<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Zpool on sigtar.com</title>
		<link>https://sigtar.com/tags/zpool/</link>
		<description>Recent content in Zpool on sigtar.com</description>
		<generator>Hugo</generator>
		<language>en-nz</language>
		
		
		
		
			<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +1200</lastBuildDate>
		
			<atom:link href="https://sigtar.com/tags/zpool/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
			<item>
				<title>email alerts on zpool failure</title>
				<link>https://sigtar.com/2011/06/02/1360/</link>
				<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +1200</pubDate>
				<guid>https://sigtar.com/2011/06/02/1360/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;simple but functional script to check if your zpools are healthy and send email if they are not&amp;hellip;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;http://blog.qcnetwork.com/2011/03/monitoring-zpool-with-email-alert.html&#34;&gt;http://blog.qcnetwork.com/2011/03/monitoring-zpool-with-email-alert.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>zfs : accidentally adding cache drive to raidz zpool</title>
				<link>https://sigtar.com/2011/05/04/zfs-accidentally-adding-cache-drive-to-raidz-zpool/</link>
				<pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 00:00:00 +1200</pubDate>
				<guid>https://sigtar.com/2011/05/04/zfs-accidentally-adding-cache-drive-to-raidz-zpool/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=23127&#34;&gt;http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=23127&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately if you have accidentally added a single drive into your raidz pool at the top-level there is no way to just remove the non redundant disk. Your pool is now &lt;strong&gt;dependant&lt;/strong&gt; on this disk.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;If you want your pool to be just raidz vdevs, then you will need to backup your data, destroy your pool, create a new pool, and restore your data.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There is no current way to remove a top-level vdev from a pool.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Opensolaris - ZFS recovery after kernel panic</title>
				<link>https://sigtar.com/2009/10/19/opensolaris-zfs-recovery-after-kernel-panic/</link>
				<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +1300</pubDate>
				<guid>https://sigtar.com/2009/10/19/opensolaris-zfs-recovery-after-kernel-panic/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;Recently i hit what i thought was a huge disaster with my ZFS array. Essentially i was unable to import my zpool without causing the kernel to panic and reboot. Still unsure of the exact reason, but it didn&amp;rsquo;t seem to be due to a hardware fault. (zpool import showed all disks as ONLINE)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When i tried to import with &lt;strong&gt;zpool import -f tank&lt;/strong&gt; the machine would lockup and reboot (panic).&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>zfs - playing with various configs</title>
				<link>https://sigtar.com/2009/07/18/zfs-playing-with-various-configs/</link>
				<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +1200</pubDate>
				<guid>https://sigtar.com/2009/07/18/zfs-playing-with-various-configs/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;If you dont have the disks available to build up a zpool and have a play with zfs you can actually just use files created with the mkfile command&amp;hellip; The commands are exactly the same.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;mkfile 64m disk1&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;mkfile 64m disk2&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;mkfile 64m disk3&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;mkfile 10m disk4&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;mkfile 100m disk5&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;mkfile 100m disk6&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Now you can create a zpool using the above files&amp;hellip; (i&amp;rsquo;m using raidz for this setup)&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;zpool create test raidz /fullpath/disk1 /fullpath/disk2 /fullpath/disk3&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>zfs - checking your zpool throughput</title>
				<link>https://sigtar.com/2009/02/18/zfs-checking-your-zpool-throughput/</link>
				<pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +1300</pubDate>
				<guid>https://sigtar.com/2009/02/18/zfs-checking-your-zpool-throughput/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;This is quite a good diagnostic for checking your disk throughput. Try copying data to and from your zpool while your running this command on the host&amp;hellip;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;zpool iostat -v unprotected 2&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;pre tabindex=&#34;0&#34;&gt;&lt;code&gt;capacity     operations    bandwidth&#xA;pool         used  avail   read  write   read  write&#xA;----------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----&#xA;unprotected  1.39T   668G     18      7  1.35M   161K&#xA;c7d0       696G   403M      1      2  55.1K  21.3K&#xA;c9d0       584G   112G      8      2   631K  69.3K&#xA;c7d1       141G   555G      8      2   697K  70.0K&#xA;----------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----&#xA;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&lt;p&gt;The above command will keep displaying the above output every 2 seconds (average during that time). I&amp;rsquo;ve used it a few times to ensure that all disks are being used (in write operations) where needed. Of course read op&amp;rsquo;s may not be typically across all disks as it will depend where the data is&amp;hellip;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>ZFS basics</title>
				<link>https://sigtar.com/2009/01/30/zfs-basics/</link>
				<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +1300</pubDate>
				<guid>https://sigtar.com/2009/01/30/zfs-basics/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;rsquo;ve had a play with WHS but eventually got annoyed with its lack of performance. Yes i know its not built for performance and typically is used just as a backup / simple store with duplication as redundancy, just i couldn&amp;rsquo;t stand the speed of the thing. If you were ever unlucky enough (even post power pack 1) to do a copy during the &amp;ldquo;data moving&amp;rdquo; the performance was even worse. On a positive note nothing beats it if you have a heap of non-similar sized disks that you want to put together (with redundancy) as a single shared storage pool.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
