From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 17 20:46:31 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B46ACE1E for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 20:46:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost1.sentex.ca (smarthost1.sentex.ca [IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:1::12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "smarthost.sentex.ca", Issuer "smarthost.sentex.ca" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 703EF1A0E for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 20:46:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:4:f025:8813:7603:7e4a] (saphire3.sentex.ca [IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:4:f025:8813:7603:7e4a]) by smarthost1.sentex.ca (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id sBHKkU6s072654; Wed, 17 Dec 2014 15:46:30 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-ID: <5491EBA1.6080606@sentex.net> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 15:46:25 -0500 From: Mike Tancsa Organization: Sentex Communications User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jd1008 , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: zfs and 512/4096 sector sizes References: <5491E462.2020902@sentex.net> <5491E5A0.9090306@gmail.com> <5491E61B.9070505@bluerosetech.com> <5491E775.5010403@gmail.com> <5491E82D.8090105@sentex.net> <5491EA62.2080401@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5491EA62.2080401@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.75 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 20:46:31 -0000 On 12/17/2014 3:41 PM, jd1008 wrote: > One last suggestion: > dismantle the whole pool (i.e. remove the drives) > and rebuild it fresh using only 512 byte sector drives. > Whole adding the drives back in, one at a time, > recheck the status after each add and see if the > error status appears. I was hoping for a rather less intrusive option than backing up 10TB of data. Although its a backup of a backup (ie offsite) I was hoping there was a less drastic option available. I am confident if I "started fresh" with just the 512k sector drives, it will work fine. The question which remains is, if I replace a single 512 sector drive with a 4k sector drive, and then replace the 4k with another 512k, is there a way to remove said warning, or has something changed about the pool that cannot be undone ---Mike -- ------------------- Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 Sentex Communications, mike@sentex.net Providing Internet services since 1994 www.sentex.net Cambridge, Ontario Canada http://www.tancsa.com/