Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

11

To change the properties (be it compresson, deduplication or checksumming) of already written data, the zfs approach is to run the data through a zfs send | zfs receive sequence. Obviously, you do not need to offline the system for that, but you will need enough resources in your zpool / on the system to hold two dedup'ed copies of the data set in question ...


9

Much has happened since I asked this question in October 2010. As of September 2013, a new collaboration known as OpenZFS will serve as a central site for several ZFS projects. The new site is http://open-zfs.org/ (with a dash) Today at LinuxCon North America, Brian Behlendorf and Matthew Ahrens are announcing that members from the illumos, zfsonlinux.org, ...


9

This is a udev issue that seems to be specific to Debian and Ubuntu variants. Most of my ZFS on Linux work is with CentOS/RHEL. Similar threads on the ZFS discussion list have mentioned this. See: scsi and ata entries for same hard drive under /dev/disk/by-id and ZFS on Linux/Ubuntu: Help importing a zpool after Ubuntu upgrade from 13.04 to 13.10, device ...


5

I hate to say this, but do you know that you were basically adding unraided disks to your pool? The command you provided basically says, "Add another disk to pool nas and stripe it with the existing disks." Is that what you meant to do? The pool is done at this point, especially if anything was written to the bad disk. If this were a pair of mirrors, the ...


5

This came up in discussion on the ZFS mailing list. The kernel ABI changed between 0.6.2 and 0.6.3 in such a way that 0.6.3 user-land tools can't interact with 0.6.2 kernel modules, which is the configuration after upgrading to 0.6.3. According to numerous messages on this list, the right approach is simply to reboot. This is covered in the ZFS ...


5

That looks like...a bug. In fact, it is a bug. The ZFS userland is updated, but the kernel modules aren't being updated by DKMS. This assertion is caused by the version mismatch. You can work around it by a process given in a comment to the bug, by removing the old kernel modules and then reinstalling everything. $ find /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/extra -name ...


5

First off, it's worth stating that ZFS is not a supported filesystem for MongoDB on Linux - the recommended filesystems are ext4 or XFS. Because ZFS is not even checked for on Linux (see SERVER-13223 for example) it will not use sparse files, instead attempting to pre-allocate (fill with zeroes), and that will mean horrendous performance on a COW ...


5

Oracle officially killed OpenSolaris, so the website will not be updated anymore. FreeBSD is working with the IllumOS project to advance ZFS at this point (their website is still a bit scant on details). I don't know if these changes are derived from actual Solaris 11 development or not, nor if the changes will be merged into the official project (a likely ...


4

$ sudo find /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/updates -name "splat.ko" -or -name "zcommon.ko" -or -name "zpios.ko" -or -name "spl.ko" -or -name "zavl.ko" -or -name "zfs.ko" -or -name "znvpair.ko" -or -name "zunicode.ko" | xargs rm -f $ sudo apt-get install --reinstall ubuntu-zfs $ sudo apt-get install --reinstall $(dpkg-query --show --showformat='${binary:Package}\n' ...


4

Instead of mounting zpool2 as /var/db, mount it as /zpool2 or /db or whatever makes sense for you. Then make /var/db a symlink to /db.


4

Everything is operating normally. You're running into TB vs TiB confusion. TL;DR 12TB raw == 10.8TiB raw (which is what is listed by zpool list) 7.5TB usable == 6.8TiB usable (which is what is listed by zfs list) You have: 3×3TB drives 2×1.5TB drives yielding a total of 12TB of raw storage. ○ → units 12TB TiB * 10.913936 / 0.091625969 ...


3

IMHO the parameters in /sys/module/zfs/parameters can only be set to 0 / 1 - disabled / enabled. I am in the same boat wanting to limit zfs' memory usage and it seems one has to create a /etc/modprobe.d/zfs.conf file and enter the parameter and the desired value in there. E.g. options zfs zfs_arc_max=34359738368 source: ...


3

Ubuntu seems to have some annoying udev issues that we don't see on the Red Hat/CentOS side. I'd recommend using the WWN-based device names if you can, as they seem less susceptible to this. Have you seen: Why did rebooting cause one side of my ZFS mirror to become UNAVAIL?


3

No, ZFS on Linux doesn't support native encryption. Another option is encryptfs, but at this juncture, you're not going to find a native solution.


