Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:25:03 -0500 From: "Daniel Staal" <DStaal@usa.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vdevs in zpool spereated, unable to import Message-ID: <4a62131a3c6a241b0fdcf3cd9061b6c4.squirrel@www.magehandbook.com> In-Reply-To: <4F393AF8.4060003@bullseye.tv> References: <4F393AF8.4060003@bullseye.tv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, February 13, 2012 11:31 am, Adam Coates wrote: > More insight into my tomfoolery: I think the "different hostnames" issue > may be because of my ignorance. If you can't tell I'm fairly new to zfs, > and even newer to the revelation of zpools (I've been using one for over > a year but had no idea, I wasn't the one who set it up). When I had > finished the fresh os install I was originally trying to /mount/ the > drives. I know I was running into an error of: > > "/dev/da0 is part of active pool 'tank'" > > with a suggestion that the mount could only proceed with the "-f" > argument. I can't recall what exactly I did, but I may have tried to > force a mount of da0 to /tank in pool "tank". This would make sense why > I now can't import the original pool tank, and why there is a destroyed > pool tank. Since these were raidz, is there any chance of recovering > from my error? You may have done some major damage, but things to try (in my thoughts on order): zpool import -f <id from /dev/da0> That's trying to import by the numeric id, not the name. At the very least, you should get a different error message. (You may need the -D as well.) zpool import -D -f -d /dev/da0 -d /dev/da1 Now we're trying to import destroyed pools, and looking at both drives explicitly for data. The next is a bit of hail mary, and if anyone else has a good idea, I'd try that first...: You can try mounting /dev/da1 like you did /dev/da0, and *then* trying to import. Basically, at that point you are trying to get them both messed up the same way. Since these were raidz: Where's the third disk? If you have two of the raidz disks, you should be able to rebuild the third. (It's *possible*, it appears, to run a raidz with two disks, but you don't get any benefits over mirroring, and you complicate recovery - a mirror in this situation would be directly usable. In theory a two-disk raidz should be recoverable from one disk, I think, but it may not have been well-tested.) Daniel T. Staal --------------------------------------------------------------- This email copyright the author. Unless otherwise noted, you are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use the contents for non-commercial purposes. This copyright will expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years, whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of local copyright law. ---------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4a62131a3c6a241b0fdcf3cd9061b6c4.squirrel>