Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 6th Nov 2009 23:42 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Thread beginning with comment 393402
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Contradictory post...
by c0t0d0s0 on Sat 7th Nov 2009 18:02
in reply to "RE[3]: Contradictory post..."
RE[5]: Contradictory post...
by Dryhte on Sat 7th Nov 2009 18:17
in reply to "RE[4]: Contradictory post..."
The PSARC mentioned in the linked text is the method to get around such problems, as it rolls back to a consistent state by simply importing the pool at another transaction group number ...
OK, but my point is that the psarc (whatever that may be) _is_ actually what the original poster was asking for, i.e. a mechanism to allow unimportable pools to be imported.
despite the fact that he uses a term which most of you don't agree with, you implicitly agree with his original point when you say that this psarc allows you to do just that. the OP probably just didn't know about it.
RE[4]: Contradictory post...
by c0t0d0s0 on Sat 7th Nov 2009 18:03
in reply to "RE[3]: Contradictory post..."







Member since:
2008-02-05
BTW: When you are using disks directly with SATA or SAS, you won't see such problems. Those disks are reasonably biggest-mistakes free. The problems start, when you have some cheap SATA/PATA to Firewire or USB converters.
ah, but since nobody tells us how to recognize 'those' disks, you can say NO as often as you want without the slightest effect. So unless someone comes up with a HCL or a sort of product matrix which tells you how to recognize 'bad' disks, there will be a need for a way to restore broken zfs filesystems to a usable state.