Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:40:36 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Snapshot problems Message-ID: <4F3A7264.8080301@infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4F3A6D44.4040105@brockmann-consult.de> References: <4F377457.4080807@FreeBSD.org> <20120212084052.GA43095@icarus.home.lan> <4F3789C1.9000903@FreeBSD.org> <4F37A8E7.7060102@brockmann-consult.de> <4F37B25A.10002@FreeBSD.org> <4F37BA49.50700@brockmann-consult.de> <4F37C52A.2030803@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4F3A30A2.9050603@FreeBSD.org> <4F3A6D44.4040105@brockmann-consult.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigAD06EDE91F002052F982823E
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 14/02/2012 14:18, Peter Maloney wrote:
> Was your pool created at the current version, or upgraded?
Upgraded. I was testing the v28 patches for quite a while.
> Some pools have issues when upgraded. Mine had a separate log that coul=
d
> not be removed after being upgraded to v28. So I destroyed it and
> recreated it, and things are fine. I don't know if it is the upgrade
> process that is broken, or just that the old ZFS code in FreeBSD was
> buggy, so pools are slightly corrupt.
Well, it's been on v28 for more than a year. Odd that this should
suddenly appear now.
> And what zpool and zfs version are you running?
Like I posted in the very first message in this thread: zpool v28, zfs v5=
=2E
> Is this your FreeBSD version? (FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE #2 r231394: Fri Feb 1=
0
> 20:35:13 GMT 2012)
> Your FreeBSD sounds very old. I tried 8.2 stable from April and it was
> unusably unstable with zfs.
Right now it's:
FreeBSD lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk 8.2-STABLE FreeBSD
8.2-STABLE #3 r231563: Mon Feb 13 01:37:39 GMT 2012
root@lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/LUCID-NON=
SENSE
amd64
Which is stable/8 from last Sunday. I hardly think that qualifies as
"old." I am planning to upgrade to stable/9 in the reasonably near
future -- perhaps I'll do that sooner rather than later if it offers any
potential fixes. I wasn't aware that there were many changes between
stable/8 and stable/9 in respect of ZFS.
> If you are using a recent STABLE pull, and have created the pool with a=
n
> old version of FreeBSD, have you considered destroying the pool and
> recreating it with your backups, using zfs send & recv?
Hmmm... no. That sounds like a thing to try when I have a day or so
that I can take the machine down for. Probably right around the point
that I do the upgrade to 9.x. Thinking about it, I'd probably split the
mirror, rebuild one of the drives, pull the ZFSes across, boot from the
rebuilt drive and then add the old drive back to the mirror.
Cheers,
Matthew
--=20
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW
--------------enigAD06EDE91F002052F982823E
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk86cmsACgkQ8Mjk52CukIya5gCfa1cGxTeZX9bh2LkeKZGJosnP
hlMAmgL7/Y4Eba/gNJ8wHEnn4jtLeCON
=YbBd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enigAD06EDE91F002052F982823E--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F3A7264.8080301>