Archive-Team
/
zfs
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases 103 Wiki Activity

Edit the hole_birth text a bit

Richard Laager 2016-12-13 17:29:53 -06:00
parent 9aaa1e71f3
commit 60ee36b486
2 changed files with 11 additions and 11 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
FAQ.md

@ -206,9 +206,9 @@ $ zpool set cachefile=none tank
### hole_birth Bugs
The hole_birth feature has/had bugs, the result of which is that, if you do a zfs send -i (or -R, since it uses -i) from an affected dataset, the receiver *will not see any checksum or other errors, but will not match the source*.
The hole_birth feature has/had bugs, the result of which is that, if you do a `zfs send -i` (or `-R`, since it uses `-i`) from an affected dataset, the receiver *will not see any checksum or other errors, but will not match the source*.
0.6.5.8 and 0.7.0-rc1 (and above) default to ignoring the faulty metadata which causes this issue *on the sender side*.
ZoL versions 0.6.5.8 and 0.7.0-rc1 (and above) default to ignoring the faulty metadata which causes this issue *on the sender side*.
For more details, see the [[hole_birth FAQ]].

18
hole_birth-FAQ.md

@ -1,15 +1,15 @@
### Short explanation
The hole_birth feature has/had bugs, the result of which is that, if you do a zfs send -i (or -R, since it uses -i) from an affected dataset, the receiver *will not see any checksum or other errors, but will not match the source*.
The hole_birth feature has/had bugs, the result of which is that, if you do a `zfs send -i` (or `-R`, since it uses `-i`) from an affected dataset, the receiver *will not see any checksum or other errors, but will not match the source*.
0.6.5.8 and 0.7.0-rc1 (and above) default to ignoring the faulty metadata which causes this issue *on the sender side*.
ZoL versions 0.6.5.8 and 0.7.0-rc1 (and above) default to ignoring the faulty metadata which causes this issue *on the sender side*.
### FAQ
#### I have a pool with hole_birth enabled, how do I know if I'm affected?
It's technically possible to calculate whether you have any affected files, but it requires scraping zdb output for each file in each snapshot in each dataset, which is a combinatoric nightmare. (If you really want it, there's a proof of concept [here](https://github.com/rincebrain/hole_birth_test)
#### I have a pool with hole_birth enabled, how do I know if I am affected?
It is technically possible to calculate whether you have any affected files, but it requires scraping zdb output for each file in each snapshot in each dataset, which is a combinatoric nightmare. (If you really want it, there is a proof of concept [here](https://github.com/rincebrain/hole_birth_test).
#### Is there any less painful way to fix this if we've already received an affected snapshot?
No, the data you need was simply not present in the send stream, unfortunately, and can't feasibly be rewritten in place.
#### Is there any less painful way to fix this if we have already received an affected snapshot?
No, the data you need was simply not present in the send stream, unfortunately, and cannot feasibly be rewritten in place.
### Long explanation
hole_birth is a feature to speed up ZFS send -i - in particular, ZFS used to not store metadata on when "holes" (sparse regions) in files were created, so every zfs send -i needed to include every hole.
@ -18,8 +18,8 @@ hole_birth, as the name implies, added tracking for the txg (transaction group)
Unfortunately, hole_birth had a number of edge cases where it could "forget" to set the birth_time of holes in some cases, causing it to record the birth_time as 0 (the value used prior to hole_birth, and essentially equivalent to "since file creation").
This meant that, when you did a zfs send -i, since zfs send doesn't have any knowledge of the surrounding snapshots when sending a given snapshot, it would see the creation txg as 0, conclude "oh, it's 0, I must have already sent this before", and not include it.
This meant that, when you did a zfs send -i, since zfs send does not have any knowledge of the surrounding snapshots when sending a given snapshot, it would see the creation txg as 0, conclude "oh, it is 0, I must have already sent this before", and not include it.
This means that, on the receiving side, it doesn't know those holes should exist, and doesn't create them - leading to differences between what you have on the source and the destination.
This means that, on the receiving side, it does not know those holes should exist, and does not create them. This leads to differences between the source and the destination.
0.6.5.8 and 0.7.0-rc1 (and above) default to ignoring this metadata and always sending holes with birth_time 0, configurable using the tunable known as "ignore_hole_birth" or "send_holes_without_birth_time" (the latter is what OpenZFS standardized on; 0.6.5.8 only has the former, but for any ZoL version with send_holes_without_birth_time, they point to the same value, so changing either will work).
ZoL versions 0.6.5.8 and 0.7.0-rc1 (and above) default to ignoring this metadata and always sending holes with birth_time 0, configurable using the tunable known as `ignore_hole_birth` or `send_holes_without_birth_time`. The latter is what OpenZFS standardized on. ZoL version 0.6.5.8 only has the former, but for any ZoL version with `send_holes_without_birth_time`, they point to the same value, so changing either will work.