[zfs-discuss] Where does the zpool info for it's label get saved, man page m. EFI label?
I reloaded my system on c0d0 messed up the rounding cyl, then when I reloaded the format command would only work on c0d1 and not c0d0, so then booted on the CD then redefined on c0d0 slice 3 - 7, to the original partition values. Where does the zpool info get saved, EFI label is mentioned in the man page? lucky my zfs file system was on c0d1 slice 5. # zpool import pool: zones id: 4567711835620380868 state: ONLINE action: The pool can be imported using its name or numeric identifier. The pool may be active on on another system, but can be imported using the '-f' flag. config: zones ONLINE c0d1s5ONLINE # df -k /zones Filesystemkbytesused avail capacity Mounted on /dev/dsk/c0d0s0 8068883 3603709 438448646%/ # zpool import -f zones # df -k /zones Filesystemkbytesused avail capacity Mounted on zones61415424 38142886 2327222163%/zones # This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ARC and patents
Hi there, I was looking at using something very similar to arc.c http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/fs/zfs/arc.c for an open source project. However, I'm a bit worried about the patent IBM is holding on the ARC data structure. http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1Sect2=HITOFFd=PG01p=1u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htmlr=1f=Gl=50s1=%2220040098541%22.PGNR.OS=DN/20040098541RS=DN/20040098541 I remember PostgreSQL dropping their ARC implementation for 2Q some time ago. But I was hoping, that someone on this list might have some constructive input on this issue? cheers Kasper ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Where does the zpool info for it's label get saved, man page m. EFI label?
John Brewer wrote: I reloaded my system on c0d0 messed up the rounding cyl, then when I reloaded the format command would only work on c0d1 and not c0d0, so then booted on the CD then redefined on c0d0 slice 3 - 7, to the original partition values. Where does the zpool info get saved, EFI label is mentioned in the man page? lucky my zfs file system was on c0d1 slice 5. zpool configuration information is part of the on-disk data. It is not part of a disk label. This is a big win over SVM, for example. Details can be found on the On-Disk Specification at http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/docs/ -- richard # zpool import pool: zones id: 4567711835620380868 state: ONLINE action: The pool can be imported using its name or numeric identifier. The pool may be active on on another system, but can be imported using the '-f' flag. config: zones ONLINE c0d1s5ONLINE # df -k /zones Filesystemkbytesused avail capacity Mounted on /dev/dsk/c0d0s0 8068883 3603709 438448646%/ # zpool import -f zones # df -k /zones Filesystemkbytesused avail capacity Mounted on zones61415424 38142886 2327222163%/zones # This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ARC and patents
With US patent laws the way they are, no one but a patent lawyer could safely give you an answer. If by some chance a patent lawyer is lurking and decided to comment, none of the rest of us could safely read such comments. No one working on ZFS could even safely look at the patent you've referenced. On Jun 5, 2007, at 11:40 PM, Kasper Nielsen wrote: Hi there, I was looking at using something very similar to arc.c http:// src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/ fs/zfs/arc.c for an open source project. However, I'm a bit worried about the patent IBM is holding on the ARC data structure. http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser? Sect1=PTO1Sect2=HITOFFd=PG01p=1u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO% 2Fsrchnum.htmlr=1f=Gl=50s1=%2220040098541%22.PGNR.OS=DN/ 20040098541RS=DN/20040098541 I remember PostgreSQL dropping their ARC implementation for 2Q some time ago. But I was hoping, that someone on this list might have some constructive input on this issue? cheers Kasper ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ARC and patents
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 06/06/2007 11:45:48 AM: With US patent laws the way they are, no one but a patent lawyer could safely give you an answer. If by some chance a patent lawyer is lurking and decided to comment, none of the rest of us could safely read such comments. No one working on ZFS could even safely look at the patent you've referenced. Kasper, In the United States, just the fact that you are aware of the patent (you linked to) and alluded to it being of potential conflict with your software opens you up to double damages if a judgment were to go against you. That said, IBM has been pretty forgiving on the patent side for opensource for a while. After talking with a patent lawyer, maybe toss IBM's patent group an email asking for clarification or usage for your app. Free legal advice usually only defers higher payments into the future. -Wade ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ARC and patents
