partitions once the disk is in use by ZFS, but there
may be 1 or more of them and they maybe SMI or EFI partitions.
So just because there is
On Thu, 20 May 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
Also, since you've got s0 on there, it means you've got some
partitions on that drive. You could manually wipe all that out via
format, but the above is pretty brainless and reliable.
The s0 on the old disk is a bug in the way we're formatting
mm.. Service time of sd3..5 are waay too high to be
good working disks.
21 writes shouldn't take 1.3 seconds.
Some of your disks are not feeling well, possibly
doing
block-reallocation like mad all the time, or block
recovery of some
form. Service times should be closer to what sd1 and
How full is your filesystem? Give us the output of
zfs list
You might be having a hardware problem, or maybe it's
extremely full.
Hi Edward,
The _db filesystems have a recordsise of 16K (the others have the default
128K) :
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
On 05/19/10 09:34 PM, Philippe wrote:
Hi !
It is strange because I've checked the SMART data of the 4 disks, and
everything seems really OK ! (on another hardware/controller, because I needed
Windows to check it). Maybe it's a problem with the SAS/SATA controller ?!
One question : if I halt
it looks like your 'sd5' disk is performing horribly
bad and except
for the horrible performance of 'sd5' (which
bottlenecks the I/O),
'sd4' would look just as bad. Regardless, the first
step would be to
investigate 'sd5'.
Hi Bob !
I've already tried the pool without the sd5 disk (so
On Tue, 18 May 2010, Philippe wrote:
The usage of the pool is for daily backups, with rsync. Some big files are
updated simulteanously, in different FS. So, I suspect a huge fragmentation of
the files ! Or maybe..., a need of more RAM ??
You forgot to tell us what brand/model of disks you
Hi,
The 4 disks are Western Digital ATA 1TB (one is slighlty different) :
1 x ATA-WDC WD10EACS-00D-1A01-931.51GB
3 x ATA-WDC WD10EARS-00Y-0A80-931.51GB
I've done lots of tests (speed tests + SMART reports) with each of these 4 disk
on another system (another computer, running Windows 2003
Howdy,
Is dedup on? I was having some pretty strange problems including slow
performance when dedup was on. Disabling dedup helped out a whole bunch. My
system only has 4gig of ram, so that may have played a part too.
Good luck!
John
On May 18, 2010, at 7:51 AM, Philippe wrote:
Hi,
The
On 18 May, 2010 - Philippe sent me these 6,0K bytes:
Hi,
The 4 disks are Western Digital ATA 1TB (one is slighlty different) :
1 x ATA-WDC WD10EACS-00D-1A01-931.51GB
3 x ATA-WDC WD10EARS-00Y-0A80-931.51GB
I've done lots of tests (speed tests + SMART reports) with each of these 4
disk
, May 18, 2010 8:11 AM
To: OpenSolaris ZFS discuss
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Very serious performance degradation
Howdy,
Is dedup on? I was having some pretty strange problems including slow
performance when dedup was on. Disabling dedup helped out a whole bunch. My
system only has 4gig of ram
On Tue, 18 May 2010, Philippe wrote:
The 4 disks are Western Digital ATA 1TB (one is slighlty different) :
1 x ATA-WDC WD10EACS-00D-1A01-931.51GB
3 x ATA-WDC WD10EARS-00Y-0A80-931.51GB
I've done lots of tests (speed tests + SMART reports) with each of these 4 disk
on another system (another
How full is your filesystem? Give us the output of zfs list
You might be having a hardware problem, or maybe it's extremely full.
Also, if you have dedup enabled, on a 3TB filesystem, you surely want more
RAM. I don't know if there's any rule of thumb you could follow, but
offhand I'd say 16G
25 matches
Mail list logo
