Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 14 Jun 2018 16:28:14 +0200
From:      Julien Cigar <>
To:        Frank Leonhardt <>
Subject:   Re: upgrade of an iSCSI zpool mirror
Message-ID:  <20180614142813.GB62135@mordor.lan>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <20180611130407.GT48472@mordor.lan> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 02:53:25PM +0100, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
> On 2018-06-11 14:04, Julien Cigar wrote:
> > Hello,
> >=20
> > We have a "low-cost" active/passive HA ZFS based filer (with
> > NFS4/SMB/... on top) which consist of two tiny HP Proliant DL20
> > with 2 x 2 To disks in each. <snip>
> >=20
> > It works well, but those are still running FreeBSD 10.3 and I'd like to
> > upgrade to 11.x. During the upgrade process the pool should be=20
> > read-only
> > available. I planned to do something like:
> > Has anyone ever done something similar and/or does it sound good to=20
> > you?
> I've tried various combinations, but not that one I'm afraid. I'm not a=
> fan of iSCSI except as a work-around, but FWIW I can't spot anything=20
> wrong with your plan, but I'm not sure where NFS fits in.
> You will probably want to upgrade the zpools at some point (optional).

After some exchanges with people smarter than me in this area I got the
confirmation that "There's no issue with the upgrade path." :)

> I've yet to get a fully redundant ZFS implementation up and running, as=
> other solutions have been more useful - such as sending incremental=20
> datasets to a backup at a different location. I've also run it on top of=
> HAST, but it scared me.

Yes, in fact all of this started after a question I started on
freebsd-fs@ some years ago:

To my suprise I had a lot of answers and it was an interresting
discussion, you may want to check the whole thread if interested.

> One day I plan to look at heartbeat/pacemaker (available in ports/net),=
> which is supposed to be the thing for it.

Yep, I had an interresting exchange on IRC (#freebsd freenode) about
it some days ago. It would be better than using a CARP only based
solution to failover (which is quite easy to split brain).

> In your situation, I think I'd proceed as follows:
> Set up a spare machine (e.g. desktop).
> Do a zfs send <zoot-dataset> to it.
> Turn off samba/nfs
> Do a zfs send <zoot-dataset> of any last minute changes.
> Make the spare machine live, but read-only.

As a security measure I have already a third "replication machine"=20
which zrep from the master, I could make the pool read-only from it

> They relax and do whatever I wanted to reconfigure the rack servers.
> Just a thought!

Thanks :)

> _______________________________________________
> mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.o=

Julien Cigar
Belgian Biodiversity Platform (
PGP fingerprint: EEF9 F697 4B68 D275 7B11  6A25 B2BB 3710 A204 23C0
No trees were killed in the creation of this message.
However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"




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