A patent lawyer could give his *opinion*, but actual infringement would likely have to be determined in court. Before that happens, most corporations end up signing a cross license agreement and not actually answering the question of infringement. -- mark Chad Lewis wrote: With US patent laws the way they are, no one but a patent lawyer could safely give you an answer. If by some chance a patent lawyer is lurking and decided to comment, none of the rest of us could safely read such comments. No one working on ZFS could even safely look at the patent you've referenced. On Jun 5, 2007, at 11:40 PM, Kasper Nielsen wrote: Hi there, I was looking at using something very similar to arc.c http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/fs/zfs/arc.c for an open source project. However, I'm a bit worried about the patent IBM is holding on the ARC data structure. http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1Sect2=HITOFFd=PG01p=1u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htmlr=1f=Gl=50s1=%2220040098541%22.PGNR.OS=DN/20040098541RS=DN/20040098541 I remember PostgreSQL dropping their ARC implementation for 2Q some time ago. But I was hoping, that someone on this list might have some constructive input on this issue? cheers Kasper ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Boot manual setup in b65
Hi Doug, from the information I read so far, I assume you have c0d0s0 - ufs root c0d0s5 - zfs root pool 'snv' and root filesystem 'b65' installgrub on c0d0s0 puts grub on the same disk as c0d0s5, but c0d0sn indicates which slice is the default boot slice. So, once you default boot from c0d0s5, you should not need 'root (hd0,0,f)' in your menu.lst entry which could confuse the mapping. (I'll try to make the doc a little bit more clear.) That said, your original menu.lst does look fine (assuming you did copy the new grub into c0d0s0). Play around a little bit more and send us more detail information. e.g. menu.lst entries from the rootpool or ufs root, where is grub installed, have you copied the devices dir to the zfs root filesystem (step 4), is snv/b65 good...etc. Lin Douglas Atique wrote: An additional information: I noticed that I was overlooking steps 6 and 7 in the instructions (http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/boot/zfsboot-manual/). I already have slice s0 in my disk dedicated to GRUB and it features a /boot of its own, so I was thinking that it wouldn't make a difference to have GRUB in one or another slice. But reading the instructions more carefully, I noticed that it says clearly that GRUB has to be installed in the ZFS slice, even if there is another UFS slice, even if they are on different disks. So I tried installgrub into c0d0s5, my ZFS root pool slice. I also mounted that pool as a filesystem and copied my /boot to it. And then something strange happens. When GRUB is loaded from c0d0s0 it works fine. Booting GRUB from c0d0s5 the menu is not displayed and only a blank screen is seen until the default option is loaded by timeout. Could I have done something wrong in the GRUB installation? -- Doug This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Re: quickly move files in different zfs in same zpool
Post it and forgot it :-) And sincere thanks for so many replies of This is not right - which is a standard sysadmin answer - which is probably the same answer I would give out to others as well. Actually I was inviting some answers like how this can be done or this can be done but the cost is too high so let's not do it No I don't think different zfs's in the same pool are the same as different UFS'es on the same disk. The latter is physically separated by partitions and while the data in the same pool are mingled together so it *should* be much easier to move links around within the same pool. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Re: zpool create -f ... fails on disk with previous UFS on it
Hi, FYI Bug ID 6566433 has been assigned to this. See also the other part of this thread at http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=30678 . Current work around suggested by Sun is: G'day Matthew, Apologize for the delay as it took sometime for the Backline Engineer to reproduce the problem and fix it. and Thanks for your efforts in providing the logs / update. A Bug 6566433 has been filed against this case. I draw your attention to the workaround section: The problem is related to an old zpool on the slice from a previous jumpstart. A workaround is to dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rdsk/c0t0d0s6 bs=64k before doing the zpool create in the jumpstart finish script. It didn't seem sufficient to overwrite the slice with a ufs filesystem, probably because zfs places 4 copies of the vdev label on the slice and ufs doesn't completely overwrite them. regards matthew This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