3

The zfs mailing list remains on opensolaris.org, and Oracle has not established a new public website for their ongoing ZFS development project. Update (2013): The opensolaris.org website has now been shut down, and Oracle’s ZFS mailing list has moved to the new Solaris-ZFS.java.net website.


3

For versions up to 28, you can still browse the repository in OpenSolaris web site: http://src.opensolaris.org/source/history/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/sys/fs/zfs.h http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/sys/fs/zfs.h#348 Update: This repository has moved to: ...


3

Your choice would likely have twoish aspects: data integrity and security performance When using different LUNs with ZFS, it will make implicit assumptions that the LUNs are separate physical devices, distributing reads and writes among them to optimize performance. You do not have to add more redundancy to the setup (i.e. you could just add your LUNs as ...


3

Run a regular script (cron) that checks zpool status -x output. Longer-term, the ZFS on Linux project is working towards this in the form of an event daemon. The Solaris-derived systems had access to the Fault Management Architecture. As far as automated reports, even commercial solutions like NexentaStor use scheduled checks. There's nothing wrong with ...


3

Try zfswatcher, it works really well for me.


3

This may sound a bit crazy, but I support another application that benefits from ZFS volume management attributes, but does not perform well on the native ZFS filesystem. My solution?!? XFS on top of ZFS zvols. Why?!? Because XFS performs well and eliminates the application-specific issues I was facing with native ZFS. ZFS zvols allow me to ...


3

Scrub your pool again (if you haven't already): zpool scrub zstorage That error is telling you that inode <0x9f115> is corrupt (deleting the file broke the filename->inode mapping, so it's just reporting the inode now). Either something still has the file open or the metadata just needs to be cleaned up (which a scrub should do). To clear the error if ...


3

I'll answer. You may be overthinking... Snapshots aren't backups. So if you're trying to protect against a compromise, you should go the extra step and back up to another device. Now, snapshots can be extremely helpful in producing a clean consistent copy of your data to ship or back up to another device. As far as ZFS on Linux, It's very easy to integrate ...


2

A 2TB limit is not that uncommon, so you should stop thinking that you're being penalized more than most other setups in the world.. That being said - the most common way of doing this is to just stripe it (RAID 0) at the VM level. If you make sure that the SAN admin puts the LUNs on different controllers (if it's a active/active setup) you'll actually ...


2

I believe your disk is busy doing reads because of the zfs_arc_max=2147483648 setting. Here you are explicitly limiting the ARC to 2Gb, even though you have 16-32Gb. ZFS is extremely memory-hungry and zealous when it comes to the ARC. If you have non-ZFS replicas identical to ZFS replicas (HW RAID1 underneath), doing some maths yields 5s spike @ (200Mb/s ...


2

If you ever end up on this page and your running Debian, you only have to do the following to fix the issue: # apt-get update # apt-get dist-upgrade # reboot The issue occurred because a simple update doesn't not replace old library files with the newer ones. This is why a dist-upgrade is needed. From the apt-get manpage: dist-upgrade in addition to ...


2

My suggestion to you would be to get a duplicate set of disks and ghost the raw contents over to the other set of disks for starters. Once you get the data restored if possible you then have the disks to make a mirror or other backup on. It will allow you much more leeway in trying to recover your pool that way. you are also leaving out important ...


2

You can set the file system mountpoint properties to legacy and use /etc/fstab to define them. That way, you'll be able to define the order in which they will be mounted. Edit: I just noticed you already considered the legacy approach. It might be the only one though.


2

You should check that the auto expand property is set for your zpool. $ zpool get autoexpand zstorage If the property is set to off, you should set it to on to have your pool automatically expand to fill the available space. $ zpool set autoexpand=off zstorage I'll include the relevant portion of the man page for clarity. autoexpand=on | off ...


1

I ran into almost this exact problem trying to upgrade to the 3.13 series kernels on Debian Wheezy. You are right in your comment; it is a udev bug. I never did get it sorted unfortunately but it's worth exploring other kernels, especially the 3.11 series, for compatibility with the 0.6.2 version of ZOL. Just use the older kernel until 0.6.3 comes out.


1

After lots and lots more Googling on this specific error message I was getting: root@kyou:/home/matt# zpool import -f storage cannot import 'storage': one or more devices are already in use (Included here for posterity and search indexes) I found this: https://groups.google.com/a/zfsonlinux.org/forum/#!topic/zfs-discuss/VVEwd1VFDmc It was using the ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible