From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 11 11:23:25 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AB2C9E0; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 11:23:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=1996a1817d=killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: from mail1.multiplay.co.uk (mail1.multiplay.co.uk [85.236.96.23]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBB3D2C5A; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 11:23:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from r2d2 ([82.69.141.170]) by mail1.multiplay.co.uk (mail1.multiplay.co.uk [85.236.96.23]) (MDaemon PRO v10.0.4) with ESMTP id md50006360058.msg; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:23:16 +0100 X-Spam-Processed: mail1.multiplay.co.uk, Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:23:16 +0100 (not processed: message from valid local sender) X-MDDKIM-Result: neutral (mail1.multiplay.co.uk) X-MDRemoteIP: 82.69.141.170 X-Return-Path: prvs=1996a1817d=killing@multiplay.co.uk X-Envelope-From: killing@multiplay.co.uk Message-ID: From: "Steven Hartland" To: , "Pete French" References: Subject: Re: hast and zfs trim possibly causing some problems in 9.2 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:23:12 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, petefrench@ingresso.co.uk 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: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 11:23:25 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pete French" >> If the device on the secondary node does not supports DELETE, but the >> device on the primary does, HAST will report to ZFS that DELETE >> succeeded (although it failed on the secondary), and ZFS will not >> disable TRIM. Pete, isn't this your case? > > Afraid not, both machines are running normal "spinning rust" hard > drives as the actual storage layer, so there is nothing TRIM capable > anywhere. > > I didnt get much chnace to look at this yesterday, but am looking at the logs > again now, and I see these messages right up to the time the machine > fell over. That machine had been up for a long time, and it was still logging > these messages, so it looks very much as if ZFS did not stop trying to > issue the TRIM. What do you see from: sysctl kstat.zfs.misc.zio_trim You should be seeing none zero unsupported and zero failed. If this is not the case its likely hast isnt setting bio_error to ENOTSUP. Regards Steve ================================================ This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337 or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk.