On 04/23/12 01:47 PM, Manuel Ryan wrote:
Hello, I have looked around this mailing list and other virtual spaces
and I wasn't able to find a similar situation than this weird one.
If it were my data, I'd set the pool read only, backup, rebuild and
restore. You do risk further data loss (maybe even pool loss) while the
new drive is resilvering.
I have a 6 disks raidz zfs15 pool. After a scrub, the status of the
pool and all disks still show up as "ONLINE" but two of the disks are
starting to give me errors and I do have fatal data corruption. The
disks seems to be failing differently :
disk 2 has 78 (not growing) read errors, 43k (growing) write errors
and 3 (not growing) checksum errors.
disk 5 has 0 read errors, 0 write errors but 7.4k checksum errors
Data corruption is around 22k files.
I plan to replace both disks. Which disk do you think should be
replaced first to loose as few data as possible ?
I was thinking of replacing disk 5 first as it seems to have a lot of
"silent" data corruption so maybe it's a bad idea to use it's output
to replace disk 2. Also checksum and read errors on disk 2 do not seem
to be growing as I used the pool to backup data (corrupted files could
not be accessed, but a lot of files were fine) but write errors are
growing extremely fast. So reading uncorrupted data from disk 2 seems
to be working but writing on it seems to be problematic.
Do you guys also think I should change disk 5 first or am I missing
I would only use raidz for unimportant data, or for a copy of data from
a more robust pool.
zfs-discuss mailing list