Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Self-tuning recordsize

2006-10-22 Thread Jeremy Teo
Hello all, Isn't a large block size a simple case of prefetching? In other words, if we possessed an intelligent prefetch implementation, would there still be a need for large block sizes? (Thinking aloud) :) -- Regards, Jeremy ___ zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] zpool question.

2006-10-22 Thread Krzys
I have solaris 10 U2 and I have raidz partition setup on 5 disks, I just added a new disk and was wondering, can I add another disk to raidz? I was able to add it to a pool but I do not think it added it to zpool. [13:38:41] /root zpool status -v mypool2 pool: mypool2 state: ONLINE

[zfs-discuss] ZFS RAID-10

2006-10-22 Thread Stephen Le
Is it possible to construct a RAID-10 array with ZFS? I've read through the ZFS documentation, and it appears that the only way to create a RAID-10 array would be to create two mirrored (RAID-1) emulated volumes in ZFS and combine those to create the outer RAID-0 volume. Am I approaching this

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Cloning a disk w/ ZFS in it

2006-10-22 Thread Krzys
yeah disks need to be identical but why do you need to do prtvtoc and fmthard to duplicate the disk label (before the dd), I thought that dd would take care of all of that... whenever I used dd I used it on slice 2 and I never had to do prtvtoc and fmthard... Juts make sure disks are identical

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Cloning a disk w/ ZFS in it

2006-10-22 Thread Jonathan Edwards
you don't really need to do the prtvtoc and fmthard with the old Sun labels if you start at cylinder 0 since you're doing a bit - bit copy with dd .. but, keep in mind: - The Sun VTOC is the first 512B and s2 *typically* should start at cylinder 0 (unless it's been redefined .. check!) -

[zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS RAID-10

2006-10-22 Thread Stephen Le
After some experimentation, it seems something like the following command would create a RAID-10 equivalent: zpool create tank mirror [i]disk1[/i] [i]disk2[/i] mirror [i]disk3[/i] [i]disk4[/i] This message posted from opensolaris.org ___

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS RAID-10

2006-10-22 Thread Al Hopper
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, Stephen Le wrote: Is it possible to construct a RAID-10 array with ZFS? I've read through the ZFS documentation, and it appears that the only way to create a RAID-10 array would be to create two mirrored (RAID-1) emulated volumes in ZFS and combine those to create the

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS RAID-10

2006-10-22 Thread Dale Ghent
On Oct 22, 2006, at 9:57 PM, Al Hopper wrote: On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, Stephen Le wrote: Is it possible to construct a RAID-10 array with ZFS? I've read through the ZFS documentation, and it appears that the only way to create a RAID-10 array would be to create two mirrored (RAID-1) emulated

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS RAID-10

2006-10-22 Thread Dennis Clarke
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, Stephen Le wrote: Is it possible to construct a RAID-10 array with ZFS? I've read through the ZFS documentation, and it appears that the only way to create a RAID-10 array would be to create two mirrored (RAID-1) emulated volumes in ZFS and combine those to create the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Self-tuning recordsize

2006-10-22 Thread Torrey McMahon
Reads? Maybe. Writes are an other matter. Namely the overhead associated with turning a large write into a lot of small writes. (Checksums for example.) Jeremy Teo wrote: Hello all, Isn't a large block size a simple case of prefetching? In other words, if we possessed an intelligent prefetch

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS RAID-10

2006-10-22 Thread Richard Elling - PAE
Dennis Clarke wrote: While ZFS may do a similar thing *I don't know* if there is a published document yet that shows conclusively that ZFS will survive multiple disk failures. ?? why not? Perhaps this is just too simple and therefore doesn't get explained well. Note that SVM (nee Solstice

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS RAID-10

2006-10-22 Thread Dennis Clarke
Dennis Clarke wrote: While ZFS may do a similar thing *I don't know* if there is a published document yet that shows conclusively that ZFS will survive multiple disk failures. ?? why not? Perhaps this is just too simple and therefore doesn't get explained well. That is not what I wrote.