Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 14:00:10 -0400 From: Todd Wasson <tsw5@duke.edu> To: Wes Morgan <morganw@chemikals.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: zfs drive replacement issues Message-ID: <4BF4272A.9020204@duke.edu> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1005182357280.75234@ibyngvyr> References: <0B97967D-1057-4414-BBD4-4F1AA2659A5D@duke.edu> <4BF0F231.9000706@mapper.nl> <53F15A8B-77DA-4CEF-A790-2902BEC91002@duke.edu> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1005182357280.75234@ibyngvyr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I'm not certain that you really always want to do that. When you offline a > device in a redundant pool you lose that redundancy. If you have a drive > that is completely dead, it is obviously the right thing to do, but > otherwise perhaps not. Were you the have another failure during the > rebuild, or if there was another error on a different vdev, you wouldn't > be able to recover that data because of the missing device. The same > reason why offlining and replacing each device in a raidz1 to "grow" it > isn't as safe as you might think -- any error could lead to data loss. > > Just food for thought. I'm guessing the implication here is that it's better to connect the new drive in addition to the old one, then, like via USB or eSATA interface? In a machine with no extra interfaces, as was the case for me, offlining it seemed to be the only choice. Maybe it's just time to invest in a USB SATA cable, just in case... Thanks! Todd
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4BF4272A.9020204>