Re: [gentoo-user] zfs repair needed (due to fingers being faster than brain)

On 3/1/21 3:25 PM, John Blinka wrote: HI, Gentooers! Hi, So, I typed dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sd, and despite hitting ctrl-c quite quickly, zeroed out some portion of the initial part of a disk. Which did this to my zfs raidz3 array: OOPS!!! NAME

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs repair needed (due to fingers being faster than brain)

Firstly, I'll say I'm not experienced, but knowing a fair bit about raid and recovering corrupted arrays ... On 01/03/2021 22:25, John Blinka wrote: HI, Gentooers! So, I typed dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sd, and despite hitting ctrl-c quite quickly, zeroed out some portion of the initial part of

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs emerge failure (solved)

Rich Freeman had the right clue. Some time ago, after successfully installing zfs, I changed root's umask to 0027. This had the effect of changing the permissions on /lib/modules/X.Y.Z-gentoo to drwxr-x--- on a subsequent kernel upgrade. This prevents emerge (once it switches to user:group

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs emerge failure

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 7:13 PM, John Blinka wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:54 PM, John Covici wrote: > >> What is your umask? I had troubles like this when I had too >> aggressive umask of I think 027 rather than 022. > > It is indeed 027, and

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs emerge failure

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 7:14 PM, John Blinka wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> >> Yes, and in fact it is in the output when emerge fails: >> /var/tmp/portage/sys-kernel/spl-0.7.1/work/spl-0.7.1/config.log > Digging into

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs emerge failure

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > > Yes, and in fact it is in the output when emerge fails: > /var/tmp/portage/sys-kernel/spl-0.7.1/work/spl-0.7.1/config.log Ah-ha! I see it now. That['s valuable, and I'll take a closer look. Thanks! John

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs emerge failure

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:54 PM, John Covici wrote: > What is your umask? I had troubles like this when I had too > aggressive umask of I think 027 rather than 022. It is indeed 027, and I wondered whether that might have been what was behind the error, hence I tried

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs emerge failure

On Tue, 15 Aug 2017 18:46:59 -0400, John Blinka wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > > First, I appreciate your thoughts and comments. > > > > > I suspect your sources have gotten messed up in some way. I've run > > into issues like this when I

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs emerge failure

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 3:46 PM, John Blinka wrote: > > I think it would be informative if I could somehow see exactly what > commands are being run when the error occurs. Is there a way of doing > that? > Yes, and in fact it is in the output when emerge fails:

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs emerge failure

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: First, I appreciate your thoughts and comments. > > I suspect your sources have gotten messed up in some way. I've run > into issues like this when I do something like build a kernel with an > odd umask so that the portage

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs emerge failure

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:19 PM, John Blinka wrote: > > Hope someone can shed some light on continuing emerge failures for zfs > since gnetoo-sources-4.4.39 and zfs-0.6.5.8. I was able to install > that version of zfs with that kernel last November on one of my > machines,

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs io scheduler

Am 23.02.2015 um 22:57 schrieb lee: Hi, is zfs setting the io scheduler to noop for the disks in the pool? no? I have it set in an init script. I'm currently finding that the IO performance is horrible with a pool made from two mirrored disks ... then set it to noop.

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

Am 13.12.2013 18:34, schrieb Michael Rühmann: Hi all, had some troubles to build sys-kernel/spl-0.6.2-r2. snip Emerging (4 of 6) sys-kernel/spl-0.6.2-r2 * spl-0.6.2.tar.gz SHA256 SHA512 WHIRLPOOL size ;-) ...[ ok ] *

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

On 12/13/2013 06:48 PM, Michael Rühmann wrote: Am 13.12.2013 18:34, schrieb Michael Rühmann: Hi all, had some troubles to build sys-kernel/spl-0.6.2-r2. snip Emerging (4 of 6) sys-kernel/spl-0.6.2-r2 * spl-0.6.2.tar.gz SHA256 SHA512 WHIRLPOOL size ;-) ...

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 07:59:41PM +0100, hasufell wrote: The problem is now: How do i set CONFIG_ZLIB_DEFLATE in menuconfig? Maybe i'm completely blind... Thanks in advance for any help, Mosh lol, done! As i thought...i was blind :D You could at least say how you did it.

