ZFS: Silent/hidden errors, nothing logged anywhere
serenity at exscape.org
Sat Jun 13 15:13:14 UTC 2009
On Jun 13, 2009, at 05:06 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 02:01:57PM -0700, Kip Macy wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Thomas
>> Backman<serenity at exscape.org> wrote:
>>> OK, so I filed a PR late May (kern/135050):
>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=135050 .
>>> I don't know if this is a "feature" or a bug, but it really should
>>> considered the latter. The data could be repaired in the
>>> background without
>>> the user ever knowing - until the disk dies completely. I'd prefer
>>> to have
>>> warning signs (i.e. checksum errors) so that I can buy a
>>> replacement drive
>>> *before* that.
>>> Not only does this mean that errors can go unnoticed, but also
>>> that it's
>>> impossible to figure out which disk is broken, if ZFS has
>>> repaired the broken data! THAT is REALLY bad!
>>> Is this something that we can expect to see changed before 8.0-
>> I'm fairly certain that we've discussed this already. Solaris uses
>> - I don't think that I'll get to a "real fix" any time soon. The time
>> that I do have will go to addressing stability problems (memory
>> over-allocation, NFS interaction, control directory mounts) all of
>> which cause panics. Maintaining them persistently in the label
>> make sense - when do you drop them? Would a simple log message
>> the number of checksum errors suffice?
> We do log such errors. Solaris uses FMA and for FreeBSD I use devd.
> can find the following entry in /etc/devd.conf:
> If you see nothing in your logs, there must be a bug with reporting
> problem somewhere or devd is not running (it should be enabled by
Awesome! After checking further I did indeed find a bunch of such
messages in messages.0.bz2.
One thing less to worry about, I guess. :)
More information about the freebsd-current