From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 19 17:08:08 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFDC61065673 for ; Thu, 19 May 2011 17:08:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pawel@dawidek.net) Received: from mail.garage.freebsd.pl (60.wheelsystems.com [83.12.187.60]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645158FC1B for ; Thu, 19 May 2011 17:08:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.garage.freebsd.pl (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 93FB145C9F; Thu, 19 May 2011 19:08:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (89-73-195-149.dynamic.chello.pl [89.73.195.149]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.garage.freebsd.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5363145683; Thu, 19 May 2011 19:08:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 19:07:40 +0200 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek To: Per von Zweigbergk Message-ID: <20110519170740.GA2100@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <85EC77D3-116E-43B0-BFF1-AE1BD71B5CE9@itassistans.se> <4DD37C69.5020005@digsys.bg> <4DD3855E.8020802@itassistans.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="yrj/dFKFPuw6o+aM" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4DD3855E.8020802@itassistans.se> X-OS: FreeBSD 9.0-CURRENT amd64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on mail.garage.freebsd.pl X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=4.5 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL autolearn=no version=3.0.4 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HAST + ZFS self healing? Hot spares? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 17:08:08 -0000 --yrj/dFKFPuw6o+aM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:37:50AM +0200, Per von Zweigbergk wrote: [...] > This would mean that you'd be running a stack looking like: > - ZFS on top of: > - One HAST resource on top of: > - Two ZVOLs, each on top of: > - ZFS on top of: > - Local storage (mirrored by zfs) Having recursive ZFS pools is bad idea and most likely it was cause deadocks. You also pay all the costs with checksumming, ARC cache, etc. twice. Very bad idea. > >Some reported they used HAST for the SLOG as well. I do not know > >if using HAST for the L2ARC makes any sense. On failure you will > >import the pool on the slave node and this will wipe the L2ARC > >anyway. > Yes, running HAST on L2ARC doesn't make much sense, I'd have to run > HAST on the ZIL though if I opted for Variant 1 (which I don't think > I will). Using HAST for L2ARC devices might make no sense, but they are part of the pool. So if you import the pool on another machine L2ARC device will be failed. You may experiment with importing the pool, removing current L2ARC devices and attaching machine-local L2ARC devices. This way you avoid HAST for L2ARC, but not sure how reliable can that be. --=20 Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheelsystems.com FreeBSD committer http://www.FreeBSD.org Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! http://yomoli.com --yrj/dFKFPuw6o+aM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk3VTlwACgkQForvXbEpPzTwtQCg83O//7AdOSAZDbscZT+WTliT YK0An0DKUe1/1hqtY2ZyjqqzJ5kO6ftD =bJn8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --yrj/dFKFPuw6o+aM--