FWIW … My default position would be "Please don't integrate without mirror/RAID-Z support - all ZFS features should work together.” However, in this case I would make an exception. I have a friend who once attempted to add a log device to a large production pool, but omitted the prefix “log” - i.e. I^Hhe managed, instead, to add a non-redundant top-level vdev to the pool. I hear others may have done this. It’s a mistake such people only make once, or perhaps twice (so I’m told). I just think it would be nice if ZFS was more gracious and forgiving of such schoolboy errors.
Phil > On 2 Mar 2016, at 17:31, Matthew Ahrens <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Erik Sørnes <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi! > > Are there any plans on implementing functionality to remove an entire vdev > from a pool ? > > One could write zpool remove <zpoolname> vdev <vdev-name>, and it would move > the data on <vdev-name> to other vdevs in the pool and then remove the vdev > <vdev-name> entirely. > This is very usefull for many use cases. I've googled a lot, and haven't > found any information on this, apart from a very old one from SUN. > > Yes, we (Delphix) have implemented this and it is used in production. It is > not yet upstreamed. For more info, see our talk at the 2014 OpenZFS > Developer Summit: > > slides: > http://open-zfs.org/w/images/b/b4/Device_Removal-Alex_Reece_%26_Matt_Ahrens.pdf > > <http://open-zfs.org/w/images/b/b4/Device_Removal-Alex_Reece_%26_Matt_Ahrens.pdf> > video: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs6MsJ9kKKE&list=PLaUVvul17xSdOhJ-wDugoCAIPJZHloVoq&index=12 > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs6MsJ9kKKE&list=PLaUVvul17xSdOhJ-wDugoCAIPJZHloVoq&index=12> > > Here is the first commit for Device Removal from the Delphix repo (there are > several follow on bug fixes and additional features): > https://github.com/delphix/delphix-os/commit/db775effdda128d8e14216abde06281513b03c37 > > <https://github.com/delphix/delphix-os/commit/db775effdda128d8e14216abde06281513b03c37> > > We haven't yet upstreamed this because it only supports removing > non-redundant top-level vdevs (i.e. you can't remove a mirror or RAID-Z > vdev). Additional work is needed to make sure that we don't lose any good > copies of the data, and to ensure proper raid-z allocation alignment. We > would welcome anyone who's interested in implementing these. > > We'd also appreciate opinions of "Please upstream even without mirror/RAID-Z > support" or "Please don't integrate without mirror/RAID-Z support - all ZFS > features should work together." > > --matt > > > kind regards > > Erik Sørnes, IT-support, Nilu > P Please consider the environment before printing this email and attachments > > > http://www.listbox.com <http://www.listbox.com/> > > openzfs-developer | Archives > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/274414/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/274414/28015347-288b957d> | > Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com/> ------------------------------------------- openzfs-developer Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/274414/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/274414/28015062-cce53afa Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=28015062&id_secret=28015062-f966d51c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
