Upgrade from 9.2.16 to 9.3 issues

[zim2323]

1) I've tried an upgrade (which never comes online). Keep getting getty repeats and 30sec timeouts. webGUI never available.

2) Tried fresh install. Works great until I import my old config. Then back to #1.

3) Tried fresh install. Works great, but when I try to import my disks/volumes it says they are out of space, which was not the case on 9.2.1.6.

I've got a successfully running 9.2.1.6 virtualized install with 2gb of RAM and a 40gb partition. 5 additional ZFS disks and associated volumes. 1 for VMware lab, 2 for Hyper-V 2008 R2 (data and quorum), and 2 for Hyper-V 2012 R2 (data and quorum). It's only when upgrading to 9.3 that I have issues.

Virtualized FreeNAS is running on VMware Workstation 11.1.0 on a machine with an Intel 6core processor and 64gb of RAM. I just revert to the 'good' snapshot of 9.2.1.6 to try each time. I make sure to change to 8GB of RAM before each 9.3 upgrade or fresh install attempt.


I can't seem to figure out why it thinks my ZFS volumes are out of space. The data disks are 1TB in size and the ZFS volumes are each 970GB. The quorum disks are 20GB in size, with 17GB ZFS volumes. In 9.2.1.6, everything is good. In 9.3, I can't see anything on upgrade or config upload, but if I just try and import the disk, I get an error that it's out of space. For actual data on each partition/volume, I have roughly 2.1gb used on each of the data disks, while the quorum disks only have a few MB.


If there's any other information you need or if I haven't explained something well enough, please let me know.

Thanks!

 

[hugovsky]

Please post your hardware.

EDIT: nevermind, you're virtualizing

 

[jgreco]

The patient says, "Doctor, it hurts when I do this."

Doctor sez: "Then don't do that!"

 

[zim2323]

The question is not about virtualization, but why 9.3 sees the ZFS volumes differently than 9.2.1.6. I want to update without breaking my labs.

 

[ser_rhaegar]

In 9.3, I can't see anything on upgrade or config upload, but if I just try and import the disk, I get an error that it's out of space.

What's the exact error, verbatim?
While on 9.2.X, what is the output of "zfs list", "zpool list" and "df -h"?
While on 9.3 what is the output of "zfs list" and "zpool list"?

 

[jgreco]

The exact error is "While trying to virtualize using 1/4th the minimum required RAM and also doing other things that the stickies also warn against doing, it fails and he's wondering why it's AFU."

Probably because he's running out of memory. But since I have no brain and no intelligence he can go <<bleep>> himself. Not like I've spent many hours writing stickies to help people successfully do these complicated things, and obviously he's tons smarter and more experienced than li'l ol' me.

 

[zim2323]

The exact error is "While trying to virtualize using 1/4th the minimum required RAM doing other things that the stickies also warn against doing, it fails and he's wondering why it's AFU."

Probably because he's running out of memory. But since I have no brain and no intelligence he can go <<bleep>> himself. Not like I've spent many hours writing stickies to help people successfully do these complicated things, and obviously he's tons smarter and more experienced than li'l ol' me.

You're obviously a <<<bleep>>>ing idiot because I already stated that the 2gb was for the 9.2.1.6 install. I change the VM to 8gb BEFORE the 9.3 upgrade. And no you can't help, because you're too busy being an ass. Try to be a little more constructive next time.

 

[zim2323]

What's the exact error, verbatim?
While on 9.2.X, what is the output of "zfs list", "zpool list" and "df -h"?
While on 9.3 what is the output of "zfs list" and "zpool list"?

THANK YOU, for some constructive questions.

I'll get these together and respond shortly. I need to revert back to my 9.2.1.6 snapshot and then process through the fresh install to get you the information you're asking for.

 

[HoneyBadger]

How are the underlying disks of each vdev presented to the FreeNAS VM?

The answer I'm hoping for is "via VT-d passthrough of a support HBA to VMware Workstation" and not "they're VMDKs."

 

[zim2323]

How are the underlying disks of each vdev presented to the FreeNAS VM?

The answer I'm hoping for is "via VT-d passthrough of a support HBA to VMware Workstation" and not "they're VMDKs."

