From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 30 21:00:09 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A164B106564A for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2010 21:00:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from morganw@chemikals.org) Received: from warped.bluecherry.net (warped.bluecherry.net [66.138.159.247]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D2598FC13 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2010 21:00:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from volatile.chemikals.org (adsl-67-123-77.shv.bellsouth.net [98.67.123.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by warped.bluecherry.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 10E1187DC608; Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:00:07 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (morganw@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by volatile.chemikals.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o3UKxwL3089114; Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:59:58 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from morganw@chemikals.org) Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:59:58 -0500 (CDT) From: Wes Morgan X-X-Sender: morganw@volatile To: Freddie Cash In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.3 at warped X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS: "Cannot replace a replacing drive" X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 21:00:09 -0000 On Fri, 30 Apr 2010, Wes Morgan wrote: > On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Freddie Cash wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Wes Morgan wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 28 Apr 2010, Freddie Cash wrote: > > > > > > > Going through the archives, I see that others have run into this issue, > > > and > > > > managed to solve it via "zpool detach". However, looking closely at the > > > > archived messages, all the successful tests had one thing in common: 1 > > > > drive ONLINE, 1 drive FAULTED. If a drive is online, obviously it can be > > > > detached. In all the cases where people have been unsuccessful at fixing > > > > this situation, 1 drive is OFFLINE, and 1 drive is FAULTED. As is our > > > case: > > > > > > > > > > What happened to the drive to fault it? > > > > > > Am in the process of replacing 500 GB drives with 1.5 TB drives, to > > increase the available storage space in the pool (process went flawlessly on > > the other storage server). First 3 disks in the vdev replaced without > > issues. Also, where is the original 500gb drive (#4) that you replaced? You should be able to put that drive back in and let it resilver itself to catch back up to the other devices, then cancel the replacement.