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

Am 13.12.2013 20:21, schrieb Bruce Hill: On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 07:59:41PM +0100, hasufell wrote: The problem is now: How do i set CONFIG_ZLIB_DEFLATE in menuconfig? Maybe i'm completely blind... Thanks in advance for any help, Mosh lol, done! As i thought...i was blind :D You could

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

On 12/13/2013 08:21 PM, Bruce Hill wrote: What *is* so difficult about that? Nothing.

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:21:42 -0600, Bruce Hill wrote: You could at least say how you did it. *sigh* maybe even add the kernel part to https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/ZFS mingdao@baruch ~ $ zgrep CONFIG_ZLIB_DEFLATE /proc/config.gz CONFIG_ZLIB_DEFLATE=y What *is* so difficult about

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

Am 13.12.2013 21:08, schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann: Am 13.12.2013 20:21, schrieb Bruce Hill: On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 07:59:41PM +0100, hasufell wrote: The problem is now: How do i set CONFIG_ZLIB_DEFLATE in menuconfig? Maybe i'm completely blind... Thanks in advance for any help, Mosh lol,

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 09:08:54PM +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: well, you won't find it in menuconfig. Or at least I couldn't. You can reach that option in xconfig. On the other hand ZLIB_DEFLATE is turned on by a douzend of other options that it is VERY probable you never have to

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 12:53:39AM +0100, Michael Rühmann wrote: mingdao@baruch ~ $ zgrep CONFIG_ZLIB_DEFLATE /proc/config.gz CONFIG_ZLIB_DEFLATE=y What *is* so difficult about that? well, you won't find it in menuconfig. Or at least I couldn't. You can reach that option in xconfig.

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

Am 14.12.2013 01:04, schrieb Bruce Hill: On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 09:08:54PM +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: well, you won't find it in menuconfig. Or at least I couldn't. You can reach that option in xconfig. On the other hand ZLIB_DEFLATE is turned on by a douzend of other options that

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

Am 14.12.2013 01:04, schrieb Bruce Hill: On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 09:08:54PM +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: well, you won't find it in menuconfig. Or at least I couldn't. You can reach that option in xconfig. On the other hand ZLIB_DEFLATE is turned on by a douzend of other options that it

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 09:47:44PM +, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:21:42 -0600, Bruce Hill wrote: You could at least say how you did it. *sigh* maybe even add the kernel part to https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/ZFS mingdao@baruch ~ $ zgrep CONFIG_ZLIB_DEFLATE

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS on Linux (spl build error)

On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 01:13:06AM +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: Any time you can't see how to enable a kernel option, just search for it and look at the Selected By field to see what you need to turn it on: Symbol: ZLIB_DEFLATE [=y] Type : tristate Defined at lib/Kconfig:198

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS formating

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 9:48 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Is the latest version of SystemRescue the best media to use to format disks with ZFS? Caveats? the latest gentoo live image has full zfs support on it -- Douglas J Hunley (doug.hun...@gmail.com) Twitter: @hunleyd

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 09/17/2013 08:20 AM, Grant wrote: I'm convinced I need 3-disk RAID1 so I can lose 2 drives and keep running. I'd also like to stripe for performance, resulting in RAID10. It sounds like most hardware controllers do not support 6-disk RAID10 so ZFS looks very interesting. Can I operate

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Sep 21, 2013 7:54 PM, thegeezer thegee...@thegeezer.net wrote: On 09/17/2013 08:20 AM, Grant wrote: I'm convinced I need 3-disk RAID1 so I can lose 2 drives and keep running. I'd also like to stripe for performance, resulting in RAID10. It sounds like most hardware controllers do not

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Joerg Schilling wrote: Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Why do you believe it has forked? This project does not even has a source code repository and the fact that they refer to illumos for sources makes me wonder whether it is open for contributing. Jörg Well, it seemed to me that it

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Douglas J Hunley doug.hun...@gmail.com wrote: 1TB drives are right on the border of switching from RAIDZ to RAIDZ2. You'll see people argue for both sides at this size, but the 'saner default' would be to use RAIDZ2. You're going to lose storage space, but gain an extra parity drive (think

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 2013-09-20 5:17 AM, Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote: Douglas J Hunley doug.hun...@gmail.com wrote: 1TB drives are right on the border of switching from RAIDZ to RAIDZ2. You'll see people argue for both sides at this size, but the 'saner default' would be to use

