Hi Robert, I agree with others here that the kernel panic is undesired behavior. If ZFS would simply offline the zpool and not kernel panic, that would obviate my request for an informational message. It'd be pretty darn obvious what was going on.
Best Regards, Jason On 12/20/06, Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Jason, Wednesday, December 20, 2006, 1:02:36 AM, you wrote: JJWW> Hi Robert JJWW> I didn't take any offense. :-) I completely agree with you that zpool JJWW> striping leverages standard RAID-0 knowledge in that if a device JJWW> disappears your RAID group goes poof. That doesn't really require a JJWW> notice...was just trying to be complete. :-) JJWW> The surprise to me was that detecting block corruption did the same JJWW> thing...since most hardware RAID controllers and filesystems do a poor JJWW> job of detecting block-level corruption, kernel panicking on corrupt JJWW> blocks seems to be what folks like me aren't expecting until it JJWW> happens. JJWW> Frankly, in about 5 years when ZFS and its concepts are common JJWW> knowledge, warning folks about corrupt blocks re-booting your server JJWW> would be like notifying them what rm and mv do. However, until then JJWW> warning them that corruption will cause a panic would definitely aid JJWW> folks who think they understand because they have existing RAID and JJWW> SAN knowledge, and then get bitten. Also, I think the zfsassist JJWW> program is a great idea for newbies. I'm not sure how often it would JJWW> be used by storage pros new to ZFS. Using the gal with the EMC DMX-3 JJWW> again as an example (sorry! O:-) ), I'm sure she's pretty experienced JJWW> and had no problems using ZFS correctly...just was not expecting a JJWW> kernel panic on corruption and so was taken by surprise as to what JJWW> caused the kernel panic when it happened. A warning message when JJWW> creating a striped pool, would in my case have stuck in my brain so JJWW> that when the kernel panic happened, corruption of the zpool would JJWW> have been on my top 10 things to expect as a cause. Anyway, this is JJWW> probably an Emacs/VI argument to some degree. Now that I've JJWW> experienced a panic from zpool corruption its on the forefront of my JJWW> mind when designing ZFS zpools, and the warning wouldn't do much for JJWW> me now. Though I probably would have preferred to learn from a warning JJWW> message instead of a panic. :-) But with other file systems you basically get the same - in many cases kernel crash - but in a more unpredictable way. Now not that I'm fond of current ZFS behavior, I would really like to specify like in UFS if system has to panic or just lock the filesystem (or a pool). As Eric posted some time ago (I think it was Eric) it's on a list to address. However I still agree that striped pools should be displayed (zpool status) with stripe keyword like mirrors or raidz groups - that would be less confusing for beginners. -- Best regards, Robert mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://milek.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
