[zfs-discuss] Nexsan SATABeast and ZFS
I'm trying to implement a Nexsan SATABeast (an external disk array, read more: http://www.nexsan.com/satabeast.php, 14 disks available) with a Sun Fire X4100 M2 server running Solaris 10 u6 (connected via fiber) and have a couple of questions: (My motivation for this is the corrupted ZFS volume discussion I had earlier with no result, and this time I'm trying to make a more robust implementation) 1. On the external disk array, I not able to configure JBOD or RAID 0 or 1 with just one disk. I can't find any options for my Solaris server to access the disk directly so I have to configure some raids on the SATABeast. I was thinking of striping two disks in each raid and then add all 7 raids to one zpool as a zraid. The problem with this is if one disk breaks down, I'll loose one RAID 0 disk but maybe ZFS can handle this? Should I rather implement RAID5 disks one the SATABeast and then export them to the Solaris machine? 14 disks would give me 4 RAID5 volumes and 2 spare disks? I'll loose a lot of disk space. What about create larger RAID volumes on the SATABeast? Like 3 RAID volumes with 5 disks in 2 RAIDS and 4 disks in one RAID? I'm really not sure what to choose ... At the moment I've striped two disks in one RAID volume. 2. After reading from the ZFS Evil Tuning Guide (http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide#Cache_Flushes ) about cache flushes I checked the cache configuration on the SATABaest and I can change these settings: System Admin Configure Cache Cache Configuration Current write cache state: Enabled, FUA ignored - 495 MB Manually override current write cache status: [ ] Force write cache to Disabled Desired write cache state: [X] Enabled [ ] Disabled Allow attached host to override write cache configuration: [ ] Ignore force unit access (FUA) bit: [X] Write cache streaming mode: [ ] Cache optimization setting: [ ] Random access [X] Mixed sequential/random [ ] Sequential access And from the help section: Write cache will normally speed up host writes, data is buffered in the RAID controllers memory when the installed disk drives are not ready to accept the write data. The RAID controller write cache memory is battery backed, this allows any unwritten array data to be kept intact during a power failure situation. When power is restored this battery backed data will be flushed out to the RAID array. Current write cache state - This is the current state of the write cache that the RAID system is using. Manually override current write cache status - This allows the write caching to be forced on or off by the user, this change will take effect immediately. Desired write cache state - This is the state of the write cache the user wishes to have after boot up. Allow attached host to override write cache configuration - This allows the host system software to issue commands to the RAID system via the host interface that will either turn off or on the write caching. Ignore force unit access (FUA) bit - When the force unit access (FUA) bit is set by a host system on a per command basis data is written / read directly to / from the disks without using the onboard cache. This will incur a time overhead, but guarantees the data is on the media. Set this option to force the controller to ignore the FUA bit such that command execution times are more consistent. Write cache streaming mode - When the write cache is configured in streaming mode (check box ticked), the system continuously flushes the cache (it runs empty). This provides maximum cache buffering to protect against raid system delays adversely affecting command response times to the host. When the write cache operates in non-streaming mode (check box not ticked) the system runs with a full write cache to maximise cache hits and maximise random IO performance. Cache optimization setting - The cache optimization setting adjusts the cache behaviour to maximize performance for the expected host I/ O pattern. Note that the write cache will be flushed 5 seconds after the last host write. It is recommended that all host activity is stopped 30 seconds before powering the system off. Any thoughts about this? Regards, Lars-Gunnar Persson ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zpool vs df
I've a interesting situation. I've created two pool now and one pool named Data and another named raid5. Check the details here: bash-3.00# zpool list NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT Data 10.7T 9.82T892G91% ONLINE - raid5 10.9T145K 10.9T 0% ONLINE - As you see, the sizes are approximately the same. If I run the df command, it reports: bash-3.00# df -h /Data Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on Data11T 108M 154G 1%/Data bash-3.00# df -h /raid5 Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on raid5 8.9T40K 8.9T 1%/raid5 You see that the Data has 11 TB when zpool reported 10.7 TB and the raid5 has 10.9TB in zpool but only 8.9 TB when using df. Thats a difference of 2 TB. Where did they go? Any explanation would be find. Regards, Lars-Gunnar Persson ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool vs df
On 09 March, 2009 - Lars-Gunnar Persson sent me these 1,1K bytes:
I've a interesting situation. I've created two pool now and one pool
named Data and another named raid5. Check the details here:
bash-3.00# zpool list
NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT
Data 10.7T 9.82T892G91% ONLINE -
raid5 10.9T145K 10.9T 0% ONLINE -
As you see, the sizes are approximately the same. If I run the df
command, it reports:
bash-3.00# df -h /Data
Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on
Data11T 108M 154G 1%/Data
bash-3.00# df -h /raid5
Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on
raid5 8.9T40K 8.9T 1%/raid5
You see that the Data has 11 TB when zpool reported 10.7 TB and the
raid5 has 10.9TB in zpool but only 8.9 TB when using df. Thats a
difference of 2 TB. Where did they go?