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Am 19.09.2013 06:47, schrieb Grant: turn off readahead. ZFS' own readahead and the kernel's clash - badly. Turn off kernel's readahead for a visible performance boon. You are probably not talking about ZFS readahead but about the ARC. which does prefetching. So yes. I'm taking notes on this

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

How about hardened? Does ZFS have any problems interacting with grsecurity or a hardened profile? Has anyone tried hardened and ZFS together? - Grant

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:20:53AM -0700, Grant wrote: How about hardened? Does ZFS have any problems interacting with grsecurity or a hardened profile? Has anyone tried hardened and ZFS together? Hi, I did - I had some problems, but I'm not sure if they were caused by the combination of

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 06:41:47PM -0400, Douglas J Hunley wrote: On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 12:32 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Spo do I need that overlay at all, or just emerge zfs and its module? You do *not* need the overlay. Everything you need is in portage nowadays Afaik the

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

How about hardened? Does ZFS have any problems interacting with grsecurity or a hardened profile? Has anyone tried hardened and ZFS together? I did - I had some problems, but I'm not sure if they were caused by the combination of ZFS and hardened. There were some issues updating kernel

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Grant wrote: Interesting news related to ZFS: http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Main_Page I wonder if this will be added to the kernel at some point in the future? May even be their intention? I think the CDDL license is what's keeping ZFS out of the kernel, although some argue that it should be

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Grant wrote: Interesting news related to ZFS: http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Main_Page I wonder if this will be added to the kernel at some point in the future? May even be their intention? I think the CDDL license is what's

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Grant emailgr...@gmail.com wrote: Interesting news related to ZFS: http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Main_Page I wonder if this will be added to the kernel at some point in the future? May even be their intention? I think the CDDL license is what's keeping ZFS out of the kernel, although

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Grant wrote: Interesting news related to ZFS: http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Main_Page I wonder if this will be added to the kernel at some point in the future? May even be their intention? I think the CDDL license is what's keeping ZFS out of the kernel,

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Joerg Schilling wrote: Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Grant wrote: Interesting news related to ZFS: http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Main_Page I wonder if this will be added to the kernel at some point in the future? May even be their intention? I think the CDDL license is what's keeping ZFS

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Why do you believe it has forked? This project does not even has a source code repository and the fact that they refer to illumos for sources makes me wonder whether it is open for contributing. Jörg Well, it seemed to me that it either changed

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 12:32 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Spo do I need that overlay at all, or just emerge zfs and its module? You do *not* need the overlay. Everything you need is in portage nowadays -- Douglas J Hunley (doug.hun...@gmail.com) Twitter: @hunleyd

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger li...@xunil.atwrote: I have to set up a server w/ 8x 1TB in about 2 weeks and consider ZFS as well, at least for data. So root-fs would go onto 2x 1TB hdds with conventional partitioning and something like ext4. 6x 1TB would be available

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 12:32 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: Spo do I need that overlay at all, or just emerge zfs and its module? You do *not* need the overlay. Everything you need is in portage nowadays -- Douglas J Hunley (doug.hun...@gmail.com) Twitter: @hunleyd

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Am 18.09.2013 06:11, schrieb Grant: I have to set up a server w/ 8x 1TB in about 2 weeks and consider ZFS as well, at least for data. So root-fs would go onto 2x 1TB hdds with conventional partitioning and something like ext4. Is a layout like this with the data on ZFS and the root-fs on

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 23:22:29 -0500, Bruce Hill wrote: Just wondering if anyone experienced running ZFS on Gentoo finds this wiki article worthy of use: http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/ZFS Yes, it is useful. However I have recently stopped using the option to built ZFS into the kernel as I ran into

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: turn off readahead. ZFS' own readahead and the kernel's clash - badly. Turn off kernel's readahead for a visible performance boon. You are probably not talking about ZFS readahead but about the ARC. Jörg --

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Am 18.09.2013 09:26, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger: rootfs on ZFS or everything on ZFS would have advantages, sure. No partitioning at all, resizeable zfs-filesystems for everything, checksums for everything ... you name it. In my case I have to decide until Sep, 25th - installation day ;-)

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Am 18.09.2013 11:56, schrieb Joerg Schilling: Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: turn off readahead. ZFS' own readahead and the kernel's clash - badly. Turn off kernel's readahead for a visible performance boon. You are probably not talking about ZFS readahead but about

