Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:29:41 +0100 From: Borja Marcos <borjam@sarenet.es> To: Marie Helene Kvello-Aune <marieheleneka@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS bug: zpool expandz says 16.0E, clearly wrong Message-ID: <0614ACAB-DFF0-4CBE-8AA1-4EAE4668DBA9@sarenet.es> In-Reply-To: <CALXRTbdJi1QZW14sYqX7o7KoeX3ht9w_KqPQ-LO0GSzWi1m62g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CALXRTbdJi1QZW14sYqX7o7KoeX3ht9w_KqPQ-LO0GSzWi1m62g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 26 Jan 2016, at 17:17, Marie Helene Kvello-Aune = <marieheleneka@gmail.com> wrote: >=20 > I've stumbled across a curiosity with my zpool. The command 'zpool = list' > states that the EXPANDZ property/value is 16.0E. This is clearly = incorrect. > :) Or not, maybe your encryption+compression has triggered a Shannon = Singularity! ;) > The pool consist of a single RaidZ2 vdev of 6 drives, and two cache = drives. > No log device. Executing 'zpool list -v' shows that each member of the > RaidZ2 has an 'EXPANDZ' value of '-', as expected. But the RaidZ2 = itself, > and the pool, has a EXPANDZ value of 16.0E. Now, seriously. I=E2=80=99ve seen odd size reports for cache drives = before. Can you try running =E2=80=9Czdb=E2=80=9D and see where the wrong size is reported? Maybe detaching and reattaching the cache drives from the pool might = help, in case something related to the cache drives is creating the confusion. Borja.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0614ACAB-DFF0-4CBE-8AA1-4EAE4668DBA9>