On Wed, 21 Dec 2011, Gareth de Vaux wrote:

I assume the checksum counts are current and irreconcilable. (Why does
the scan say 'repaired with 0 errors' then?).

One of your disks failed to return a sector. Due to redundancy, the original data was recreated from the remaining disks. This is normal good behavior (other than the disk failing to read the sector).

What should one do at this point?

Normally one would have done nothing other than 'zpool clear' after thinking about the issue for a while. If there were many failures to read from that disk, or the failures continue to accumulate for the same disk, then that would have been cause to replace it.

Doing a 'zpool scrub' is very much recommended in order to flush out data which fails to read while redundancy is still available.

  see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-8A
scan: resilvered 218G in 1h25m with 14 errors on Wed Dec 21 14:48:47 2011

       NAME             STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
       pool             DEGRADED     0     0    14
         raidz1-0       DEGRADED     0     0    28
           replacing-0  OFFLINE      0     0     0
             ad18/old   OFFLINE      0     0     0
             ad18       ONLINE       0     0     0
           ad19         ONLINE       0     0     0
           ad10         ONLINE       0     0     0
           ad4          ONLINE       0     0     0

errors: 11 data errors, use '-v' for a list

and 'zpool status -v' gives me a list of affected files.

This is a bummer. If you had a spare slot (or spare installed disk) you could have installed a new disk and done a replace with the existing disk still live. Then you would be much less likely to encounter a data error since the original disk was still working. Raidz1 is not very robust when used with large disks and with one drive totally failed.

Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to