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: Interesting news related to ZFS: http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Main_Page I wonder if this will be added to the kernel at some point in the future? May even be their intention? Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Interesting news related to ZFS: http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Main_Page I wonder if this will be added to the kernel at some point in the future? May even be their intention? I think the CDDL license is what's keeping ZFS out of the kernel, although some argue that it should be integrated

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

turn off readahead. ZFS' own readahead and the kernel's clash - badly. Turn off kernel's readahead for a visible performance boon. You are probably not talking about ZFS readahead but about the ARC. which does prefetching. So yes. I'm taking notes on this so I want to clarify, when using

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Am 17.09.2013 09:20, schrieb Grant: Performance doesn't seem to be one of ZFS's strong points. Is it considered suitable for a high-performance server? A high performance server for what? But you've already given yourself the answer: if high performance is what you are aiming for it

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Grant emailgr...@gmail.com wrote: I'm convinced I need 3-disk RAID1 so I can lose 2 drives and keep running. I'd also like to stripe for performance, resulting in RAID10. It sounds like most hardware controllers do not support 6-disk RAID10 so ZFS looks very

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 17/09/2013 10:05, Pandu Poluan wrote: On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Grant emailgr...@gmail.com wrote: I'm convinced I need 3-disk RAID1 so I can lose 2 drives and keep running. I'd also like to stripe for performance, resulting in RAID10. It sounds like most hardware controllers do not

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

It looks like there are comprehensive ZFS Gentoo docs (http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/ZFS) but can anyone tell me from the real world about how much extra difficulty/complexity is added to installation and ongoing administration when choosing ZFS over ext4? Very very minimal. So minimal, in

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

I'm convinced I need 3-disk RAID1 so I can lose 2 drives and keep running. I'd also like to stripe for performance, resulting in RAID10. It sounds like most hardware controllers do not support 6-disk RAID10 so ZFS looks very interesting. Can I operate ZFS RAID without a hardware RAID

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Grant emailgr...@gmail.com wrote: Performance doesn't seem to be one of ZFS's strong points. Is it considered suitable for a high-performance server? ZFS is one of the fastest FS I am aware of (if not the fastest). You need a sufficient amount of RAM to make the ARC useful. The only problem

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 2013-09-17 4:05 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: 2. When comparing performance of 1 (one) drive, of course ZFS will lose. But when you build a ZFS pool out of 3 pairs of mirrored drives, throughput will increase significantly as ZFS has the ability to do 'load-balancing' among

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 2013-09-17 3:20 AM, Grant emailgr...@gmail.com wrote: It sounds like most hardware controllers do not support 6-disk RAID10 so ZFS looks very interesting. ?? RAID 10 simply requires an even number of drives with a minimum of 4. So, you certainly can have a 6 disk RAID10 - I've got a system

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

It sounds like most hardware controllers do not support 6-disk RAID10 so ZFS looks very interesting. ?? RAID 10 simply requires an even number of drives with a minimum of 4. OK, there seems to be some disagreement on this. Michael? - Grant

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Performance doesn't seem to be one of ZFS's strong points. Is it considered suitable for a high-performance server? ZFS is one of the fastest FS I am aware of (if not the fastest). You need a sufficient amount of RAM to make the ARC useful. How much RAM is that? - Grant

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Grant emailgr...@gmail.com wrote: Performance doesn't seem to be one of ZFS's strong points. Is it considered suitable for a high-performance server? ZFS is one of the fastest FS I am aware of (if not the fastest). You need a sufficient amount of RAM to make the ARC useful. How much

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 09/17/2013 09:21 AM, Grant wrote: It sounds like most hardware controllers do not support 6-disk RAID10 so ZFS looks very interesting. ?? RAID 10 simply requires an even number of drives with a minimum of 4. OK, there seems to be some disagreement on this. Michael? Any controller

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 09/17/2013 11:40 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-09-17 11:18 AM, Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com wrote: Any controller that claims RAID10 on a server with 6 drive bays should be able to put all six drives in an array. But you'll get a three-way stripe (better performance) instead of a

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 09/17/2013 01:00 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: But not 6-drive RAID w/ hot spare... ;) Anyone who can't afford to add a single additional drive for the piece of mind has no business buying the RAID card to begin with... Most of our servers only come with 6 drive bays -- that's why I have this

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 2013-09-17 12:34 PM, Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com wrote: For maximum fault tolerance, what you really want is, A B A B A B but, like I said, it's hard to find in hardware. The standard I linked to calls both of these RAID10, thus the confusion. Ok, I see where my