To your raid5 (raidz) parity.
Check 'zpool status' to see how your two pools differ.. zpool list shows
the disk space you have.. zfs/df shows how much you can store there..
/Tomas
--
Tomas Ögren, st...@acc.umu.se, http://www.acc.umu.se/~stric/
|- Student at Computing Science, University of Umeå
`- Sysadmin at {cs,acc}.umu.se
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ZFS GSoC ideas page rough draft
Here's my rough draft of GSoC ideas http://www.osunix.org/docs/DOC-1022 Also want to thank everyone for their feedback. Please keep in mind that for creating a stronger application we only have a few days. We still need to : 1) Find more mentors. (Please add your name to the doc or confirm via email and which idea you're most interested in) 2) Add contacts from each organization that may be interested (OpenSolaris, FreeBSD...) 3) Finalize the application, student checklist, mentor checklist and template 4) Start to give ideas for very accurate project descriptions/details (We have some time for this) Thanks ./Christopher --- Community driven OpenSolaris Technology - http://www.osunix.org blog: http://www.codestrom.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool vs df
Here is what zpool status reports:
bash-3.00# zpool status
pool: Data
state: ONLINE
scrub: none requested
config:
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
Data ONLINE 0 0 0
c4t5000402001FC442Cd0 ONLINE 0 0 0
errors: No known data errors
pool: raid5
state: ONLINE
scrub: none requested
config:
NAME STATE READ
WRITE CKSUM
raid5 ONLINE 0
0 0
raidz1 ONLINE 0
0 0
c7t6000402001FC442C609DCA22d0 ONLINE 0
0 0
c7t6000402001FC442C609DCA4Ad0 ONLINE 0
0 0
c7t6000402001FC442C609DCAA2d0 ONLINE 0
0 0
c7t6000402001FC442C609DCABFd0 ONLINE 0
0 0
c7t6000402001FC442C609DCADBd0 ONLINE 0
0 0
c7t6000402001FC442C609DCAF8d0 ONLINE 0
0 0
errors: No known data errors
On 9. mars. 2009, at 14.29, Tomas Ögren wrote:
On 09 March, 2009 - Lars-Gunnar Persson sent me these 1,1K bytes:
I've a interesting situation. I've created two pool now and one pool
named Data and another named raid5. Check the details here:
bash-3.00# zpool list
NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH
ALTROOT
Data 10.7T 9.82T892G91% ONLINE -
raid5 10.9T145K 10.9T 0% ONLINE -
As you see, the sizes are approximately the same. If I run the df
command, it reports:
bash-3.00# df -h /Data
Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on
Data11T 108M 154G 1%/Data
bash-3.00# df -h /raid5
Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on
raid5 8.9T40K 8.9T 1%/raid5
You see that the Data has 11 TB when zpool reported 10.7 TB and the
raid5 has 10.9TB in zpool but only 8.9 TB when using df. Thats a
difference of 2 TB. Where did they go?
To your raid5 (raidz) parity.
Check 'zpool status' to see how your two pools differ.. zpool list
shows
the disk space you have.. zfs/df shows how much you can store there..
/Tomas
--
Tomas Ögren, st...@acc.umu.se, http://www.acc.umu.se/~stric/
|- Student at Computing Science, University of Umeå
`- Sysadmin at {cs,acc}.umu.se
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
.--.
|Lars-Gunnar
Persson |
|IT-
sjef |
|
|
|Nansen senteret for miljø og
fjernmåling |
|Adresse : Thormøhlensgate 47, 5006
Bergen|
|Direkte : 55 20 58 31, sentralbord: 55 20 58 00, fax: 55 20 58
01|
|Internett: http://www.nersc.no, e-post: lars-
gunnar.pers...@nersc.no |
'--'
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Other zvols for swap and dump?
