Hi,
Quick update:
I left memtest running over night - 39 passes, no errors.
I also attempted to force the BIOS to run the memory at 800MHz 5-5-5-15 as
suggested - but the machine became very unstable - long boot times; PCI-Express
failure of Yukon network card on booting etc. I've switched
Hmm...my SB2K, 2GB RAM, 2x 1050MHz UltraSPARC III Cu CPU, seems
to freeze momentarily for a couple of seconds every now and then in
a zfs root setup on snv_90, which it never did with mostly ufs on snv_81;
that despite having much faster disks now (LSI SAS 3800X and a pair of
Seagate 1TB SAS
Are you using
set md:mirrored_root_flag=1
in /etc/system?
See the entry for md:mirrored_root_flag on
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2724/chapter2-156?a=view
keeping in mind all the cautions...
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
I wonder if one couldln't reduce (but probably not eliminate) the likelihood
of this sort of situation by setting refreservation significantly lower than
reservation?
Along those lines, I don't see any property that would restrict the number
of concurrent snapshots of a dataset :-( I think that
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 02:40:34AM -0700, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
the SAS drives, at a mere 7200 RPM can sustain a sequential transfer
rate about 2.5x that of the 10KRPM FC drives!).
I think that't my favorite part about these new high density drives.
Don't get me wrong, a TB (or more!) in a
Hi ;
Is there any one who have used adaptec 3085 or smilar ? I'd like to learn if
larger than 2 TB lun's are supported?
Best regards
http://www.sun.com/ http://www.sun.com/emrkt/sigs/6g_top.gif
Mertol Ozyoney
Storage Practice - Sales Manager
Sun Microsystems, TR
Istanbul TR
No, not an issue :-)
This is just a thank you note to the ZFS team and all contributors that worked
hard to deliver ZFS boot support in snv_90. ZFS is a great achievement for
Solaris and operating systems in general, and I believe ZFS boot will make the
lives of many, many computer users much
Title: test2
Hi there,
I need to migrate zfs data from a huge vdev
to a
smaller one, as only 5% of the first vdev is used.
Many zfs items were created on the source vdev, organized as tree,
subtrees,
etc.
zpool attach and detach won't help here as the target device is
smaller than the source
On 6/13/08 12:25 AM, Keith Bierman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I could easily imagine providing two tiers of storage for a
university environment ... one which wasn't backed up, and doesn't
come with any serious promises ... which could be pretty inexpensive
and the second tier which has the
On 6/12/08 1:46 PM, Chris Siebenmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Every time I've come across a usage scenario where the submitter asks
| for per user quotas, its usually a university type scenario where
| univeristies are notorious for providing lots of CPU horsepower (many,
| many servers)
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
Hmm...my SB2K, 2GB RAM, 2x 1050MHz UltraSPARC III Cu CPU, seems
to freeze momentarily for a couple of seconds every now and then in
a zfs root setup on snv_90, which it never did with mostly ufs on snv_81;
that despite having much faster disks
Charles Soto wrote:
On 6/13/08 12:25 AM, Keith Bierman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I could easily imagine providing two tiers of storage for a
university environment ... one which wasn't backed up, and doesn't
come with any serious promises ... which could be pretty inexpensive
and the
Ben Middleton wrote:
Hi,
Quick update:
I left memtest running over night - 39 passes, no errors.
I also attempted to force the BIOS to run the memory at 800MHz 5-5-5-15 as
suggested - but the machine became very unstable - long boot times;
PCI-Express failure of Yukon network card on
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Albert Lee wrote:
While the S10 updates include features backported from Nevada you can
only upgrade from S10 to Solaris Express, not the other way around (which
would technically be a downgrade).
Understood; I had no intention of installing SXCE and then trying to layer
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Tim wrote:
They aren't even close to each other. Things like in-kernel cifs will
never be put back.
Right, so that would be a feature I would not avail of. In terms of ZFS, I
think the feature set of SXCE will be closer to S10U6 than S10U5. I want to
start testing out ZFS
I want to
start testing out ZFS boot and zfs allow to minimize the delay between the
release of U6 and my production deployment.
Good observation. I mention this in every Solaris briefing that I do.
Get some stick time with this capability using SXCE or OpenSolaris so
that you can reduce
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Bob Netherton wrote:
Get some stick time with this capability using SXCE or OpenSolaris so
that you can reduce the time it takes to deploy whatever upcoming Solaris
update has ZFS root (how's that for being evasive).
I've heard from reasonably credible sources that
S10 U4 and U5 both use ZFS v4 (you specified your U4 machine as using v3).
If you have access to both machines, you can do 'zpool upgrade -v' to
confirm which versions are being used.
-Brian
Peter Hawkins wrote:
By the way I'm sure the pool was created using S10 Update 5
This message
Brian H. Nelson wrote:
S10 U4 and U5 both use ZFS v4 (you specified your U4 machine as using v3).
If you have access to both machines, you can do 'zpool upgrade -v' to
confirm which versions are being used.
careful - there's zpool version and zfs version, and they're not the same:
$ uname
Followup with modified test plan:
1) Yank disk0 from V240.
Waited for it to be marked FAULTED in zpool status -x
2) Inserted new disk0 scavenged from another system
3) Ran format to set s0 as full-disk to agree with other system
4) Halted system
5) boot disk1
Wanted to make sure Jumpstart mirror
I have a disk on ZFS created by snv_79b (sxde4) and one on ZFS created
by snv_90 (sxce). I wonder, how do I know a ZFS version has to be
upgraded or not? I.e. are the ZFS versions of sxde and sxce the same?
How do I verify that?
--
Dick Hoogendijk -- PGP/GnuPG key: 01D2433D
++ http://nagual.nl/
You want to install the zfs boot block, not the ufs bootblock.
Check the syntax in the ZFS Admin Guide that is available
from this location:
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/docs
Cindy
- Original Message -
From: Vincent Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, June 13, 2008 3:49 pm
Even though ZFS is the last word in filesystems, is there something
more that an application can do when writing large files sequentially
in order to assure that the data is stored as contiguously as
possible? Does this notion even make sense given that ZFS load-shares
large blocks across a
You want to install the zfs boot block, not the ufs
bootblock.
Oh duh. I tried to correct my mistake using this:
installboot /usr/platform/`uname -i`/lib/fs/zfs/bootblk /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0s0
And now get this:
Boot device: disk File and args:
Can't mount root
Evaluating:
The file just loaded
As a followup, I see that there is an optional posix_fallocate()
function defined in the POSIX standard
(http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/posix_fallocate.html)
With some Linux-related discussion at http://lwn.net/Articles/226710/.
Recent Linux (2.6.23) has implemented
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Paul B. Henson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Bob Netherton wrote:
Get some stick time with this capability using SXCE or OpenSolaris so
that you can reduce the time it takes to deploy whatever upcoming Solaris
update has ZFS root (how's that
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 4:48 PM, Dick Hoogendijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a disk on ZFS created by snv_79b (sxde4) and one on ZFS created
by snv_90 (sxce). I wonder, how do I know a ZFS version has to be
upgraded or not? I.e. are the ZFS versions of sxde and sxce the same?
How do I
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 6:17 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a followup, I see that there is an optional posix_fallocate()
function defined in the POSIX standard
(http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/posix_fallocate.html)
With some Linux-related discussion at
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Al Hopper wrote:
storage sub-system. Currently, ZFS determines if the access pattern
is random or sequential and there is no mechanism to provide it with
hints.
Right. But this untunable generality may prevent it from being used
for real-time uncompressed 2K resolution
29 matches
Mail list logo
