-Original Message-
From: Erik Trimble [mailto:erik.trim...@oracle.com]
Sent: 星期四, 七月 01, 2010 11:45
To: Fred Liu
Cc: Bob Friesenhahn; 'OpenSolaris ZFS discuss'
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] OCZ Vertex 2 Pro performance numbers
On 6/30/2010 7:17 PM, Fred Liu wrote:
See. Thanks.
Victor,
I've reproduced the crash and have vmdump.0 and dump device files. How do I
query the stack on crash for your analysis? What other analysis should I
provide?
Thanks
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
I plan on removing the second USAS-L8i and connect
all 16 drives to the
first USAS-L8i when I need more storage capacity. I
have no doubt that
it will work as intended. I will report to the list
otherwise.
I'm a little late to the party here. First, I'd like to thank those pioneers
who
Hello list,
I wanted to test deduplication a little and did a experiment.
My question was: can I dedupe infinite or is ther a upper limit ?
So for that I did a very basic test.
- I created a ramdisk-pool (1GB)
- enabled dedup and
- wrote zeros to it (in one single file) until an error is
I also have this problem, with 134 if I delete big snapshots the server hangs
only responding to ping.
I also have the ZVOL issue.
Any news about having them solved?
In my case this is a big problem since I'm using osol as a file server...
Thanks
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Greetings,
we are running a few databases of currently 200GB (growing) in total for data
warehousing:
- new data via INSERTs for (up to) millions of rows per day; sometimes with
UPDATEs
- most data in a single table (= 10 to 100s of millions of rows)
- queries SELECT subsets of this table via
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:57:53PM +0530, Anil Gulecha wrote:
Hi All,
On behalf of NexentaStor team, I'm happy to announce the release of
NexentaStor Community Edition 3.0.3. This release is the result of the
community efforts of Nexenta Partners and users.
Changes over 3.0.2 include
*
From: Asif Iqbal [mailto:vad...@gmail.com]
currently to speed up the zfs send| zfs recv I am using mbuffer. It
moves the data
lot faster than using netcat (or ssh) as the transport method
Yup, this works because network and disk latency can both be variable. So
without buffering, your data
On Jul 1, 2010, at 10:39, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
basicly 5-30 seconds after login prompt shows up on the console
the server will reboot due to kernel crash.
the error seems to be about the broadcom nic driver..
Is this a known bug?
Please contact Nexenta via their support infrastructure (web
Dear Forum
I use a KINGSTON SNV125-S2/30GB SSD on a ASUS M3A78-CM Motherboard (AMD SB700
Chipset).
SATA Type (in BIOS) is SATA
Os : SunOS homesvr 5.11 snv_134 i86pc i386 i86pc
When I scrub my pool I got a lot of checksum errors :
NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
rpool
Joachim Worringen wrote:
Greetings,
we are running a few databases of currently 200GB
(growing) in total for data warehousing:
- new data via INSERTs for (up to) millions of rows
per day; sometimes with UPDATEs
- most data in a single table (= 10 to 100s of
millions of rows)
- queries
I'm new with ZFS, but I have had good success using it with raw physical disks.
One of my systems has access to an iSCSI storage target. The underlying
physical array is in a propreitary disk storage device from Promise. So the
question is, when building a OpenSolaris host to store its data on
Hi Benjamin,
I'm not familiar with this disk but you can see the fmstat output that
disk, system event, and zfs-related diagnostics are on overtime about
something and its probably this disk.
You can get further details from fmdump -eV and you will probably
see lots of checksum errors on this
It looks like I have some leftovers of old clones that I cannot delete:
Clone name is tank/WinSrv/Latest
I'm trying:
zfs destroy -f -R tank/WinSrv/Latest
cannot unshare 'tank/WinSrv/Latest': path doesn't exist: unshare(1M) failed
Please help me to get rid of this garbage.
Thanks a lot.
--
- Original Message -
I'm new with ZFS, but I have had good success using it with raw
physical disks. One of my systems has access to an iSCSI storage
target. The underlying physical array is in a propreitary disk storage
device from Promise. So the question is, when building a
Hi! We've put 28x 750GB SATA drives in a RAIDZ2 pool (a single vdev) and we
get about 80MB/s in sequential read or write. We're running local tests on the
server itself (no network involved). Is that what we should be expecting? It
seems slow to me.
Thanks
The best would be to export the drives in JBOD style, one array per
drive. If you rely on the Promise RAID, it you won't be able to
recover from silent errors. I'm in the progress of moving from a
NexSAN RAID to a JBOD-like style just because of that (we had data
corruption on the RAID, stuff
Hi! We've put 28x 750GB SATA drives in a RAIDZ2 pool (a single vdev) and we get
about 80MB/s in sequential read or write. We're running local tests on the
server itself (no network involved). Is that what we should be expecting? It
seems slow to me.
Please read the ZFS best practices
- Original Message -
I also have this problem, with 134 if I delete big snapshots the
server hangs only responding to ping.
I also have the ZVOL issue.
Any news about having them solved?
In my case this is a big problem since I'm using osol as a file
server...
Are you using dedup?
On a slightly different but related topic, anyone have advice on how
to connect up my drives? I've got room for 20 pool drives in the case.