Can you use a different zvol for dump and swap rather than using the swap and dump zvol created by liveupgrade? Casper ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Other zvols for swap and dump?
casper@sun.com wrote: Can you use a different zvol for dump and swap rather than using the swap and dump zvol created by liveupgrade? Yes you can. Swap just uses a normal ZVOL. Dump uses a special one. When you run dumpadm to change/set the dump device to a zvol it will dumpify it so it can be used for dumping too. -- Darren J Moffat ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexsan SATABeast and ZFS
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009, Lars-Gunnar Persson wrote: 1. On the external disk array, I not able to configure JBOD or RAID 0 or 1 with just one disk. I can't find any options for my Solaris server to access the disk directly so I have to configure some raids on the SATABeast. I was thinking of striping two disks in each raid and then add all 7 raids to one zpool as a zraid. The problem with this is if one disk breaks down, I'll loose one RAID 0 disk but maybe ZFS can handle this? Should I rather implement RAID5 disks one the SATABeast and then export them to the Solaris machine? 14 disks would give me 4 RAID5 volumes and 2 spare disks? I'll loose a lot of disk space. What about create larger RAID volumes on the SATABeast? Like 3 RAID volumes with 5 disks in 2 RAIDS and 4 disks in one RAID? I'm really not sure what to choose ... At the moment I've striped two disks in one RAID volume. Your idea to stripe two disks per LUN should work. Make sure to use raidz2 rather than plain raidz for the extra reliability. This solution is optimized for high data throughput from one user. An alternative is to create individual RAID 0 LUNs which actually only contain a single disk. Then implement the pool as two raidz2s with six LUNs each, and two hot spares. That would be my own preference. Due to ZFS's load share this should provide better performance (perhaps 2X) for multi-user loads. Some testing may be required to make sure that your hardware is happy with this. Avoid RAID5 if you can because it is not as reliable with today's large disks and the resulting huge LUN size can take a long time to resilver if the RAID5 should fail (or be considered to have failed). There is also the issue that a RAID array bug might cause transient wrong data to be returned and this could cause confusion for ZFS's own diagnostics/repair and result in useless repairs. If ZFS reports a problem but the RAID array says that the data is fine, then there is confusion, finger-pointing, and likely a post to this list. If you are already using ZFS, then you might as well use ZFS for most of the error detection/correction as well. These are my own opinions and others will surely differ. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Is there a limit to snapshotting?
On 03/08/09 23:16, Blake wrote: I think it's filesystems, not snapshots, that take a long time to enumerate. (If I'm wrong, somebody correct me :) The time needed to iterate through the same number of snapshots and filesystems should be about the same. However, whenever any of the ZFS filesystems or snapshots to be listed are not already cached in memory, then it does take time for zfs list to load them from disk. However, some prefetching has been added to help speed this up. No extra time is needed to boot a system with thousands of filesystems or snapshots. However, ZFS mounts filesystems by default and it does take time for thousands of filesystems to be mounted. Changes have been made to speed this up by reducing the number of mnttab lookups. And zfs list has been changed to no longer show snapshots by default. But it still might make sense to limit the number of snapshots saved: http://blogs.sun.com/timf/entry/zfs_automatic_snapshots_0_10 -- Rich On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:10 PM, mike mike...@gmail.com wrote: I do a daily snapshot of two filesystems, and over the past few months it's obviously grown to a bunch. zfs list shows me all of those. I can change it to use the -t flag to not show them, so that's good. However, I'm worried about boot times and other things. Will it get to a point with 1000's of snapshots that it takes a long time to boot, or do any sort of sync or scrub activities? Thanks :) ___ 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] How to make a ZFS pool with discs of the other machines of the LAN?
