From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 6 16:54:25 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54AFD16A41B for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 16:54:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [IPv6:2001:4070:101:2::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B59713C46B for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 16:54:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m16GpwUf004501; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 17:51:58 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id m16GpjmR004492; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 17:51:58 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 17:51:45 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Bogdan Culibrk In-Reply-To: <1202313434.5415.209.camel@serafim> Message-ID: <20080206174915.O4330@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <1202313434.5415.209.camel@serafim> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Some ZFS experience X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:54:25 -0000 > > What happened: > 1. Base system running on gmirror volume consisting of 4 mirrors booted > up normally in degraded mode with 3 of 4 drives online. > 2. /data powered by raidz1 zfs was showing 3 drives, 2 online and 1 > faulted. zfs list was showing that volume is unavailable due lack of > spares. you told about having raidz over 4 drives. so while it reports 2 online and 1 faulted, not 3 online and 1 faulted? > What was wrong when 3 drives were connected? Wasnt supposed to raidz1 > survive lack of 1 drive? Or I did something wrong there? yes it should work normally. in case of raid-z - with just a bit slower speed according to ZFS theory.