Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 01 Apr 2011 15:31:36 +0300
From:      Mikolaj Golub <trociny@freebsd.org>
To:        Pete French <petefrench@ingresso.co.uk>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, pjd@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Any success stories for HAST + ZFS?
Message-ID:  <86wrjei253.fsf@in138.ua3>
In-Reply-To: <E1Q5blz-00084y-NW@dilbert.ticketswitch.com> (Pete French's message of "Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:40:11 %2B0100")
References:  <E1Q5blz-00084y-NW@dilbert.ticketswitch.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:40:11 +0100 Pete French wrote:

 >> Yes, you may hit it only on hast devices creation. The workaround is to avoid
 >> using 'hastctl role primary all', start providers one by one instead.

 PF> Interesting to note that I just hit a lockup in hast (the discs froze
 PF> up - could not run hastctl or zpool import, and could not kill
 PF> them). I have two hast devices instead of one, but I am starting them
 PF> individually instead of  using 'all'. The copde includes all the latest
 PF> patches which have gone into STABLE over the last few days, none of which
 PF> look particularly controversial!

 PF> I havent tried your atch yet, nor been able to reporduce the lockup, but
 PF> thought you might be interested to know that I also had problems with
 PF> multiple providers.

This looks like a different problem. If you have this again please provide the
output of 'procstat -kka'.

-- 
Mikolaj Golub



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86wrjei253.fsf>