From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AEA01FF187 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2025 22:39:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9E96E23E99; Mon, 22 Sep 2025 22:40:15 +0200 (CEST) From: Marco Gaiarin Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2025 16:21:48 +0200 Organization: Il gaio usa sempre TIN per le liste, fallo anche tu!!! Message-ID: References: X-Trace: eraldo.lilliput.linux.it 1758571662 1346257 192.168.1.45 (22 Sep 2025 20:07:42 GMT) To: Marco Gaiarin X-Mailer: tin/2.6.4-20240224 ("Banff") (Linux/6.14.0-29-generic (x86_64)) X-Gateway-System: SmartGate 1.4.5 In-Reply-To: ; from SmartGate on Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 22:36:01PM +0200 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.451 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 1.543 Date: is 6 to 12 hours before Received: date DMARC_PASS -0.1 DMARC pass policy JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL 0.5 SPF set to ?all KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_PASS -0.001 SPF: HELO matches SPF record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [PVE-User] ZFS Upgrade... X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE user list Cc: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-user-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-user" Someone have some feedback on this? Really i don't understand... Thanks. > We have upgraded our server from PVE6 to PVE8, waited some month to be sure > there's no incompatibilities and now we are ready to remove older kernels, > and upgrade ZFS. > > Current situation is: > > root@svpve3:~# zfs upgrade > This system is currently running ZFS filesystem version 5. > > All filesystems are formatted with the current version. > > and: > > root@svpve3:~# zpool upgrade > This system supports ZFS pool feature flags. > > All pools are formatted using feature flags. > > > Some supported features are not enabled on the following pools. Once a > feature is enabled the pool may become incompatible with software > that does not support the feature. See zpool-features(7) for details. > > Note that the pool 'compatibility' feature can be used to inhibit > feature upgrades. > > POOL FEATURE > --------------- > rpool > draid > zilsaxattr > head_errlog > blake3 > block_cloning > vdev_zaps_v2 > rpool-backup > draid > zilsaxattr > head_errlog > blake3 > block_cloning > vdev_zaps_v2 > > So, there's no zfs upgrade needed, but zpool is. > > > First question: i've read: > https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/ZFS_on_Linux#sysadmin_zfs_features > and on detail: > A system with root on ZFS, that still boots using GRUB will become unbootable if a new feature is active on the rpool, due to the incompatible implementation of ZFS in GRUB. > > looking at 'zpool-features', GRUB 2.06 compatible features seems on file > /usr/share/zfs/compatibility.d/grub2-2.06, that report: > > # Features which are supported by GRUB2 versions prior to v2.12. > # > # GRUB is not able to detect ZFS pool if snaphsot of top level boot pool > # is created. This issue is observed with GRUB versions before v2.12 if > # extensible_dataset feature is enabled on ZFS boot pool. > # > # This file lists all read-only comaptible features except > # extensible_dataset and any other feature that depends on it. > > After upgrading the non-boot ZFS pool, i get this: > > root@svpve3:~# zpool get all rpool-backup | grep feature@ | grep enabled | sort > rpool-backup feature@allocation_classes enabled local > rpool-backup feature@async_destroy enabled local > rpool-backup feature@blake3 enabled local > rpool-backup feature@block_cloning enabled local > rpool-backup feature@bookmarks enabled local > rpool-backup feature@bookmark_v2 enabled local > rpool-backup feature@bookmark_written enabled local > rpool-backup feature@device_rebuild enabled local > rpool-backup feature@device_removal enabled local > rpool-backup feature@draid enabled local > rpool-backup feature@edonr enabled local > rpool-backup feature@enabled_txg active local > rpool-backup feature@encryption enabled local > rpool-backup feature@filesystem_limits enabled local > rpool-backup feature@large_dnode enabled local > rpool-backup feature@livelist enabled local > rpool-backup feature@multi_vdev_crash_dump enabled local > rpool-backup feature@obsolete_counts enabled local > rpool-backup feature@redacted_datasets enabled local > rpool-backup feature@redaction_bookmarks enabled local > rpool-backup feature@resilver_defer enabled local > rpool-backup feature@sha512 enabled local > rpool-backup feature@skein enabled local > rpool-backup feature@vdev_zaps_v2 enabled local > rpool-backup feature@zilsaxattr enabled local > rpool-backup feature@zpool_checkpoint enabled local > rpool-backup feature@zstd_compress enabled local > > but it is unclear to me how to check compatibility issue: seems to there's > no 'extensible_dataset' so i'm safe... or better, seems active BOTH on > upgraded and non-upgraded dataset, and was not on feature list to be enabled > by upgrade... > > root@svpve3:~# zpool get all rpool | grep feature@ | grep extensible_dataset > rpool feature@extensible_dataset active local > > root@svpve3:~# zpool get all rpool-backup | grep feature@ | grep extensible_dataset > rpool-backup feature@extensible_dataset active local > > > There's some better description of these incompatibilities, or some > reference ZFS or GRUB docs about this? > > > Thanks. > -- _______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list pve-user@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user