Re: [zfs-discuss] gzip compression throttles system?

2007-05-04 Thread Darren J Moffat
Erblichs wrote: So, my first order would be to take 1GB or 10GB .wav files AND time both the kernel implementation of Gzip and the user application. Approx the same times MAY indicate that the kernel implementation gzip funcs should be treatedly maybe more

[zfs-discuss] Filesystem full not reported in /var/adm/messages

2007-05-04 Thread C-EDGE
Hello, Is someone able to explain me why zfs does not report a filesystem full in /var/adm/messages ? Did I miss something or is it a expected behaviour ? Tested on Solaris 11/06 (ZFS version 3) Thank you for your feedback ! This message posted from opensolaris.org

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS vs UFS2 overhead and may be a bug?

2007-05-04 Thread Pawel Jakub Dawidek
On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 02:15:45PM -0700, Bakul Shah wrote: [originally reported for ZFS on FreeBSD but Pawel Jakub Dawid says this problem also exists on Solaris hence this email.] Thanks! Summary: on ZFS, overhead for reading a hole seems far worse than actual reading from a disk. Small

[zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Re: Re: ZFS improvements

2007-05-04 Thread Gino
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 09:38:47AM -0700, Gino wrote: we had 5 corrupted zpool (on different servers and different SANs) ! With Solaris up to S10U3 and Nevada up to snv59 we are able to corrupt easily a zpool only disconnecting a few times one or more luns of a zpool under high i/o

Re: [zfs-discuss] gzip compression throttles system?

2007-05-04 Thread Erblichs
Darren Moffat, Yes and no. A earlier statement within this discussion was whether gzip is appropriate for .wav files. This just gets a relative time to compress. And relative sizes of the files after the compression. My assumption is that gzip will run as

[zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Re: gzip compression throttles system?

2007-05-04 Thread Jürgen Keil
A couple more questions here. ... What do you have zfs compresison set to? The gzip level is tunable, according to zfs set, anyway: PROPERTY EDIT INHERIT VALUES compression YES YES on | off | lzjb | gzip | gzip-[1-9] I've used the default gzip compression level, that

[zfs-discuss] Force rewriting of all data, to push stripes onto newly added devices?

2007-05-04 Thread Mario Goebbels
I'm just in sort of a scenario, where I've added devices to a pool and would now like the existing data to be spread across the new drives, to increase the performance. Is there a way to do it, like a scrub? Or would I have to have all files to copy over themselves, or similar hacks? Thanks,

Re: [zfs-discuss] iscsitadm local_name in ZFS

2007-05-04 Thread cedric briner
cedric briner wrote: hello dear community, Is there a way to have a ``local_name'' as define in iscsitadm.1m when you verbshareiscsi/verb a zvol. This way, it will give even easier way to identify an device through IQN. Ced. Okay no reply from you so... maybe I didn't make myself well

[zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Re: gzip compression throttles system?

2007-05-04 Thread Jürgen Keil
Roch Bourbonnais wrote with recent bits ZFS compression is now handled concurrently with many CPUs working on different records. So this load will burn more CPUs and acheive it's results (compression) faster. Is this done using the taskq's, created in spa_activate()?

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: gzip compression throttles system?

2007-05-04 Thread Roch - PAE
Ian Collins writes: Roch Bourbonnais wrote: with recent bits ZFS compression is now handled concurrently with many CPUs working on different records. So this load will burn more CPUs and acheive it's results (compression) faster. Would changing (selecting a smaller)

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force rewriting of all data, to push stripes onto newly added devices?

2007-05-04 Thread Bart Smaalders
Mario Goebbels wrote: I'm just in sort of a scenario, where I've added devices to a pool and would now like the existing data to be spread across the new drives, to increase the performance. Is there a way to do it, like a scrub? Or would I have to have all files to copy over themselves, or

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force rewriting of all data, to push stripes onto newly added devices?

2007-05-04 Thread Richard Elling
Mario Goebbels wrote: I'm just in sort of a scenario, where I've added devices to a pool and would now like the existing data to be spread across the new drives, to increase the performance. Is there a way to do it, like a scrub? Or would I have to have all files to copy over themselves, or

[zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Re: gzip compression throttles system?

