From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 27 13:37:39 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3E1D106566B for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:37:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from psteele@maxiscale.com) Received: from exprod7og123.obsmtp.com (exprod7og123.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F18A8FC1D for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:37:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from psteele@maxiscale.com) Received: from source ([209.85.146.180]) by exprod7ob123.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSfW1Ih8IjPszOEoerNAVklEg3iO/gRhf@postini.com; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 06:37:39 PDT Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j5so910841wah.2 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 06:37:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.133.1 with SMTP id g1mr2543801wad.21.1240839458664; Mon, 27 Apr 2009 06:37:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([76.231.178.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m29sm14702289poh.25.2009.04.27.06.37.37 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 27 Apr 2009 06:37:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 06:37:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Peter Steele To: Wojciech Puchar Message-ID: <2732371.101240839456548.JavaMail.HALO$@halo> In-Reply-To: <18933005.81240838051541.JavaMail.HALO$@halo> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: #freebsd-questions Subject: Re: Unexpected gmirror behavior: Is this a bug? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:37:39 -0000 > i think it's a bug but only happens with such massive mirror. very few >people do more than 2-way mirrors that's probably it wasn't catched. > >please do report the bug - it's critical. In fact I just confirmed that if we reduce our mirror to just two members the problem does not occur. The returning member, even if it is the first drive, is always re-synced with the data from the other drive and no data is lost. And yes, it's definitely a critical bug. I'm filing a bug report now, but we may have to fix this in-house before we can release our product with this problem. There is too great a risk for customers to lose data. Peter