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 17/09/2013 15:22, Grant wrote: Performance doesn't seem to be one of ZFS's strong points. Is it considered suitable for a high-performance server? ZFS is one of the fastest FS I am aware of (if not the fastest). You need a sufficient amount of RAM to make the ARC useful. How much RAM

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Grant emailgr...@gmail.com wrote: I'm convinced I need 3-disk RAID1 so I can lose 2 drives and keep running. I'd also like to stripe for performance, resulting in RAID10. It sounds like most hardware controllers do

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 17.09.2013 09:20, schrieb Grant: I'm convinced I need 3-disk RAID1 so I can lose 2 drives and keep running. I'd also like to stripe for performance, resulting in RAID10. It sounds like most hardware controllers do not support

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Am 17.09.2013 09:20, schrieb Grant: I'm convinced I need 3-disk RAID1 so I can lose 2 drives and keep running. I'd also like to stripe for performance, resulting in RAID10. It sounds like most hardware controllers do not support 6-disk RAID10 so ZFS looks very interesting. Can I operate

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 2013-09-17 2:00 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: use ECC ram. Lots of it. 16GB DDR3 1600 ECC ram cost you less than 170€. And it is worth it. ZFS showed me just how many silent corruptions can happen on a 'stable' system. Errors never seen neither detected thanks to

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 2013-09-17 11:18 AM, Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com wrote: Any controller that claims RAID10 on a server with 6 drive bays should be able to put all six drives in an array. But you'll get a three-way stripe (better performance) instead of a three-way mirror (better fault tolerance).

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Am 17.09.2013 20:11, schrieb cov...@ccs.covici.com: Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 17.09.2013 09:20, schrieb Grant: I'm convinced I need 3-disk RAID1 so I can lose 2 drives and keep running. I'd also like to stripe for performance, resulting in RAID10. It sounds

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Am 17.09.2013 20:11, schrieb Tanstaafl: On 2013-09-17 2:00 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: use ECC ram. Lots of it. 16GB DDR3 1600 ECC ram cost you less than 170€. And it is worth it. ZFS showed me just how many silent corruptions can happen on a 'stable' system.

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Am 17.09.2013 19:34, schrieb Tanstaafl: On 2013-09-17 1:07 PM, Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com wrote: On 09/17/2013 01:00 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: But not 6-drive RAID w/ hot spare... ;) Anyone who can't afford to add a single additional drive for the piece of mind has no business buying

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On 2013-09-17 1:07 PM, Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com wrote: On 09/17/2013 01:00 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: But not 6-drive RAID w/ hot spare... ;) Anyone who can't afford to add a single additional drive for the piece of mind has no business buying the RAID card to begin with... Most of

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Any controller that claims RAID10 on a server with 6 drive bays should be able to put all six drives in an array. But you'll get a three-way stripe (better performance) instead of a three-way mirror (better fault tolerance). I forget why I even brought it up. I think it was in order to argue

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Performance doesn't seem to be one of ZFS's strong points. Is it considered suitable for a high-performance server? ZFS is one of the fastest FS I am aware of (if not the fastest). You need a sufficient amount of RAM to make the ARC useful. How much RAM is that? 1G of RAM per 1TB of data

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

I have to set up a server w/ 8x 1TB in about 2 weeks and consider ZFS as well, at least for data. So root-fs would go onto 2x 1TB hdds with conventional partitioning and something like ext4. Is a layout like this with the data on ZFS and the root-fs on ext4 a better choice than ZFS all around?

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Besides performance, are there any drawbacks to ZFS compared to ext4? do yourself three favours: use ECC ram. Lots of it. 16GB DDR3 1600 ECC ram cost you less than 170€. And it is worth it. ZFS showed me just how many silent corruptions can happen on a 'stable' system. Errors never seen

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

Besides performance, are there any drawbacks to ZFS compared to ext4? How about hardened? Does ZFS have any problems interacting with grsecurity or a hardened profile? - Grant

Re: [gentoo-user] ZFS

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 02:11:33PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: Is there a good place to read about these kinds of tuning parameters? Just wondering if anyone experienced running ZFS on Gentoo finds this wiki article worthy of use: http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/ZFS -- Happy Penguin Computers

Re: [gentoo-user] zfs-fuse

Am 30.05.2010 22:49, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=291540 new stable release 0.6.9 out today. ebuild also in the mentioned bug.