Jump to content

  • GUI does not properly assign device numbers when removed from a zfs pool

    juchong

    By juchong

      • Minor

    Basically what the title says. While playing around with ZFS pools in a VM, I found that removing the drives from a pool seems to mess up the numbering scheme for device numbers in the GUI. Here's a screenshot:

     

    image.thumb.png.964c9cbe59b3b45326c117e6c60b61db.png

     

    NOTE: Refreshing the page does not seem to clean up the "Dev" numbers.

    Go to reports Prereleases

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    juchong

    Try this:

    1. Create a ZFS pool
    2. Assign drives
    3. Start the array
    4. Stop the array
    5. Remove the drives from the pool
    6. Delete the pool
    7. Watch as the GUI assigns duplicate "Dev X" numbers (see image above)
    Edited by juchong
    Link to comment
    JorgeB

    By invalid Dev numbers do you mean couple of duplicate dev numbers? Like mentioned those numbers have nothing to do with a pool, but that should not happen, @dlandonany idea?

    Link to comment
    juchong
    Just now, JorgeB said:

    By invalid Dev numbers do you mean couple of duplicate dev numbers? Like mentioned those numbers have nothing to do with a pool, but that should not happen, @dlandonany idea?

    I assume it shouldn't happen. This is why I'm reporting a bug. 🙂

    Link to comment
    dlandon
    3 hours ago, juchong said:

    I assume it shouldn't happen. This is why I'm reporting a bug. 🙂

    The first Dev1 and Dev2 have the same serial numbers.  It looks like this is a drive bay with two drives reporting the same serial numbers.  Every disk also has the same mount point.  Disk sdo is not formatted.

     

    What is your setup?  Is this a drive bay with 15 disks?  Are all these disks supposed to be in one pool?

    Link to comment
    JorgeB
    33 minutes ago, dlandon said:

    have the same serial numbers.

    They look similar but one is 0B and the other is 08.

    Link to comment
    dlandon
    16 minutes ago, JorgeB said:

    They look similar but one is 0B and the other is 08.

    Wow, time for new glasses.

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    ×

  • Status Definitions

     

    Open = Under consideration.

     

    Solved = The issue has been resolved.

     

    Solved version = The issue has been resolved in the indicated release version.

     

    Closed = Feedback or opinion better posted on our forum for discussion. Also for reports we cannot reproduce or need more information. In this case just add a comment and we will review it again.

     

    Retest = Please retest in latest release.

    Priority Definitions

     

    Minor = Something not working correctly.

     

    Urgent = Server crash, data loss, or other showstopper.

     

    Annoyance = Doesn't affect functionality but should be fixed.

     

    Other = Announcement or other non-issue.

×
×
  • Create New...