Disk failure on sdX, disabling device message on dmesg

[ASap]

Hi all,

I was setting up a pool on a brand-new install TrueNAS, and I got this message:



Should I worry? I checked the disk has no issues, the created pool is also healthy.

 

[Alecmascot]

Looks wrong. Have you got some kind of hardware raid setup there ?

 

[ASap]

Nope, the disks are connected via the onboard SATA controller in AHCI mode.

I'm assuming that message was there as the disk was ejected in order to form the raid.

 

[artlessknave]

there is something about Scale that links disks to non existent MDADM. it's weird. appears to be a display error, somewhere.

 

[ASap]

The disks were brand new and blank, and the pool was created successfully.
So do I need to worry about anything due to this error message?

 

[winnielinnie]

SCALE probably uses mdadm to create mirrors for your swap.

 

[artlessknave]

Ill have to check but I'm quite sure scale is booting from zfs just like core

 

[artlessknave]

aparently, I read "Boot" instead of "Swap", but's definitely not MDADM for the boot pool

Show : zpool status -v boot-pool

Code:

  pool: boot-pool
 state: ONLINE
status: Some supported and requested features are not enabled on the pool.
        The pool can still be used, but some features are unavailable.
action: Enable all features using 'zpool upgrade'. Once this is done,
        the pool may no longer be accessible by software that does not support
        the features. See zpool-features(7) for details.
config:

        NAME        STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
        boot-pool   ONLINE       0     0     0
          mirror-0  ONLINE       0     0     0
            sda3    ONLINE       0     0     0
            sdp3    ONLINE       0     0     0

errors: No known data errors
$ uname -a
Linux glpnas3 5.15.79+truenas #1 SMP Tue Dec 13 12:40:04 UTC 2022 x86_64 GNU/Linux

but it does look like it's swap. well, that makes sense now.

Show : fdisk -l

Code:

Disk /dev/md127: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes


Disk /dev/md126: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes


Disk /dev/md125: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 8192 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 8192 bytes / 8192 bytes


Disk /dev/mapper/md126: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes


Disk /dev/mapper/md125: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 8192 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 8192 bytes / 8192 bytes


Disk /dev/mapper/md127: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes


Disk /dev/md124: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 8192 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 8192 bytes / 8192 bytes


Disk /dev/md123: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes


Disk /dev/mapper/md124: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 8192 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 8192 bytes / 8192 bytes


Disk /dev/mapper/md123: 2 GiB, 2145320960 bytes, 4190080 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes

 

[ASap]

So that's not an issue, I suppose?
Can you please elaborate more?

 

[artlessknave]

on the swap? swap is just temp space set up on the drives for both the purpose of padding the drives a bit, since each drive is usually a few MB different, so that the partitions are the same size to be used in a pool, as well as to provide emergency RAM-like space for if the system is eating RAM. RAM is always used first and then swap is used if needed and appropriate. (ARC would never be in swap for example, that would be silly)

some catastrophic pool failures can be fixed by ZFS, and it will try to do so, but usually needs gobs and gobs of RAM for this kind of rescue, and if it runs out of RAM, the import will just stall and the pool will be inaccessable until you literally get more RAM. the swap space gives some room to help with this. swap on the disks you are trying to rescue a pool from is slow as hell compared to RAM, but its far better than having the whole thing just coming to a screeching halt.

 

[ASap]

1. What I meant was the error message I got. Is that normal due to the pool creating the swap?
2. When setting up TrueNAS, I remember I opted to create 16 GB of a swap partition, but now my swap partition is 6 GB.

Code:

root@truenas[~]# swapon -s
Filename				Type		Size	Used	Priority
/dev/dm-0                              	partition	2095036	0	-2
/dev/dm-1                              	partition	2095036	0	-3
/dev/dm-2                              	partition	2095036	0	-4
root@truenas[~]#

 

[artlessknave]

I remember I opted to create 16 GB of a swap partition

eh, 2 is plenty. it's per disk.
the error is annoying but swap is just swap. you dont strictly need it, its mostly just a safety net truenas has added for many years.

 

[ASap]

My TrueNAS install a had 16 GB swap when it was fresh install, that was before creating a pool, after making two pools, I got the error above, as attached screenshot on the first post. Then after that error, my TrueNAS instance has a total of 6GB swap.