Ayaz,
Ayaz Anjum wrote:
HI !
I have some concerns here, from my experience in the past, touching a
file ( doing some IO ) will cause the ufs filesystem to failover, unlike
zfs where it did not ! Why the behaviour of zfs different than ufs ? is
not this compromising data integrity ?
As
. Please
explain.
thaks
Ayaz Anjum
Darren Dunham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
03/12/2007 05:45 AM
To
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
cc
Subject
Re: Re[2]: [zfs-discuss] writes lost with zfs !
I have some concerns here
Milkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Recipients:
Manoj Joseph [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ayaz Anjum
[EMAIL PROTECTED],zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject:
Re[2]: [zfs-discuss] writes lost with zfs !
Date:
03/08/2007 02:34:20 PM
Hello Manoj,
Thursday, March 8, 2007, 7:10:57 AM, you wrote:
MJ Ayaz Anjum wrote:
2
I have some concerns here, from my experience in the past, touching a
file ( doing some IO ) will cause the ufs filesystem to failover, unlike
zfs where it did not ! Why the behaviour of zfs different than ufs ?
UFS always does synchronous metadata updates. So a 'touch' that creates
a file
updating file. Hence my concerns about data integrity. Please
explain.
thaks
Ayaz Anjum
Darren Dunham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
03/12/2007 05:45 AM
To
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
cc
Subject
Re: Re[2]: [zfs-discuss] writes lost with zfs !
I have some concerns here
@opensolaris.org
cc
Subject
Re: Re[2]: [zfs-discuss] writes lost with zfs !
I have some concerns here, from my experience in the past,
touching a
file ( doing some IO ) will cause the ufs filesystem to failover,
unlike
zfs where it did not ! Why the behaviour of zfs different than ufs ?
UFS always
Heya,
I believe Robert and Darren have offered sufficient explanations: You
cannot be assured of committed data unless you've sync'd it. You are
only risking data loss if your users and/or applications assume data
is committed without seeing a completed sync, which would be a design
error.
Hello Manoj,
Thursday, March 8, 2007, 7:10:57 AM, you wrote:
MJ Ayaz Anjum wrote:
2. with zfs mounted on one cluster node, i created a file and keeps it
updating every second, then i removed the fc cable, the writes are still
continuing to the file system, after 10 seconds i have put back
robert,
this applies only if you have full control on the application forsure
..but how do you do it if you don't own the application ... can you
mount zfs with forcedirectio flag ?
selim
On 3/8/07, Robert Milkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Manoj,
Thursday, March 8, 2007, 7:10:57 AM,
Hello Selim,
Thursday, March 8, 2007, 8:08:50 PM, you wrote:
SD robert,
SD this applies only if you have full control on the application forsure
SD ..but how do you do it if you don't own the application ... can you
SD mount zfs with forcedirectio flag ?
No
--
Best regards,
Robert
Le 8 mars 07 à 20:08, Selim Daoud a écrit :
robert,
this applies only if you have full control on the application forsure
..but how do you do it if you don't own the application ... can you
mount zfs with forcedirectio flag ?
selim
ufs directio and O_DSYNC are different things.
Would a
Would a forcesync flag be something of interest to the community ?
Yes.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
it's an absolute necessity
On 3/8/07, Roch Bourbonnais [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le 8 mars 07 à 20:08, Selim Daoud a écrit :
robert,
this applies only if you have full control on the application forsure
..but how do you do it if you don't own the application ... can you
mount zfs with
HI !
I have tested the following scenario
created a zfs filesystem as part of HAStoragePlus in SunCluster 3.2,
Solaris 11/06
Currently i am having only one fc hba per server.
1. There is no IO to the zfs mountpoint. I disconnected the FC cable.
Filesystem on zfs still shows as mounted
Ayaz Anjum wrote:
HI !
I have tested the following scenario
created a zfs filesystem as part of HAStoragePlus in SunCluster 3.2,
Solaris 11/06
Currently i am having only one fc hba per server.
1. There is no IO to the zfs mountpoint. I disconnected the FC cable.
Filesystem on zfs still
15 matches
Mail list logo