I'll have two AOC-USAS-L8i cards along with cables to connect 16 SATA2
drives. The motherboard has 6 SATA2 connectors plus 2 SATA3
connectors. I was
Hi! We've put 28x 750GB SATA drives in a RAIDZ2 pool (a single vdev) and we get
about 80MB/s in sequential read or write. We're running local tests on the
server itself (no network involved). Is that what we should be expecting? It
seems slow to me.
Please read the ZFS best
Another question...We're building a ZFS NAS/SAN out of the following JBODs we
already own:
2x 15x 1000GB SATA3x 15x 750GB SATA2x 12x 600GB SAS 15K4x 15x 300GB SAS 15K
That's a lot of spindles we'd like to benefit from, but our assumption is that
we should split these in two separate pools,
Sorry for the formatting, that's
2x 15x 1000GB SATA
3x 15x 750GB SATA
2x 12x 600GB SAS 15K
4x 15x 300GB SAS 15K
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
- Original Message -
Another question...
We're building a ZFS NAS/SAN out of the following JBODs we already
own:
2x 15x 1000GB SATA
3x 15x 750GB SATA
2x 12x 600GB SAS 15K
4x 15x 300GB SAS 15K
That's a lot of spindles we'd like to benefit from, but our assumption
is that we
As the 15k drives are faster seek-wise (and possibly faster for linear I/O),
you may want to separate them into different VDEVs or even pools, but then,
it's quite impossible to give a correct answer unless knowing what it's
going to be used for.Mostly database duty. Also, using 10+
Hello,
this may not apply to your machine. I have two changes to your setup:
* Opensolaris instead of Nexenta
* DL585G1 instead of your DL380G4
Here's my problem: reproducible crash after a certain time (1:30h in my case).
Explanation: the HP machine has enterprise features (ECC RAM) and
Thanks roy, I read a lot around and also was thinking it was a dedup-related
problem. Although I did not find any indication of how many RAM is enough, and
never find something saying Do not use dedup, it will definitely crash your
server. I'm using a Dell Xeon with 4 Gb of RAM, maybe it is not
- Original Message -
Thanks roy, I read a lot around and also was thinking it was a
dedup-related problem. Although I did not find any indication of how
many RAM is enough, and never find something saying Do not use dedup,
it will definitely crash your server. I'm using a Dell Xeon
On 7/1/2010 12:23 PM, Lo Zio wrote:
Thanks roy, I read a lot around and also was thinking it was a dedup-related problem.
Although I did not find any indication of how many RAM is enough, and never find
something saying Do not use dedup, it will definitely crash your server. I'm
using a Dell
Folks,
I am learning more about zfs storage. It appears, zfs pool can be created on a
raw disk. There is no need to create any partitions, etc. on the disk. Does
this mean there is no need to run format on a raw disk?
I have added a new disk to my system. It shows up as /dev/rdsk/c8t1d0s0. Do
Even easier, use the zpool create command to create a pool
on c8t1d0, using the whole disk. Try this:
# zpool create MyData c8t1d0
cs
On 07/01/10 16:01, Peter Taps wrote:
Folks,
I am learning more about zfs storage. It appears, zfs pool can be created on a raw disk.
There is no need to
Victor,
A little more info on the crash, from the messages file is attached here. I
have also decompressed the dump with savecore to generate unix.0, vmcore.0, and
vmdump.0.
Jun 30 19:39:10 HL-SAN unix: [ID 836849 kern.notice]
Jun 30 19:39:10 HL-SAN ^Mpanic[cpu3]/thread=ff0017909c60:
Folks.
My env is Solaris 10 update 8 amd64. Does LUN alignment matter when I'm
creating zpool's on disks (lun's) with EFI labels and providing zpool the
entire disk?
I recently read some sun/oracle docs and blog posts about adjusting the
starting sector for partition 0 (in format -e) to
Awesome. Thank you, CIndy.
Regards,
Peter
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Benjamin Grogg
When I scrub my pool I got a lot of checksum errors :
NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
rpool DEGRADED 0 0 5
c8d0s0DEGRADED
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Peter Taps
I am learning more about zfs storage. It appears, zfs pool can be
created on a raw disk. There is no need to create any partitions, etc.
on the disk. Does this mean there is no
doh! It turns out the host in question is actually a Solaris 10 update 6 host.
It appears that an Solaris 10 update 8 host actually sets the start sector at
256.
So to simplify the question. If I'm using ZFS with EFI label and full disk
do I even need to worry about lun alignment? I was
Actually, I think the rule-of-thumb is 270 bytes/DDT
entry. It's 200
bytes of ARC for every L2ARC entry.
DDT doesn't count for this ARC space usage
E.g.:I have 1TB of 4k files that are to be
deduped, and it turns
out that I have about a 5:1 dedup ratio. I'd also
like to see
I created a zpool called 'data' from 7 disks.
I created zfs filesystems on the zpool for each Xen vm
I can choose to recursively snapshot all 'data'
I can choose to snapshot the individual 'directories'
If you use mkdir, I don't believe you can snapshot/restore at that level
Malachi de
On 07/01/10 22:33, Erik Trimble wrote:
On 7/1/2010 9:23 PM, Geoff Nordli wrote:
Hi Erik.
Are you saying the DDT will automatically look to be stored in an
L2ARC device if one exists in the pool, instead of using ARC?
Or is there some sort of memory pressure point where the DDT gets
moved
40 matches
Mail list logo
