From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Dec 17 23:13:02 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEC53569;
 Wed, 17 Dec 2014 23:13:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C312EE9E;
 Wed, 17 Dec 2014 23:12:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua
 [212.40.38.100])
 by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id BAA03144;
 Thu, 18 Dec 2014 01:14:51 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
 by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD))
 id 1Y1Nm4-000Jyi-LH; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 01:12:56 +0200
Message-ID: <54920DC0.8030200@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 01:12:00 +0200
From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>,
 "freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.org>,
 freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: zfs and 512/4096 sector sizes
References: <5491E462.2020902@sentex.net>
In-Reply-To: <5491E462.2020902@sentex.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 23:13:02 -0000

On 17/12/2014 22:15, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> On a remote server, I replaced a dead 2TB disk with a new one that had 4096K
> sectors.
> 
> 2014-12-11.22:40:30 zpool replace -f tank1 16144392433229115618 /dev/ada0
> 
> 
> My ZFS pool then warned me after
> 
>   pool: tank1
>  state: ONLINE
> status: One or more devices are configured to use a non-native block size.
>         Expect reduced performance.
> action: Replace affected devices with devices that support the
>         configured block size, or migrate data to a properly configured
>         pool.
> 
> Camcontrol and smartctl confirm the 2TB drive was indeed 4096. (All my previous
> ones were 512, so didnt think to check)
> 
> # camcontrol identify ada0 | grep secto
> sectors/track         63
> sector size           logical 512, physical 4096, offset 0
> LBA supported         268435455 sectors
> LBA48 supported       3907029168 sectors
> 
> # smartctl -a /dev/ada0 | grep -i 512
> Sector Sizes:     512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical
> 
> So, with a new drive, I replaced the 4096 drive
> 
> 2014-12-16.17:07:14 zpool replace tank1 ada0 ada11
> 
> # smartctl -a /dev/ada11 | grep -i 512
> Sector Size:      512 bytes logical/physical
> # camcontrol identify ada11 | grep -i sector
> sectors/track         63
> sector size           logical 512, physical 512, offset 0
> LBA supported         268435455 sectors
> LBA48 supported       3907029168 sectors
> 
> yet, zfs is still complaining

Does zpool clear help in this situation?

-- 
Andriy Gapon