From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 16 07:42:49 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3D13C5E for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:42:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay05.ispgateway.de (smtprelay05.ispgateway.de [80.67.31.97]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81DB021B5 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:42:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [78.35.169.64] (helo=fabiankeil.de) by smtprelay05.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (SSLv3:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1WwRVq-0008LV-EB for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:39:30 +0200 Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:39:28 +0200 From: Fabian Keil To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS pool permanent error question -- errors: Permanent errors have been detected in the following files: storage: <0x0> Message-ID: <20140616093928.1b96f24b@fabiankeil.de> In-Reply-To: <20140616024942.GA13697@koodekoo.local> References: <20140615211052.GA63247@neutralgood.org> <20140616024942.GA13697@koodekoo.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/fv0n5LFkt5WMnWlpfL5xSla"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Df-Sender: Nzc1MDY3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:42:49 -0000 --Sig_/fv0n5LFkt5WMnWlpfL5xSla Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Anders Jensen-Waud wrote: > On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 05:10:52PM -0400, kpneal@pobox.com wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 03:04:16PM +1000, Anders Jensen-Waud wrote: > > > Hi all, > > >=20 > > > My main zfs storage pool (named ``storage'') has recently started > > > displaying a very odd error: [...] > > > errors: Permanent errors have been detected in the following files: > > > storage:<0x0> > >=20 > > I'm not sure what causes ZFS to lose the filename like this. I'll let > > someone else comment. I want to say you have a corrupt file in a > > snapshot, but don't hold me to that. > >=20 > > It looks like you are running ZFS with pools consisting of a single > > disk. In cases like this if ZFS detects that a file has been corrupted > > ZFS is unable to do anything to fix it. Run with the option "copies=3D2" > > to have two copies of every file if you want ZFS to be able to fix > > broken files. Of course, this doubles the amount of space you will > > use, so you have to think about how important your data is to you. >=20 > Thank you for the tip. I didn't know about copies=3D2, so I will > definitely consider that option.=20 >=20 > I am running ZFS on a single disk -- a 1 TB USB drive -- attached to my > "server" at home. It is not exactly an enterprise server, but it fits > well for my home purposes, namely file backup from my different > computers. On a nightly basis I then copy and compress the data sets > from storage to another USB drive to have a second copy. In this > instance, the nightly backup script (zfs send/recv based) hadn't run > properly so I had no backup to recover from.=20 >=20 > Given that my machine only has 3 GB RAM, I was wondering if the issue > might be memory related and if I am better off converting the volume > back to UFS. I am keen to stay on ZFS to benefit from snapshots, > compression, security etc. Any thoughts? I doubt that the issue is memory related. BTW, I use single-disk pools for backups as well and one of my systems only has 2 GB RAM. My impression is that ZFS's "permanent error" detection is flawed and may also count (some) temporary errors as permanent. If the "permanent errors" don't survive scrubbing, I wouldn't worry about them, especially if no corrupt files are mentioned. > > You've got something going on here. Did you GPT partition the disk? The > > zpool status you posted says you built your pools on the entire disk > > and not inside a partition. But GEOM is saying the disk has been > > partitioned. GPT stores data at both the beginning and end of the > > disk. ZFS may have trashed the beginning of the disk but not gotten to > > the end yet. >=20 > This disk is not the ``storage'' zpool -- it is my ``backup'' pool, > which is on a different drive:=20 >=20 > NAME SIZE ALLOC FREE CAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT > backup 464G 235G 229G 50% 1.00x ONLINE - > storage 928G 841G 87.1G 90% 1.00x ONLINE - >=20 > Running 'gpt recover /dev/da1' fixes the error above but after a reboot > it reappears. Would it be better to completely wipe the disk and > reinitialise it with zfs?=20 As you mentioned being keen on security above, I think it would make sense to wipe the disk to add geli encryption to the mix [0], but I doubt that the gpt complaints are related to the "problem". Fabian [0] I use zogftw for this: http://www.fabiankeil.de/gehacktes/zogftw/ --Sig_/fv0n5LFkt5WMnWlpfL5xSla Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlOenzMACgkQBYqIVf93VJ14AwCgl4C8314mGJE8BVfOlNeGo894 adgAoIUE/+DHFSJau7R1h4A3DY67IWgw =15fk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/fv0n5LFkt5WMnWlpfL5xSla--