Hi All,
I've noticed that link to dmu_txg.c from the ZFS Source Code tour is
broken. It looks like it dmu_txg.c should be changed to dmu_tx.c
Please take care of this.
- Victor
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 03:56:00PM -0700, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
Matthew Ahrens wrote:
[...]
Given the overwhelming criticism of this feature, I'm going to shelve it for
now.
I'd really like to see this feature. You say ZFS should change our view
on filesystems, I say be consequent.
In ZFS
Some people have privately asked me the configuration details when the problem
was encountered. Here they are:
zonecfg:bluenile info
zonepath: /zones/bluenile
autoboot: false
pool:
inherit-pkg-dir:
dir: /lib
inherit-pkg-dir:
dir: /platform
inherit-pkg-dir:
dir: /sbin
Hi,
So recently, i decided to test out some of the ideas i've been toying
with, and decided to create 50 000 and 100 000 filesystems, the test
machine was a nice V20Z with dual 1.8 opterons, 4gb ram, connecting a
scsi 3310 raid array, via two scsi controllers.
Now creating the mass of
Patrick wrote:
Hi,
So recently, i decided to test out some of the ideas i've been toying
with, and decided to create 50 000 and 100 000 filesystems, the test
machine was a nice V20Z with dual 1.8 opterons, 4gb ram, connecting a
scsi 3310 raid array, via two scsi controllers.
Now creating the
Hi,
*sigh*, one of the issues we recognized, when we introduced the new
cheap/fast file system creation, was that this new model would stress
the scalability (or lack thereof) of other parts of the operating
system. This is a prime example. I think the notion of an automount
option for zfs
Fixed. Thank you for the heads up on that.
Noel
On Sep 27, 2006, at 1:04 AM, Victor Latushkin wrote:
Hi All,
I've noticed that link to dmu_txg.c from the ZFS Source Code tour
is broken. It looks like it dmu_txg.c should be changed to dmu_tx.c
Please take care of this.
- Victor
Is it possible to destroy a pool by ID? I created two pools with the
same name, and want to destroy one of them
-neel
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Thank you Bill for your clear description.
Now I have to find a way to justify myself with my head office that after
spending 100k+ in hw and migrating to the most advanced OS we are running
about 8 time slower :)
Anyway I have a problem much more serious than rsync process speed. I hope
observations below...
Bill Moore wrote:
Thanks, Chris, for digging into this and sharing your results. These
seemingly stranded sectors are actually properly accounted for in terms
of space utilization, since they are actually unusable while maintaining
integrity in the face of a single drive
Richard Elling - PAE wrote:
More generally, I could suggest that we use an odd number of vdevs
for raidz and an even number for mirrors and raidz2.
Thoughts?
Sounds good to me. I'd make sure it's in the same section of the BP
guide as Align the block size with your app... type notes.
On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 16:13 -0700, Noel Dellofano wrote:
I can also reproduce this on my test machines and have opened up CR
6475506 panic in dmu_recvbackup due to NULL pointer dereference
to track this problem. This is most likely due to recent changes
made in the snapshot code for -F.
Sorry, But i was able to dd zero's to the devices zpool status
gave for the incorrect zpool, and made it disappear. There are
two possible cases that could have made this happen
1. When I first created the zpool (zpool create zfsdata ...)
I control-c'd the command. I ran it to completion the
All,
Customer would like to confirm this if this is supported or not.
=
I've created non global zones with ZFS underneath the root filesystem
for a new SAP
environment that's approaching production next week. Then I read that
its not supported,
but many people in the
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 09:53:32AM -0700, Neelakanth Nadgir wrote:
Is it possible to destroy a pool by ID? I created two pools with the
same name, and want to destroy one of them
How do you manage to do that? This should be impossible, and is a bug
in ZFS somewhere. The internal AVL
I was trying to import the pool, but got an error that there
wee 2 pools with the same name (in exported state) and I had
to import by id. Thus I wanted to destroy the other pool
-neel
Sometime ago, Darren Dunham said:
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 09:53:32AM -0700, Neelakanth Nadgir wrote:
Is it
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006, Gino Ruopolo wrote:
Thank you Bill for your clear description.
Now I have to find a way to justify myself with my head office that after
spending 100k+ in hw and migrating to the most advanced OS we are running
about 8 time slower :)
Anyway I have a problem much
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006, Arlina Goce-Capiral wrote:
All,
Customer would like to confirm this if this is supported or not.
=
I've created non global zones with ZFS underneath the root filesystem
for a new SAP
environment that's approaching production next week. Then I read
Hey,
I did a similar test a couple of months ago, albeit on a smaller system,
and 'only' 10,000 users. I saw a similar delay at boot time, but also
saw a large amount of memory utilisation.
I didn't notice the major memory usage, but the box had no other use,
than to mount these mass of empty
Thank you Al for your quick response.
I will forward this info to customer and inform him about it.
Arlina-
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
That was it. Thanks, Matt.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
21 matches
Mail list logo
