9.1.1 to 9.3.1

[StaLeWaR]

hi all!

I have the hp dl180 g6 with hardware raid as a Smart Array P212 c memory and battery.
The current installed version FreeNAS 9.1.1
all works correctly.
The recommendations need to update the size 8GB HDD.

root@freenas] /dev# gpart show da1
=> 63 30865345 da1 MBR (14G)
63 1930257 1 freebsd (942M)
1930320 63 - free - (31k)
1930383 1930257 2 freebsd [active] (942M)
3860640 3024 3 freebsd (1.5M)
3863664 41328 4 freebsd (20M)
3904992 26960416 - free - (12G)


I think the installer will not resize partitions....
How to upgrade?

 

[dlavigne]

I think the installer will not resize partitions....

Actually, both the 9.3 installer and upgrade file will reformat the boot device as 9.3 switched from UFS to ZFS for the boot device.

 

[StaLeWaR]

Thanks!
I read about it.
This means that the installer will do resize?

 

[dlavigne]

Yes.

 

[StaLeWaR]

Thanks dlavigne!!!!

I have one more question:)

I have a controller Smart Array P212/256MB BBWC.
4 disk 2TB build to raid5 , FreeNAS connected to one disc, zfs filesystem, it's good.

I want to add a couple of drives in the array.
The controller will do it. But how to react ZFS?
I must say zfs about this?

 

[danb35]

Do not use hardware RAID with FreeNAS. FreeNAS and ZFS expect to have direct access to, and control of, your physical disks. Without out, many of the data protection features simply won't work.

 

[StaLeWaR]

in my case zfs used only for storage and snapshot.
all the functions of redundancy and protection against data loss from hardware controller

How do I make that ZFS part extended?

 

[Ericloewe]

in my case zfs used only for storage and snapshot.
all the functions of redundancy and protection against data loss from hardware controller

Very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, bad idea.

If you do go ahead with your idea (and let's be clear, you're risking your data as it is and are about to venture into mostly-unexplored territory), tell us how it goes. Your scenario has some parallels with a different, non-dangerous scenario that should help answer some questions of that other scenario.

 

[StaLeWaR]

bad idea? why?
all work fine for 3 years
No problems speed excellent:)

you can give a complete answer?

 

[HoneyBadger]

in my case zfs used only for storage and snapshot.
all the functions of redundancy and protection against data loss from hardware controller

How do I make that ZFS part extended?

DISCLAIMER: See @Ericloewe 's post. This is a bad idea.

You can accomplish this in the best-of-a-bad-situation manner by creating an equally sized RAID5 volume on your hardware RAID controller.

Eg: Right now you have 4x 2TB drive in RAID5 for ~6TB usable. You should add 4 more 2TB drives, and create a second RAID5 volume. Then you would extend the ZFS volume with the new "single disk" that ZFS will see.

Again you will be relying on your hardware controller to notify you of this failure. You may be able to pull some info via camcontrol inquiry

 

[StaLeWaR]

OK. do you think I should remove raid5 and give direct access to the drives in zfs?
Sorry for bad english :)

 

[Ericloewe]

bad idea? why?
all work fine for 3 years
No problems speed excellent:)

you can give a complete answer?

• ZFS is designed to deal directly with drives.
• HW RAID controllers do all sorts of things that violate the above.
• Exposing a single volume means that ZFS cannot correct any errors. Delegating this task to a HW RAID controller almost always results in data loss, when ZFS is involved.
• Drive monitoring is mostly broken, which increases the risk of actually having a drive fail completely immensely AND it masks the problem - until ZFS can't work anymore because the single volume it seems is irreparably broken.

OK. do you think I should remove raid5 and give direct access to the drives in zfs?
Sorry for bad english :)

Yes! Backup your data, destroy the pool, use a proper, non-RAID controller and rebuild the pool using ZFS like it's supposed to be used.

 

[HoneyBadger]

Only problem with replacing the controller is that it's a DL180 G6, so it may have a backplane that refuses to work with non-HP cards, or works but puts the fans at full blast because it can't speak "HP" to the HBA.

 

[StaLeWaR]

I'm not understand you.
I'm not going to change the controller it is necessary to work backplane.
It's OK ?

I will not lose speed of failure of the hardware controller?

 

[StaLeWaR]

I tried the whole day.
You lied to me?:(

How do I raid-z(or raid-z2) can add drives after its creation?
All writing is impossible:(

 

[HoneyBadger]

Extending a ZFS volume

How you choose to make the underlying second volume is up to you.

 

[StaLeWaR]

Once a vdev is created, you can not add more drives to that vdev

it is sad.
a hardware controller I add disks to an existing array

in ZFS I have to sacrifice the additional redundancy

Example:
I will create a pool of 4 discs 1Tb raidz2. 2 disks for redundancy. Effective size - 2tb. ok! :)
When I have to add more disc, then I will have to add another 4 discs . 2 of which drive for redundancy.

In general, I'm going to lose 50% of disks for redundancy, with each addition:(

Is it too much?

 

[danb35]

If you use four-disk RAIDZ2 arrays, yes, you'll lose 50% of your capacity to redundancy. Why do that? A six-disk RAIDZ2 is much more efficient in storage space. Or, if you want to be able to expand the pool as simply as possible, use mirrors. You can start with any even number of disks, and add them in pairs as needed. That will still sacrifice half of your capacity to redundancy, but expansion will be easier.

 

[StaLeWaR]

I say that a lot of drives used for redundancy.
if you use a hardware controller with the possibility of extension, you do not need to spend a lot of disks for redundancy.

Do you understand me?;)

 

[danb35]

I, and @HoneyBadger, and @Ericloewe say that if you want to use a hardware RAID controller as a RAID controller, FreeNAS is not the OS for you. Do you understand us?