On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Trond Michelsen <tron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Tim Cook <t...@cook.ms> wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Jan Owoc <jso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Trond Michelsen <tron...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> How can I replace the drive without migrating all the data to a
> >>> different pool? It is possible, I hope?
> >> I had the same problem. I tried copying the partition layout and some
> >> other stuff but without success. I ended up having to recreate the
> >> pool and now have a non-mirrored root fs.
> >> If anyone has figured out how to mirror drives after getting the
> >> message about sector alignment, please let the list know :-).
> > Not happening with anything that exists today.  The only way this would
> be
> > possible is with bp_rewrite which would allow you to evacuate a vdev
> > (whether it be for a situation like this, or just to shrink a pool).
>  What
> > you're trying to do is write a block for block copy to a disk that's
> made up
> > of a different block structure.  Not happening.
> That is disappointing. I'll probably manage to find a used 2TB drive
> with 512b blocksize, so I'm sure I'll be able to keep the pool alive,
> but I had planned to swap all 2TB drives for 4TB drives within a year
> or so. This is apparently not an option anymore. I'm also a bit
> annoyed, because I cannot remember seeing any warnings (other than
> performance wise) about mixing 512b and 4kB blocksize discs in a pool,
> or any warnings that you'll be severely restricted if you use 512b
> blocksize discs at all.
> > *insert everyone saying they want bp_rewrite and the guys who have the
> > skills to do so saying their enterprise customers have other needs*
> bp_rewrite is what's needed to remove vdevs, right? If so, yes, being
> able to remove (or replace) a vdev, would've solved my problem.
> However, I don't see how this could not be desirable for enterprise
> customers. 512b blocksize discs are rapidly disappearing from the
> market. Enterprise discs fail ocasionally too, and if 512b blocksize
> discs can't be replaced by 4kB blocksize discs, then that effectively
> means that you can't replace failed drives on ZFS. I would think that
> this is a desirable feature of an enterprise storage solution.

Enterprise customers are guaranteed equivalent replacement drives for the
life of the system.  Generally 3-5 years.  At the end of that cycle, they
buy all new hardware and simply migrate the data.  It's generally a
non-issue due to the way gear is written off.

zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to