Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 19:15:56 +0500 From: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@mail.turbofuzz.com> To: Gena Guchin <ggulchin@icloud.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS unable to import pool Message-ID: <888649C4-CC66-48A6-9901-BEA93D1BBFA3@mail.turbofuzz.com> In-Reply-To: <72E79259-3DB1-48B7-8E5E-19CC2145A464@icloud.com> References: <B493BD80-CDC2-4BA6-AC14-AE16B373A051@icloud.com> <20140423064203.GD2830@sludge.elizium.za.net> <B1024D84-EBBE-4A9B-82C4-5C19B5A66B60@icloud.com> <20140423080056.GE2830@sludge.elizium.za.net> <20140423091852.GH2830@sludge.elizium.za.net> <20140423100126.GJ2830@sludge.elizium.za.net> <5357937D.4080302@gmail.com> <72E79259-3DB1-48B7-8E5E-19CC2145A464@icloud.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
If you added a single disk to a pool, you have no choice but to destroy = the pool and start over. The single disk will essentially degrade the = performance of the whole pool, because it represents a unique = (100Mb/sec, typical) transaction group now, and if you lose that one = disk you will also lose the entire pool since it has no redundancy. This is a common mistake people make with ZFS, and it sucks, but block = pointer rewrite was never implemented so that=92s just the way it is, = too. That=92s another reason for FreeBSD-based front-ends to ZFS like = FreeNAS. The GUI adds some seat-belts to prevent users from trivially = doing things like that. On the command line, all bets are off. - Jordan On Apr 23, 2014, at 7:09 PM, Gena Guchin <ggulchin@icloud.com> wrote: > Looking though the history, i DID add that disk ada7 (!) to the pool, = but I added it as a separate disk. I wanted to re-add the disk to the = storage pool, but it added as a new disk=85 > this does help a lille.. >=20 >=20 > anything I can do now?=20 > can I remove that vdev?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?888649C4-CC66-48A6-9901-BEA93D1BBFA3>