Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 18 Sep 2012 16:25:33 +0300
From:      Volodymyr Kostyrko <>
To:        Gary Palmer <>
Subject:   Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: ZFS: Corrupted pool metadata after adding vdev to a pool - no opportunity to rescue data from healthy vdevs? Remove a vdev? Rewrite metadata?
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <000001cd9239$ed734c80$c859e580$> <> <000a01cd9274$0aa0bba0$1fe232e0$> <> <000001cd9377$e9e9b010$bdbd1030$> <> <000001cd94f1$a4157030$ec405090$> <> <> <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
18.09.2012 16:14, Gary Palmer wrote:
>> Please understand me correctly, this is only my point of view on the
>> problem as I never saw any tests that show difference between correct
>> alignment of _partitions_ and alignment on _records_ on ZFS. This area
>> is not thoroughly covered with test data.
> I seem to recall that people made 4 kilobyte aligned partitions on
> advanced format drives without doing the gnop trick and still
> suffered worse performance than when they did the gnop trick to make
> ashift=12.  Check the list archives.
> If you believe there is insufficient testing here and are saying that
> conventional wisdom regarding this is wrong, it is resonable to request
> that you prove your position.

I have one of the first 4k drives yet it's not yet available for 
testing. I'm planning to rerun tests on it when it will be available.

Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>