2007-05-04 Thread Jürgen Keil
A couple more questions here. ... You still have idle time in this lockstat (and mpstat). What do you get for a lockstat -A -D 20 sleep 30? Do you see anyone with long lock hold times, long sleeps, or excessive spinning? Hmm, I ran a series of lockstat -A -l ph_mutex -s 16 -D 20 sleep 5

[zfs-discuss] Motley group of discs?

2007-05-04 Thread Lee Fyock
Hi-- I'm looking forward to using zfs on my Mac at some point. My desktop server (a dual-1.25GHz G4) has a motley collection of discs that has accreted over the years: internal EIDE 320GB (boot drive), internal 250, 200 and 160 GB drives, and an external USB 2.0 600 GB drive. My guess is

Re: [zfs-discuss] ARC, mmap, pagecache...

2007-05-04 Thread Roch - PAE
Manoj Joseph writes: Hi, I was wondering about the ARC and its interaction with the VM pagecache... When a file on a ZFS filesystem is mmaped, does the ARC cache get mapped to the process' virtual memory? Or is there another copy? My understanding is, The ARC does not get mapped

Re: [zfs-discuss] ARC, mmap, pagecache...

2007-05-04 Thread Matty
On 5/4/07, Roch - PAE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Manoj Joseph writes: Hi, I was wondering about the ARC and its interaction with the VM pagecache... When a file on a ZFS filesystem is mmaped, does the ARC cache get mapped to the process' virtual memory? Or is there another copy? My

[zfs-discuss] thoughts on ZFS copies

2007-05-04 Thread Richard Elling
I've put together some thoughts on the ZFS copies property. http://blogs.sun.com/relling/entry/zfs_copies_and_data_protection I hope that you might find this useful. I tried to use simplified drawings to illustrate the important points. Feedback appreciated. There is more work to be

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motley group of discs?

2007-05-04 Thread Toby Thain
On 4-May-07, at 6:53 PM, Al Hopper wrote: ... [1] it continues to amaze me that many sites, large or small, don't have a (written) policy for mechanical component replacement - whether disk drives or fans. You're not the only one. In fact, while I'm not exactly talking enterprise level

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motley group of discs?

2007-05-04 Thread mike
Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to corrupt your data? To me it sounds like he is a SOHO user; may not have a lot of funds to go out and swap hardware on a whim like a company might. ZFS in

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motley group of discs?

2007-05-04 Thread Ian Collins
mike wrote: Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to corrupt your data? To me it sounds like he is a SOHO user; may not have a lot of funds to go out and swap hardware on a whim like a company

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motley group of discs?

2007-05-04 Thread Al Hopper
On Fri, 4 May 2007, mike wrote: Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to corrupt your data? Yes - I won't argue that ZFS can be applied exactly as you state above. However, ZFS is no substitute

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motley group of discs?

2007-05-04 Thread mike
On 5/4/07, Al Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes - I won't argue that ZFS can be applied exactly as you state above. However, ZFS is no substitute for bad practices that include: - not proactively replacing mechanical components *before* they fail - not having maintenance policies in place I

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motley group of discs?

2007-05-04 Thread Lee Fyock
I didn't mean to kick up a fuss. I'm reasonably zfs-savvy in that I've been reading about it for a year or more. I'm a Mac developer and general geek; I'm excited about zfs because it's new and cool. At some point I'll replace my old desktop machine with something new and better --

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motley group of discs?

2007-05-04 Thread Ian Collins
Lee Fyock wrote: I didn't mean to kick up a fuss. I'm reasonably zfs-savvy in that I've been reading about it for a year or more. I'm a Mac developer and general geek; I'm excited about zfs because it's new and cool. At some point I'll replace my old desktop machine with something new and

[zfs-discuss] recovered state after system crash

2007-05-04 Thread kyusun Chang
If system crashes some time after last commit of transaction group (TxG), what happens to the file system transactions since the last commit of TxG (I presume last commit of TxG represents the last on-disk consistency)? Does ZFS recover all file system transactions which it returned with success

Re: [zfs-discuss] recovered state after system crash

2007-05-04 Thread Neil Perrin
kyusun Chang wrote On 05/04/07 19:34,: If system crashes some time after last commit of transaction group (TxG), what happens to the file system transactions since the last commit of TxG They are lost, unless they were synchronous (see below). (I presume last commit of TxG represents the