> From: Richard Elling [mailto:richard.ell...@gmail.com]
>> What do you expect to happen if you're in progress doing a zfs send, and
>> then simultaneously do a zfs destroy of the snapshot you're sending?
> It depends on the release. For modern implementations, a hold is placed on
> the snapshot and
> it won't be destroyed until the hold is removed.
>> This happened to me today, because I'm replicating one server to
>> another... So I'm sending the oldest snapshot first, to be followed by
>> incrementals. But the oldest one is of course the biggest one to send,
>> spanned the overnight midnight. Meanwhile zfs-auto-snapshot tried to
>> destroy the oldest snap.
>> I'm now in a state where I can't do "zfs list" and a whole bunch of
>> failing... I have 46 "zfs list" processes unkillabIe, and I have 28
>> snapshot processes also unkillable. I may be forced to reboot, and I may
>> have to start over. If the destroy succeeds, then of course I won't be
>> use that snap as the initial point for the incrementals.
> Sounds like a bug :-(
> There are some large locks around some of these things...
Sounds to me, like placing a "hold" on a snapshot has some unintended side
effects... Such as making a "zfs list" hang, just like the "zfs destroy."
Perhaps that was intentional by design... Ensuring commands complete in the
order they were run or something like that. But I doubt it. I bet it's a
In any event, I power cycled mine.
zfs-discuss mailing list