omniscence
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2010
- Messages
- 1,310
Yes, you won't see anything at the destination till the process is complete except the free space getting smaller.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
ZFS filesystem versions
- Thread starter TeeJayHoward
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2005
- Messages
- 13,322
Getting close!
Only ≈1TB left to go.
Code:
root@omnios:~# time zfs send backup/storage@testing | mbuffer | zfs receive pool/storage
in @ 162 MiB/s, out @ 162 MiB/s, 11.5 TiB total, buffer 100% fulllOnly ≈1TB left to go.
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2005
- Messages
- 13,322
Damned good thing I put both pools in one chassis... I just got the following error:
Losing network connectivity during the send isn't something I want to deal with!
Code:
Aug 22 03:10:01 omnios cron[2364]: [ID 574227 user.alert] Solaris_audit getaddrinfo(omnios) failed[node name or service name not known]: Error 0
Aug 22 03:10:01 omnios cron[2364]: [ID 574227 user.alert] Solaris_audit mapping omnios to 192.168.0.146: Error 0Losing network connectivity during the send isn't something I want to deal with!
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2005
- Messages
- 13,322
Aaaand, done... Looks promising:
Transferred the controller to a Solaris 11.1 VM. Booted it up. Success!
Code:
in @ 207 MiB/s, out @ 207 MiB/s, 12.5 TiB total, buffer 0% fullll
summary: 12.5 TiByte in 16h 42min 53.6sec - average of 217 MiB/s
cannot mount 'pool/storage': Can't mount a version 6 file system on a version 28 pool. Pool must be upgraded to mount this file system.
real 1002m55.665s
user 86m32.381s
sys 451m57.329sTransferred the controller to a Solaris 11.1 VM. Booted it up. Success!
Code:
root@backup:~# zpool import pool
root@backup:~# ls -lah /pool/storage/
total 713
drwxrwxrwx 13 nobody nobody 13 May 12 18:18 .
drwxrwxrwx 2 nobody nobody 2 Jan 20 2014 ._nfs
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 3 Aug 22 04:16 ..
drwx------ 2 nobody nobody 3 May 12 18:18 .$EXTEND
drwx------ 3 nobody nobody 3 Apr 29 11:28 .vSphere-HA
drwxr-xr-x 94 nobody nobody 94 Jun 30 14:27 Applications
drwxr-xr-x 19 nobody nobody 32 Aug 2 08:44 Documents
drwxrwxrwx 3 nobody nobody 5 Jul 25 15:39 Downloads
drwxr-xr-x 214 nobody nobody 214 Jan 21 2014 Music
drwxr-xr-x 5 nobody nobody 5 Dec 17 2013 Other
drwxr-xr-x 49 nobody nobody 54 Aug 14 08:41 Pictures
drwxr-xr-x 22 nobody nobody 23 Apr 7 18:38 Sites
drwxr-xr-x 6 nobody nobody 6 Apr 7 21:51 VideoI have built and tested a small change against ZoL (based on 0.6.3) which prevents you shooting yourself in the foot by seeing a message that tells you to upgrade your pool 
Now, it will say 'filesystem version 6 is not supported.' I have opened a pull request...
Now, it will say 'filesystem version 6 is not supported.' I have opened a pull request...Interesting story. I have never used Solaris and it definitely doesn't encourage me to, I'll stay with OpenIndiana and OmniOS, still with v28 pool and v5 fs for the moment as I don't need the new features so far.
Telling you to upgrade the pool when it's the fs that is incompatible is really misleading.
Telling you to upgrade the pool when it's the fs that is incompatible is really misleading.
it's not really anything against solaris or omni, just a warning to pick a fork at this point and stick with it.
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2005
- Messages
- 13,322
Actually, it was OmniOS that told me to upgrade. I only tried ZoL to try and bypass the filesystem version check.