I'll drop AoE in favor of the iSCSI to export my 20 discs from Linux Debian Lenny to OpenSolaris 2008.11. Now, I believe this setup will be more compatible with OpenSolaris OS. Thanks! Thiago - Thiago Martins thiago.mart...@worldweb.com.br escreveu: Sriram, - Sriram Narayanan sri...@belenix.org escreveu: On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Thiago C. M. Cordeiro | World Web thiago.mart...@worldweb.com.br wrote: Hi! Today I have ten computers with Xen and Linux, each with 2 discs of 500G in raid1, each node sees only its own raid1 volume, I do not have live motion of my virtual machines... and moving the data from one hypervisor to another is a pain task... Now that I discovered this awesome file system! I want that the ZFS manages all my discs in a network environment. But I don't know the best way to make a pool using all my 20 discs in one big pool with 10T of capacity. My first contact with Solaris, was with the OpenSolaris 2008.11, as a virtual machine (paravirtual domU) on a Linux (Debian 5.0) dom0. I also have more opensolaris on real machines to make the tests... I'm thinking in export all my 20 discs, through the AoE protocol, and in my dom0 that I'm running the opensolaris domU (in HA through the Xen), I will make the configuration file for it (zfs01.cfg) with 20 block devices of 500G and inside the opensolaris domu, I will share the pool via iSCSI targets and/or NFS back to the domUs of my cluster... Is this a good idea? I share a three disk pool over NFS for some VMWare ESXi based hosting. This three discs are on the same machine or in three distinct? I mean, your pool have three local or remote discs? There is considerably high disk I/O caused by the apps that run on these VMs. ZFS + NFS is working fine for me. I intend to experiment with iSCSI later when I free up some machines for such an experiment. -- Sriram Thanks! - Thiago ___ 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] Is there a limit to snapshotting?
Well, I could just use the same script to create my daily snapshot to remove a snapshot with the same prefix, just different date (say, keep 30 days only or something) My hope was to just keep a running archive indefinitely. But I guess snapshots are only as good as needed, and I doubt I will realize I need a file I lost 6+ months ago... On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Richard Morris - Sun Microsystems - Burlington United States richard.mor...@sun.com wrote: On 03/08/09 23:16, Blake wrote: I think it's filesystems, not snapshots, that take a long time to enumerate. (If I'm wrong, somebody correct me :) The time needed to iterate through the same number of snapshots and filesystems should be about the same. However, whenever any of the ZFS filesystems or snapshots to be listed are not already cached in memory, then it does take time for zfs list to load them from disk. However, some prefetching has been added to help speed this up. No extra time is needed to boot a system with thousands of filesystems or snapshots. However, ZFS mounts filesystems by default and it does take time for thousands of filesystems to be mounted. Changes have been made to speed this up by reducing the number of mnttab lookups. And zfs list has been changed to no longer show snapshots by default. But it still might make sense to limit the number of snapshots saved: http://blogs.sun.com/timf/entry/zfs_automatic_snapshots_0_10 -- Rich On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:10 PM, mike mike...@gmail.com wrote: I do a daily snapshot of two filesystems, and over the past few months it's obviously grown to a bunch. zfs list shows me all of those. I can change it to use the -t flag to not show them, so that's good. However, I'm worried about boot times and other things. Will it get to a point with 1000's of snapshots that it takes a long time to boot, or do any sort of sync or scrub activities? Thanks :) ___ 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] Is there a limit to snapshotting?
mike wrote: Well, I could just use the same script to create my daily snapshot to remove a snapshot with the same prefix, just different date (say, keep 30 days only or something) NB the autosnapshot feature (aka Time Slider Manager) already has this capability. My hope was to just keep a running archive indefinitely. But I guess snapshots are only as good as needed, and I doubt I will realize I need a file I lost 6+ months ago... famous last words... :-) -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] cannot mount '/export' directory is not empty
Hello, I am desperate. Today I realized that my OS 108 doesn't want to boot. I have no idea what I screwed up. I upgraded on 108 last week without any problems. Here is where I'm stuck: Reading ZFS config: done. Mounting ZFS filesystems: (1/17) cannot mount '/export': directory is not empty (17/17) $ svcs -x svc:/system/filesystem/local:default (local file system mounts) State: maintenance since ... Impact: 45 dependent services are not running. svc:/network/rpc/smserver:default (removable media management) State: uninitialized since... Impact: 2 dependent services are not running. $ zfs mount rpool/ROOT/opensolaris-2/ rpool/export/home/export/home/wewek rpool /rpool tank /tank tank/projects/tank/projects . . . . $ pfexec zfs mount -a cannot mount '/export': directory is not empty I can mount rpool/export by -O option but I'll lost my home directory and Gnome can't come up. $ pfexec zfs mount -O rpool/export $ svcadm clear filesystem/local:default Mounting ZFS filesystems: (17/17) GDM login comes up, after log in: Your home directory is listed as: '/export/home/wewek' but it doesn't appear to exist. Do you want to log in with the / (root) directory as your home directory? It's unlikely anything will work unless you use a failsafe session. Can you help me please? I don't want to loose all my configurations. Thank you! Regards, Jan Hlodan ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Is there a limit to snapshotting?
