From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 9 14:56:29 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A48921065697 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 14:56:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerrit@pmp.uni-hannover.de) Received: from mrelay1.uni-hannover.de (mrelay1.uni-hannover.de [130.75.2.106]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 320818FC14 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 14:56:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from www.pmp.uni-hannover.de (www.pmp.uni-hannover.de [130.75.117.2]) by mrelay1.uni-hannover.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o19EuQck009365; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:56:27 +0100 Received: from pmp.uni-hannover.de (arc.pmp.uni-hannover.de [130.75.117.1]) by www.pmp.uni-hannover.de (Postfix) with SMTP id 17B3A4F; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:56:26 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:56:25 +0100 From: Gerrit =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=FChn?= To: Jeremy Chadwick Message-Id: <20100209155625.a255a34d.gerrit@pmp.uni-hannover.de> In-Reply-To: <20100209142658.GA38072@icarus.home.lan> References: <20100209150606.ddba52dc.gerrit@pmp.uni-hannover.de> <20100209142658.GA38072@icarus.home.lan> Organization: Albert-Einstein-Institut (MPI =?ISO-8859-1?Q?f=FCr?= Gravitationsphysik & IGP =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Universit=E4t?= Hannover) X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.18.4; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-PMX-Version: 5.5.9.388399, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2010.2.9.144527 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: zpool vdev vs. glabel X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:56:29 -0000 On Tue, 9 Feb 2010 06:26:58 -0800 Jeremy Chadwick wrote about Re: zpool vdev vs. glabel: JC> > I'm running out of ideas here... JC> Would "zpool export" and "zpool import" be necessary in this case? I tried that several times, does not change anything. JC> Also, I'm a little confused as to the use of glabel in this case. In JC> what condition do your disk indices (e.g. X of daX) change? Are you JC> yanking multiple disks out of a system at the same time and then JC> shoving them back into different drive bays? I just did not want to do hard-wiring da-devices in the kernel. I have two lsi controllers, and they do not even come up in the same order every time I boot (mpt0/mpt1), let alone the disks picking up the same daX every time. I thought labeling the disks would be a good idea to prevent all these kinds of problems. JC> Are you switching JC> between storage subsystem drivers (ahci(4) vs. ataahci(4), for JC> example) regularly? No (not yet al least :-). JC> I've yet to be convinced glabel is worth bothering with, unless the JC> system adheres to one of the above situations (which are worthy of JC> strangulation anyway ;-) ). I would really like to know how this happened at all... meanwhile I used a spare disk under a different name to replace everything round-robin back to normal. However, I just recognized one more thing: pigpen# zpool status tank pool: tank state: ONLINE scrub: resilver completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Tue Feb 9 15:50:01 2010 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM tank ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 label/tank1 ONLINE 0 0 0 11K resilvered label/tank2 ONLINE 0 0 0 10K resilvered label/tank3 ONLINE 0 0 0 11K resilvered label/tank4 ONLINE 0 0 0 10.5K resilvered label/tank5 ONLINE 0 0 0 11K resilvered label/tank6 ONLINE 0 0 0 15K resilvered errors: No known data errors pigpen# zpool offline tank label/tank5 pigpen# zpool status tank pool: tank state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices has experienced an unrecoverable error. An attempt was made to correct the error. Applications are unaffected. action: Determine if the device needs to be replaced, and clear the errors using 'zpool clear' or replace the device with 'zpool replace'. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-9P scrub: resilver completed after 0h0m with 0 errors on Tue Feb 9 15:50:01 2010 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM tank DEGRADED 0 0 0 raidz2 DEGRADED 0 0 0 label/tank1 ONLINE 0 0 0 11K resilvered label/tank2 ONLINE 0 0 0 10K resilvered label/tank3 ONLINE 0 0 0 11K resilvered label/tank4 ONLINE 0 0 0 10.5K resilvered label/tank5 ONLINE 0 0 0 11K resilvered label/tank6 OFFLINE 0 39 0 15K resilvered errors: No known data errors pigpen# zpool offline tank label/tank5 cannot offline label/tank5: no valid replicas Why can't I offline a second disk? This is a raidz2 volume, after all?! cu Gerrit