From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Wed Jul 19 10:21:15 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCC61C78ABF for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:21:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 482254ac@razorfever.net) Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com (ironport2-out.teksavvy.com [206.248.154.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.teksavvy.com", Issuer "DigiCert High Assurance CA-3" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9442C74B3B for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:21:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 482254ac@razorfever.net) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DAGgAuMW9Z/0StpUVbGwEBAQMBAQEJAQEBgj2BHWeQD48/BoEGIiwBlVeCEYVHAoNaQhYBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIUYAQEBAQIBIwQRHigLCxgCAiYCAjkeEAMIAQGKHgUIrm6BbDqLBzKBC4IdgwaCUwuCboU2gkeCYQEEgjGHGA2IYY0BAQKfNBGHAZQYgUQmDSSBChwtN4gFJIkJAQEB X-IPAS-Result: A0DAGgAuMW9Z/0StpUVbGwEBAQMBAQEJAQEBgj2BHWeQD48/BoEGIiwBlVeCEYVHAoNaQhYBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIUYAQEBAQIBIwQRHigLCxgCAiYCAjkeEAMIAQGKHgUIrm6BbDqLBzKBC4IdgwaCUwuCboU2gkeCYQEEgjGHGA2IYY0BAQKfNBGHAZQYgUQmDSSBChwtN4gFJIkJAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,380,1496116800"; d="scan'208";a="320736947" Received: from 69-165-173-68.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO mail.razorfever.net) ([69.165.173.68]) by smtp.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 19 Jul 2017 06:21:07 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (mail.razorfever.net [192.168.0.4]) by mail.razorfever.net (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTP id v6JAL6up030562 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 06:21:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from 482254ac@razorfever.net) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.razorfever.net: Host mail.razorfever.net [192.168.0.4] claimed to be [127.0.0.1] Subject: Re: zfs send -R | zfs recv aborted To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <2dbcb271-be11-6ca0-fbf0-f21a21725875@razorfever.net> <64602a81-132a-2f8b-076b-3497acb569e3@fjl.co.uk> From: "Derek (freebsd lists)" <482254ac@razorfever.net> Message-ID: <03dbb8de-2d75-6719-1976-8fd02e82ab9d@razorfever.net> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 06:21:06 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <64602a81-132a-2f8b-076b-3497acb569e3@fjl.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-CA Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, FROM_STARTS_WITH_NUMS,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on mail.razorfever.net X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:21:15 -0000 On 17-07-18 05:19 PM, Frank Leonhardt wrote: > On 18/07/2017 11:02, Derek (freebsd lists) wrote: >> Thanks for the response. Sorry I wasn't clear - those options >> aren't available in 10.2 - and this is the upgrade path for >> this machine (i.e. migrate to a new one). >> >> Other thoughts still welcome. > > I'm not 100% sure that datasets that appear to be good on a > failed send will be safe; I presume you've checked! > > So your problem is that you need to free up broken dataset > snapshots on the receiver. I don't understand why this is a > problem - why not just "destroy" them? > And here, you've gotten to the heart of the matter. Perhaps the questions I mean to be asking are: - How can I tell which datasets/snapshots were received in-tact, and which are only partial transfers? (I *presume* some are in-tact, and they superficially appear to be so.) - Can this be done using only properties/metadata of the zfs dataset + pool? (like a receive completed flag) > You might want to consider a differential "send" (with a -I > (capital i) ) option, which will send the snapshot plus all the > missing intermediate ones. > I tried this route, and it just spun the CPU for a day - perhaps meaningful output was coming, just not then. > I've a dim idea that zxfer might be of some help here, but as you > say, the OpenZFS from 10.3 onwards has exactly the option you need. > That's a good point. I'll look there for some inspiration - and see how deep it goes. > Am I right in thinking these two machines are colocated? Why not > just export the pool on one and import on the other? (Lack of > drive bays being one obvious reason - just get a load of > USB->SATA cables and a hub). Just a thought. > The source machine is active in service. Thanks for that! Derek