Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:00:07 +0100 From: "Joao Barros" <joao.barros@gmail.com> To: "Pawel Jakub Dawidek" <pjd@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Lapo Luchini <lapo@lapo.it> Subject: Re: ZFS panic on mdX-based raidz Message-ID: <70e8236f0706151300l72e48e03r40d09f09c6d0ff9d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20070615154009.GB39202@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <f4tjii$bus$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070615145224.GA39202@garage.freebsd.pl> <4672A8CD.5060009@lapo.it> <20070615154009.GB39202@garage.freebsd.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6/15/07, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:57:17PM +0200, Lapo Luchini wrote: > > Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > > >> Follows the status with two invalid disks (I wonder why :P) and a scrub > > >> in progress; but the host will panic before the scrub ends. > > >> > > > > > > You corrupted two components in configuration with accepts only one disk > > > failure. > > Yes, I'm well aware of that (it was intentional, in fact), and the > > "invalid" state of the pool was fully expected.. while the kernel panic > > short thereafter was a bit less so ;-) > > Not a very urgent or pressing issue, I do agree, I reported it mainly > > for completeness sake. > > But this is very expected behaviour of ZFS. Let's suppose I have 2 raidz, one volume using disks on one enclosure and another volume using disks on another enclosure. One of the enclosures is disconnected, doesn't matter why. Is ZFS going to panic the machine thus rendering the other volume unavailable? From what I've seen the volume is marked as failed and that's what's supposed to happen. Or when you say intentional was just for md backed devices? -- Joao Barros
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?70e8236f0706151300l72e48e03r40d09f09c6d0ff9d>