Am 13.04.12 19:22, schrieb Tim Cook:
I tend to think, that S11 even tightened the gap of that. When I
upgraded from SE11 to S11 a couple of drives became "corrupt" when S11
tried to mount the zpool, which consists of vdev mirrors. Switching back
to SE1! and importing the very same zpool went without issue.
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Freddie Cash <fjwc...@gmail.com
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Tim Cook <t...@cook.ms
> You will however have an issue replacing them if one should
fail. You need
> to have the same block count to replace a device, which is why I
asked for a
> "right-sizing" years ago. Deaf ears :/
I thought ZFSv20-something added a "if the blockcount is within 10%,
then allow the replace to succeed" feature, to work around this issue?
That would be news to me. I'd love to hear it's true though. When I
made the request there was excuse after excuse about how it would be
difficult and Sun always provided replacement drives of identical
size, etc (although there were people who responded who in fact
had received drives from Sun of different sizes in RMA). I was hoping
now that the braintrust had moved on from Sun that they'd embrace what
I consider a common-sense decision, but I don't think it's happened.
In the SR I opened for that issue, it was stated that S11 is even more
picky about drives sizes than SE11 had been and I had to replace the
drives with new ones. Interstingly these were all Hitachi drives of the
"same" size, but prtvoc displayed in fact fewer sectors for the ones
that were refused by S11 - and the percentage was closer to 5% than to
I was able to create another zpool from the drives S11 refused later on
in S11 though.
zfs-discuss mailing list