Search results

While I get my thoughts together again, can one of you please motivate why it would be good thing for ZFS (so in no way am I involving the proxmox team here) to only do health checks when there are IO operations? the more I think of it the more it does not make sense to me as one just a...

I had to break down my test because of... reasons ;( Ok, Please let me be your method then to settle this debate once and for all. What test shall I run to make it certain that there is an issue worth exploring or whether it is just a misunderstanding from a user perspective.

I have a superMicro and a SilverStone case. Both with HDD BackPlates configured to let the motherboard do all the "thinking" Hence the removal of a drive does get noticed by the OS in both cases, whether system a or b I tried this in. More to follow

I did not even start the test yet (and I will soon) but having a pool in active data flux should not be the only way to have ZFS tell you when things might go bad. I have more to say when I did my test

Inserting point, No I never did do this while the disks were in obvious operation. The pools on where I ran the tests were not in use so no changes. Hold on and I will do the same test but then force a change to the pool.

I changed the title of this thread to indicate it is no longer only about single disk pools

I am getting really worried. Just tried the drive removal from a 3 way mirrored pool on a different system. I pulled out one of the disks. syslog: Nov 24 08:37:24 pver1 kernel: ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300) Nov 24 08:37:29 pver1 kernel: ata6: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl...

I can run the experiment again tomorrow. it was a test pool to test just these kind of scenarios syslog: Nov 23 20:14:15 pveasus smartd[3939]: Device: /dev/sda [SAT], removed ATA device: No such device. But ZFS and thus also ZED did not detect it thus no email was sent. I tried pulling a drive...

I am running proxmox 7.2.11 with zfs-zed/stable,now 2.1.6-pve1 amd64 zfs-initramfs/stable,now 2.1.6-pve1 all zfsutils-linux/stable,now 2.1.6-pve1 amd64 After taking out the only disk out of a hot swap bay in a single disk pool. zpool status still listed the pool as online including that disk...

or if someone knows of a linux distro with mirrored zfs root installer that would also solve the problem

tried all steps ib the link above. rebooted and can still log into localhost:8006 pve still running fine. apt remove --purge proxmox-ve Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Package 'proxmox-ve' is not installed, so not removed 0...

SR-IOV is a luxury. Not needed. virtio is more than enough for basic needs.

I am passing through an actual USB dongle for WAP purposes, and a PCIe wireless card for WAP purposes. The 2 are very distinct. I recommend giving the USB route a try as it is low cost and very flexible.

Mind you though that I am no longer trying. I have gotten it running for ages in the mean time ;)

it's glorious to have an OpenWrt running 'virtually' (pun intended) without restrictions ;) USB WAP or PCIe WAP are the only way to go for me going forward. It's soo muych easier than having to deal with several hardware routers through the house.

it's super simple to virtualize OpenWrt. It might take a few tries though as getting the NICS to play nice might not be intuitive from the get go.

I never did fix the NTP issue and the host app armor issue. So I abandoned that route :( as I finally figured that most if not all of my client devices could not use wifi6 and/or WPA3 anyway. So wanting kernel support for my WIFI6 PCIe devices no longer seemed to be paramount. I kept using...

I used the ubuntu 22.04.1 ISO and things worked out great. I marked the thread as solved

yes indeed. Success!! this time!. I tried once before but got stuck then. I just tried again with the ubuntu 22.04.1 ISO. I ran into the same issue as earlier as no pool is available, but this time figured to import it. which worked. rolled back, exported the pool and everything works like a...

uggg. just revisited this zfs rescue disk only to find it last being updated in 2014. so I won't even try. grrrr. back to square one ;(