Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 7 Apr 2019 16:36:40 +0100
From:      tech-lists <tech-lists@zyxst.net>
To:        freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   about zfs and ashift and changing ashift on existing zpool
Message-ID:  <20190407153639.GA41753@rpi3.zyxst.net>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--EVF5PPMfhYS0aIcm
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello,

I have this in sysctl.conf on a desktop machine (12-stable):

vfs.zfs.min_auto_ashift=3D12

this has not always been there. I guess the zpool pre-dates it. I only
noticed it because have recently had to replace a disk in its zfs array
when I saw this:

% zpool status
pool: storage
state: ONLINE
status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered.  The pool
will continue to function, possibly in a degraded state.

action: Wait for the resilver to complete.
  scan: resilver in progress since Sun Apr  7 03:09:42 2019
        3.46T scanned at 79.5M/s, 2.73T issued at 62.8M/s, 3.46T total
        931G resilvered, 78.94% done, 0 days 03:22:41 to go

config:

NAME             STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
storage          ONLINE       0     0     0
  raidz1-0       ONLINE       0     0     0
    replacing-0  ONLINE       0     0 1.65K
      ada2       ONLINE       0     0     0
      ada1       ONLINE       0     0     0  block size: 512B configured, 4=
096B native
    ada3         ONLINE       0     0     0
    ada4         ONLINE       0     0     0

What I'd like to know is:

1. is the above situation harmful to data
2. given that vfs.zfs.min_auto_ashift=3D12, why does it still say 512B
   configured for ada1 which is the new disk, or..
3. does "configured" pertain to the pool, the disk, or both
4. what would be involved in making them all 4096B
5. does a 512B disk wear out faster than 4096B (all other things being
   equal)

Given that the machine and disks were new in 2016, I can't understand why z=
fs
didn't default to 4096B on installation

thanks,
--=20
J.

--EVF5PPMfhYS0aIcm
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=PrOZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--EVF5PPMfhYS0aIcm--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20190407153639.GA41753>