zfs in production?

Bernd Walter ticso at cicely12.cicely.de
Tue Sep 25 03:12:16 PDT 2007

On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 10:56:22AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> writes:
> > we are thinking of using zfs on a production server, using gmirror for
> > booting and then following http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSOnRoot for the rest.
> >
> > but we would like to hear from folk using zfs in production for any
> > length of time, as we do not really have the resources to be pioneers.
> Works fine, but if using SATA, avoid Promise controllers.

It is worse:
  pool: data
 state: ONLINE
status: One or more devices has experienced an unrecoverable error.  An
        attempt was made to correct the error.  Applications are unaffected.
action: Determine if the device needs to be replaced, and clear the errors
        using 'zpool clear' or replace the device with 'zpool replace'.
   see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-9P
 scrub: none requested

        NAME        STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
        data        ONLINE       0     0     0
          raidz1    ONLINE       0     0     0
            ad4     ONLINE       0     0     5
            ad6     ONLINE       0     0     8
            ad8     ONLINE       0     0    11

These are WDC WD3200AAKS-00SBA0/12.01B01 connected to an SIL3114.
System is amd64 from 26th june on core2quad with ECC RAM.
My home system is using the same controller on i386/P3 and has no
checksum errors - it is running source from 12th july.
Considered that I'd seen lots of silent data corruptions with PATA
disks on alpha during the last years I'm not that shure if the problem
depends on a specific controller, but more on timing or such.
It is easy to blame the controller, especially since SIL isn't known
for quality, but in this case I believe it is our problem somehow.

B.Walter                http://www.bwct.de      http://www.fizon.de
bernd at bwct.de           info at bwct.de            support at fizon.de

More information about the freebsd-fs mailing list