You're using an *old* version of both OpenSolaris and zpool.  There have been a 
few corruption bugs fixed since then.  I'd recommend updating.

        - Garrett

On Oct 22, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Robert Watzlavick wrote:

> I've noticed something strange over the past few months with four files on my 
> raidz.  Here's the setup:
> OpenSolaris snv_111b
> ZFS Pool version 14
> AMD-based server with ECC RAM.
> 5 ST3500630AS 500 GB SATA drives (4 active plus spare) in raidz1
> The other day, I observed what appears to be undetected file corruption in 4 
> of the files on the raidz.  I have two external USB hard drives that I use to 
> back up the contents of the ZFS raidz on alternating months.  The USB hard 
> drives use EXT3 so they are connected to a Linux box which in turn connects 
> to the raidz over NFS.  Occasionally, I use the checksum option on rsync 
> (rsync -ainc) to make sure everything on the USB hard drives match before I 
> perform the real rsync back from the raid to the USB disk and that's when I 
> noticed the changes.  In each file, there was a single byte changed.  Running 
> zpool status doesn't show any errors and running zpool scrub doesn't show any 
> problems either.
> One of the changed files was a .ppt file that I downloaded from the web over 
> a year ago and the other 3 were Acronis incremental Backup files from my XP 
> machine that get stored on the raidz.  Since ZFS files aren't supposed to be 
> corrupted without notification (right?), I initially assumed the problem was 
> with the USB drive.  For the 3 Acronis backup files, I had no way of knowing 
> which version was the correct one because Acronis shows all of them to be 
> valid.  The .ppt file was not on the web anymore but with the help of the 
> Wayback machine, I was able to re-download it and that's when I confirmed the 
> "good" copy from the web matches the copy on my USB hard drive, not the copy 
> on the raidz.  I know I haven't modified the .ppt file because the date still 
> matches the date I downloaded it, 2010-01-12.
> What failure scenario could have caused this?  The file was obviously 
> initially good on the raidz because it got backed up to the USB drive and 
> that matches the "good" version from the web.
> Thanks in advance,
> -Bob
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list

zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to