Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

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

$ 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' ...


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

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

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

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: ...


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 ...


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

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 ...


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 ...


4

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

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

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 ...


3

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

Please try zpool list. This will show if the pool is even available to the system. Try to import. Maybe a zpool import -f nestpool Perhaps try to remove the unavailable log devices via: zpool remove nestpool mirror-1 From now on, use whole devices for L2ARC and ZIL... Edit: Your easiest fix is to temporarily create the symbolic links you need in ...


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

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 ...


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

I'd stick with mainstream filesystems like XFS (as promoted by Red Hat) and rely on ZFS for advanced filesystem needs. This is mainly due to: Mindshare: ZFS knowledge is held in the Linux, FreeBSD and Solaris/OpenIndiana communities. Maturity: The ZFS codebase is proven and has been around for awhile. Best-practices have evolved and I can't recall seeing ...


2

In the 1st case, maybe some files of user1 can't be discovered by find(1) because they're hidden by some fs being mounted on top of them? In the 2nd case, maybe something is mounted somewhere under the zfs1 mountpoint and you include that in the space calculation? Incidentally, zfs get -H -o value mountpoint zpool/zfs1 will print just the mountpoint, so ...


1

I believe you are misunderstanding the ZIL purpose. You describe it as a write cache which it is not. No activity on the ZIL might just be a normal behavior depending on what is running on your machine. Nothing is ever anything read from the ZIL, this is a write only device outside possibly at mount time after a crash. There are only writes to it if ...


1

Ok, so this is definitely due to my inexperience with ZFS. Unlike a traditional file system where you can reference a particular partition from any context, ZFS seems to retain the exact information used to reference the data location no matter where it is loaded from. For example, I created the zpool and referenced the device by from OSX by "/dev/disk0s6" ...


1

I've given an elaborate answer already here: Is btrfs production ready? In short: Btrfs is nothing you already want on a production file server. Here are the reasons why: it becomes unpredictable if space is running out, though most core features are considered stable, others aren't yet and it is still a fast moving target. Being a fast moving target means ...


1

Typically for folks using ZoL that want encryption, encryptfs isn't desireable because you lose both performance and fuctionality. ZFS works best when it is the filesystem, not when you layer others on top of it (again, you can, but it's suboptimal). This is what encryptfs does (layers an encrypted filesystem on top of ZFS), and exactly why you see so much ...


1

The official bug page has this fix for Ubuntu and Debian users: # apt-get update # apt-get dist-upgrade # reboot


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 ...


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

http://fibrevillage.com/storage/169-zfs-arc-on-linux-how-to-set-and-monitor-on-linux this article is very good starting version ZoL 0.6.2 you can set the c_max at runtime, however the ARC size will not be released automatically. to force the RAM to be released it is needed to export the zpool.


1

Start with disabling atime if not already done. You might also investigate setting primarycache=metadata impact.



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