Replies: 3 comments 1 reply
-
Any ideas on this? @scineram I noticed the thumbs down. I'm curious why. Thanks, Steve |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hmm... I'm not sure how this was possible:
When I do the same thing with zfs-2.1.15, I get:
I can't even force it:
My only thoughts:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
This has been resolved using "detach" a couple of times. I tried a number of things and finally tried:
This got rid of the "old" entry in the "replacing-9" section so that there then were just Slot_30 and Slot_46 in it and Slot_30 was also still listed in raidz2-3. I then tried it again and it got rid of the "replacing-9" section all together and raidz2-2 was "ONLINE" with all 10 drives "ONLINE" and Slot_30 now listed just once as OFFLINE in raidz2-3. Finally, I replaced Slot_30 with itself with:
and it is resilvering. All looks to be back where it should be. Steve |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
On a CentOS 7 (I know... we are migrating...) system with zfs-2.0.7-1 I have a pool made up of a number of 10-drive raidz2s. It is at a remote location and I noticed that raidz2-2 had two bad drives. The system didn't have any spare drives available and the local technician was not going to be available for a few days so I decided to take one drive offline from one raidz2 group and use that to replace a drive in the one that had two bad drives. What happened though, was that the drive ended up being listed in both raidz2s. The disk is called "Slot_30". Once I had more redundancy, I tried to fix it by offlining Slot_30 and replacing it with another drive: Slot_46. That's where it stands but the layout is even more strange, with a "replacing-9" section that has three devices, two of which are OFFLINE. resilvering has completed and I scrubbed and rebooted, hoping that this would clear things up. It hasn't.
The original bad drive that I think is now labeled as "old" was Slot_29. Here is what I see in these groups:
The "**" marks are an attempt to highlight Slot_30 in both groups but it doesn't seem to work in a "code" section.
This is what I see in "zpool history"
I obviously did something wrong. Right now, I'd like to try to get it back to where it should be but I'd also like to figure out what I did wrong so it doesn't happen again.
If anyone has any ideas, please let me know.
Thanks,
Steve
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions