Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:59:05 -0500 From: "James R. Van Artsdalen" <james-freebsd-fs2@jrv.org> To: Kurt Touet <ktouet@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ZFS - Unable to offline drive in raidz1 based pool Message-ID: <4AB8D829.4060301@jrv.org> In-Reply-To: <2a5e326f0909211044k349d6bc1lb9bd9094e7216e41@mail.gmail.com> References: <2a5e326f0909201500w1513aeb5ra644f1c748e22f34@mail.gmail.com> <4AB757E4.5060501@goflexitllc.com> <2a5e326f0909211021o431ef53bh3077589efb0bed6c@mail.gmail.com> <2a5e326f0909211044k349d6bc1lb9bd9094e7216e41@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kurt Touet wrote: > I wonder then, with the storage array reporting itself as healthy, how > did it know that one drive had desynced data, and why wouldn't that > have shown up as an error like DEGRADED? The uberblock on each ZFS disk contains a txtag, in effect a revision number. When a pool is imported and one drive's txtag is older than the others then that drive needs resilvering.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4AB8D829.4060301>