From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 1 19:10:13 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CBA2EAA for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 19:10:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rainer@ultra-secure.de) Received: from mail.ultra-secure.de (mail.ultra-secure.de [78.47.114.122]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA05C1C9A for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 19:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 73754 invoked by uid 89); 1 Jul 2013 19:08:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.201?) (rainer@ultra-secure.de@217.71.83.52) by mail.ultra-secure.de with ESMTPA; 1 Jul 2013 19:08:13 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) Subject: Re: ZFS Panic after freebsd-update From: Rainer Duffner X-Priority: 3 In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 21:08:12 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20130701154925.GA64899@icarus.home.lan> <20130701170422.GA65858@icarus.home.lan> To: freebsd-stable List X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 19:10:13 -0000 Am 01.07.2013 um 20:56 schrieb "Steven Hartland" = : > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Sipe" >> So I realize that neither 8.2-RELEASE or 8.4-RELEASE are stable, but = I >> ultimately wasn't sure where the right place to go for discuss 8.4 = is? >> Beyond the FS mailing list, was there a better place for my question? = I'll >> provide the other requested information (zfs outputs, etc) to = wherever >> would be best. >> This is a production machine (has been since late 2010) and after = tweaking >> some ZFS settings initially has been totally stable. I wasn't = incredibly >> closely involved in the initial configuration, but I've done at least = one >> binary freebsd-update previously. >> Before this computer I had always done source upgrades. ZFS (and the >> thought of a panic like the one I saw this weekend!) made me leery of = doing >> that. We're a small business--we have this server, an offsite backup >> server, and a firewall box. I understand that issues like this are = are >> going to happen when I don't have a dedicated testing box, I just = like to >> try to minimize them and keep them to weekends! >> It sounds like my best bet might be to add a new UFS disk, do a clean >> install of 9.1 onto that disk, and then import my existing ZFS pool? >=20 > There should be no reason why 8.4-RELEASE shouldn't work fine. >=20 > Yes ZFS is continuously improving and these fixes / enhancements first = hit > head / current and are then MFC'ed back to stable/9 & stable/8, but = that > doesn't mean the release branches should be avoided. >=20 > If you can I would try booting from a 8.4-RELEASE cdrom / iso to see > if it can successfully read the pool as this could eliminate out of = sync > kernel / world issues. Personally, I find mfsbsd much more practical for booting up a = "rescue-environment". Also, if 8.4 does not work for some reason - maybe try 8.3? I have quite a lot of systems running 8.3 (and even more with 9.1) but = none of them do zfsroot and none of them stresses ZFS very much. I've so far resisted the urge to update to 8.4. The reason why I would be interested to run zfs-root is that sometimes, = you only have two hard drives and still want to do ZFS on it. Ideally, though, FreeBSD would be able to do something like SmartOS (one = of the few features I kind of like about it=85), where you boot from an = USB-image (or ideally, via (i)PXE) but use all the available space for = data and (3rd-party) software. That way, you always have something to = boot from, but can maximize the usage of spindles and space. A basic FreeBSD install is, I think, less than 0.5G these days - I = really hate wasting two 300 (or even 600) GB SAS hard disks just for = that.