From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 2 21:03:54 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8AF9D23 for ; Sat, 2 May 2015 21:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com (mail-qk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7668815D7 for ; Sat, 2 May 2015 21:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qkhg7 with SMTP id g7so67273028qkh.2 for ; Sat, 02 May 2015 14:03:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=79ksxNbyraLl3/qbRPEAp929EvJI6Wcf7bXbi0uSZN0=; b=QWpzYroqXbotZKAKms1zkculexn1e/I0Thv0TG2jMo8ZvpzA/eB6DMAEQsjFPoYGoa EZs4iAGyghYDHLTVRbRRQc/J5jXlPravnmoJx6Giims3wlR6l+jJbdkb8oD3T5jZ+ewP auzlHfoVrrtyqOwlHsiiSxrYUh2xErNNPyPPAlSOxZtK7WdrmuBo5VOW9/x1CUOApowo jg/uPwjPzqBWA1vmPKe5v/V4/yteuGFRaP4qp0/+wTlFqby1p4kduo+qgzODBIJ/dE+F XFIEYhDJakHaUQAz7YwrtC/CWQjHgjFTJm4QID+6E9ozRGyv0Rc9cGg38TT0ZbtXSc03 Uw3w== X-Received: by 10.55.15.129 with SMTP id 1mr32090541qkp.29.1430600633477; Sat, 02 May 2015 14:03:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.96.118 with HTTP; Sat, 2 May 2015 14:03:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Gabor Radnai Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 23:03:33 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: vfs.zfs.write_to_degraded missing in 10.1? To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 May 2015 21:03:54 -0000 Hi Lacey, Thanks for prompt answer. Quick test showed that behavior indeed changed, ie. by default a degraded redundant pool is writable. (Nevertheless Handbook is out-of-date this regards and thus misleading. Hope it will catch at some point.) Thanks again. Best regards, Gabor