VMDK's

I've used them like that for at least 5 years. Again, these are just labs I build and use for testing. Everything works fine in 9.2.1.6. If I build 9.3 fresh and add new disks build new ZFS volumes everything seems to work fine. It's ONLY when I upgrade to 9.3, or load fresh and import from 9.2.1.6 config that I have this issue.

This isn't a matter of the 'ideal configuration', rather why the upgrade doesn't work. What has changed? Is there something in my existing 9.2.1.6 configuration that's causing the problem? Maybe 9.2.1.6 allowed for something, like VMDK's, that were supported in 9.2.1.6 but not 9.3.

Through all the upgrades I've never run into this specific issue. Disks and their volumes have never been the problem. Until now.

 

[ser_rhaegar]

You're obviously a <<<bleep>>>ing idiot because I already stated that the 2gb was for the 9.2.1.6 install. I change the VM to 8gb BEFORE the 9.3 upgrade. And no you can't help, because you're too busy being an ass. Try to be a little more constructive next time.

He is one of the most experienced posters on the forum. Yeah, he posted about not using virtualization, it's not recommended anywhere and it does cause problems - which could be the cause of yours (I know I've experienced them). Because it isn't recommended, there isn't much for support here.

If you're not happy with his original response, you should have just ignored it instead of replying with a rude comment:

unless you can grow a brain and some intelligence to go with it

If you want help, lighten up a bit and just stick to the problem at hand.

 

[jgreco]

From the Forum Rules, conveniently linked in red at the top of every page.

[...]
Proper Thread Format: When creating a new post, you must include the following information:

• [...]
• System Configuration Information: Items marked with an asterisk “*” are required for a failure postings. However, all items are recommended and could simply be part of your tag-line[...]

Topics that are likely to go unanswered: Some topics tend to be ignored either because they are already explained thoroughly in forum stickies and the documentation or they regularly turn into arguments about technology. These topics include:

• Virtualization of FreeNAS on Type-1 Hypervisors such as ESXi, XenServer, and Hyper-V. In short, if you can't do this without help, you shouldn't be doing it.[...]

Unauthorized Activities/Violations:

• Obscenities: Proper language is to be used at all times. No insults, bullying, profanity, defamatory, hateful, personal attacks, negative, or arrogant postings will be tolerated. Forum moderators will remove all offensive comments without warning. Repeated abuse of this rule will result in account termination.

This could be considered a warning.

 

[zim2323]

He is one of the most experienced posters on the forum. Yeah, he posted about not using virtualization, it's not recommended anywhere and it does cause problems - which could be the cause of yours (I know I've experienced them). Because it isn't recommended, there isn't much for support here.

If you're not happy with his original response, you should have just ignored it instead of replying with a rude comment:


If you want help, lighten up a bit and just stick to the problem at hand.

Sometimes the bully needs to be told he's one so he realizes he's not wanted. Sorry, but that's the truth. I don't need him cluttering up the thread with useless garba

He is one of the most experienced posters on the forum. Yeah, he posted about not using virtualization, it's not recommended anywhere and it does cause problems - which could be the cause of yours (I know I've experienced them). Because it isn't recommended, there isn't much for support here.

If you're not happy with his original response, you should have just ignored it instead of replying with a rude comment:


If you want help, lighten up a bit and just stick to the problem at hand.

I don't want his help. He obviously paid no attention to the details of my thread, rather he used it as a soap box to be a condescending to me as if I didn't know what I was doing. If he wants to be "that guy", then HE is the one who needs to lighten up. Instead of making assumptions and posting useless unrelated links, he should have started asking questions, like a couple of you have, and be more constructive.

Ignoring him only makes him that much worse for the next person looking for some friendly help and answers.

 

[zim2323]

From the Forum Rules, conveniently linked in red at the top of every page.



This could be considered a warning.

blah blah blah

 

[HoneyBadger]

VMDK's

shakes head sadly

This isn't a matter of the 'ideal configuration', rather why the upgrade doesn't work. What has changed?

A lot has changed between 9.2 and 9.3 but one of the things that jumps to mind is that the boot volumes are now ZFS instead of UFS.

 

[jgreco]

Thread closed. (The user has since edited his posts to remove some unwarranted offensiveness.)