Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:44:19 +0100 From: Bogdan Culibrk <bc@default.co.yu> To: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Some ZFS experience Message-ID: <47B58923.90603@default.co.yu> In-Reply-To: <20080206174915.O4330@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <1202313434.5415.209.camel@serafim> <20080206174915.O4330@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi and sorry for resurrecting this old topic Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> >> 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? As I mentioned in first email I did have 4 drives, but new host wasnt able to accept all 4 drives so I gave a shot with 3 drives expecting that it should work. The day after I got new cablings and connected all 4 drives and all worked like charm. Point is that raidz1 refused to work in somewhat degraded mode with 3 drives. It showed 1 out of 3 drive as faulted :/ IIRC, I didnt do: # zpool export tank before migration. It might be source of the problem, but I'm not sure. So lesson learned: always export your ZFS volumes before doing anything like that :) > >> 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. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47B58923.90603>