Yeah, all 3 controllers I've tested broke 137GB barrier. Unfortunately it seems
that 500GB barrier is unbreakable for them ;-)
Thanks for reply though.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Yeah, all 3 controllers I've tested broke 137GB barrier. Unfortunately it
seems that 500GB barrier
is unbreakable for them ;-)
Why would they not be able to take 500GB disks?
Casper
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Blake wrote:
Hi.
I'm running snv 65 and having an issue much like this:
http://osdir.com/ml/solaris.opensolaris.help/2006-11/msg00047.html
http://osdir.com/ml/solaris.opensolaris.help/2006-11/msg00047.html
Has anyone found a workaround?
Or is this the issue with the BIOS not liking EFI
Hi.
I'm running snv 65 and having an issue much like this:
http://osdir.com/ml/solaris.opensolaris.help/2006-11/msg00047.html
Has anyone found a workaround?
Or is this the issue with the BIOS not liking EFI information that ZFS uses?
Blake
___
I can understand lun expansion capability being an issue with more a
traditional volume manager or even a single lun but with pooled
storage and the ability to expand the pool, benefiting all filesystems
in the pool it seems a shame to consider lun expansion a show stopper.
Even so, having all
I'dont know really. They just hang during POST while determining size of
attached hard drives. 400GB and 500GB drives works without problem. Also,
onboard controller detects all 8 750GB disks, so the problemy must be on the
controller side.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Yannick,
How do you grow the VTOC on UFS dynamically?
- Bob
Yan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8/6/2007 9:29 PM
Hey David
might I need to track the evolution of that size-change utility to ZFS
could I have a contact at Sun that would be able to give me more information on
that ?
Being able to resize LUNS
Title: Re: license keys
Some hints :
This could be done online using VxVM cli : "# vxdisk resize VM_dev"
after lun resizing on the StorageBox side.
This is subject to an expensive license fee
No sure that you could do it online with no VxVM...
C.
Yannick,
How do you grow the VTOC on UFS
I'm running snv 65 and having an issue
much like this:
http://osdir.com/ml/solaris.opensolaris.help/2006-11/msg00047.html
Bug 6414472?
Has anyone found a workaround?
You can try to patch my suggested fix for 6414472 into the ata binary
and see if it helps:
Hi Yannick,
Just to be sure I understand the restriction; with the clariion you
are limited in host side volume management so that basically you use
single luns with ufs filesystems on them and if you need additional
space in the ufs filesystem the only option is to resize the lun on
the clarion,
I have re-flashed the BIOS.
Blake
On 8/7/07, Ian Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Blake wrote:
Hi.
I'm running snv 65 and having an issue much like this:
http://osdir.com/ml/solaris.opensolaris.help/2006-11/msg00047.html
Hello
Is there a way to limit size of filesystem not including snapshots?
Or even better size of data on filesystem regardless of compression.
If not is it planned?
It is hard to explain to user that it is normal that after deleting his files
he did not receive more space. Even harder to ask to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 08/07/2007 10:53:28 AM:
Hello
Is there a way to limit size of filesystem not including snapshots?
Or even better size of data on filesystem regardless of compression.
If not is it planned?
It is hard to explain to user that it is normal that after deleting
6564677 oracle datafiles corrupted on thumper
wow, must be a huuge database server!
:D
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 08:53:28AM -0700, Dmitry wrote:
Hello
Is there a way to limit size of filesystem not including snapshots?
Or even better size of data on filesystem regardless of compression.
If not is it planned?
It is hard to explain to user that it is normal that after deleting
Some time ago I encountered issues using the odd numbered ports on my
SIL3114 based card.
I currently use ports 0 and 2 without issue.
I never did get ports 1 and 3 working...
If I have a disk connected to ports 1 or 3, it just conks out on the way
up when it's initializing the disks.
Jay,
Slides look good, though I'm not not sure what you say along
with Filthy lying on slide 22 related to the ZIL, or
slide 27 which has Worst Feature - thinks hardware is stupid.
Anyway I have some comments on http://www.meangrape.com/2007/08/oscon-zfs
You say:
---
Records in the ZIL are
17 matches
Mail list logo