Bear in mind I am not that comfortable with smf and manifests and Solaris userland and such... I wouldn't want to be messing up anything or not setting it up correctly. My little PHP script (yes, I use PHP for shell scripting) does a perfect job of what I need and I got a neat idea from Brad Stone about rolling up daily snapshots into monthly snapshots, which would roll up into yearly snapshots... On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Richard Elling richard.ell...@gmail.com wrote: mike wrote: Well, I could just use the same script to create my daily snapshot to remove a snapshot with the same prefix, just different date (say, keep 30 days only or something) NB the autosnapshot feature (aka Time Slider Manager) already has this capability. My hope was to just keep a running archive indefinitely. But I guess snapshots are only as good as needed, and I doubt I will realize I need a file I lost 6+ months ago... famous last words... :-) -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] cannot mount '/export' directory is not empty
On 09 March, 2009 - Jan Hlodan sent me these 1,7K bytes:
Hello,
I am desperate. Today I realized that my OS 108 doesn't want to boot.
I have no idea what I screwed up. I upgraded on 108 last week without
any problems.
Here is where I'm stuck:
Reading ZFS config: done.
Mounting ZFS filesystems: (1/17) cannot mount '/export': directory is
not empty (17/17)
$ svcs -x
svc:/system/filesystem/local:default (local file system mounts)
State: maintenance since ...
Impact: 45 dependent services are not running.
svc:/network/rpc/smserver:default (removable media management)
State: uninitialized since...
Impact: 2 dependent services are not running.
$ zfs mount
rpool/ROOT/opensolaris-2/
rpool/export/home/export/home/wewek
rpool /rpool
tank /tank
tank/projects/tank/projects
.
.
.
.
$ pfexec zfs mount -a
cannot mount '/export': directory is not empty
I can mount rpool/export by -O option but I'll lost my home directory
and Gnome can't come up.
$ pfexec zfs mount -O rpool/export
$ svcadm clear filesystem/local:default
Mounting ZFS filesystems: (17/17)
GDM login comes up, after log in:
Your home directory is listed as: '/export/home/wewek' but it doesn't
appear to exist. Do you want to log in with the / (root) directory as
your home directory? It's unlikely anything will work unless you use a
failsafe session.
Can you help me please? I don't want to loose all my configurations.
It seems like you have some stuff in /export which does not belong to
the filesystem that should be mounted in /export
That is, you have /export/somefileordirectory that belongs to the /
filesystem.. Try this:
pfexec mv /export /oldexport
pfexec mkdir /export
pfexec zfs mount -a
/Tomas
--
Tomas Ögren, st...@acc.umu.se, http://www.acc.umu.se/~stric/
|- Student at Computing Science, University of Umeå
`- Sysadmin at {cs,acc}.umu.se
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Is there a limit to snapshotting?
mike wrote: Bear in mind I am not that comfortable with smf and manifests and Solaris userland and such... I wouldn't want to be messing up anything or not setting it up correctly. For the benefit of others who may be lurking, the policies are: svcintervalkeep - auto-snapshot:frequent 15 mins4 auto-snapshot:hourly1 hours 24 auto-snapshot:daily 1 days 31 auto-snapshot:weekly7 days4 auto-snapshot:monthly 1 months 12 My little PHP script (yes, I use PHP for shell scripting) does a perfect job of what I need and I got a neat idea from Brad Stone about rolling up daily snapshots into monthly snapshots, which would roll up into yearly snapshots... For scripting wizards, the same table is available from: $ for i in frequent hourly daily weekly monthly; do echo $i $(svcprop -p zfs/period auto-snapshot:$i) $(svcprop -p zfs/interval auto-snapshot:$i) keep $(svcprop -p zfs/keep auto-snapshot:$i) done frequent 15 minutes keep 4 hourly 1 hours keep 24 daily 1 days keep 31 weekly 7 days keep 4 monthly 1 months keep 12 -- richard On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Richard Elling richard.ell...@gmail.com wrote: mike wrote: Well, I could just use the same script to create my daily snapshot to remove a snapshot with the same prefix, just different date (say, keep 30 days only or something) NB the autosnapshot feature (aka Time Slider Manager) already has this capability. My hope was to just keep a running archive indefinitely. But I guess snapshots are only as good as needed, and I doubt I will realize I need a file I lost 6+ months ago... famous last words... :-) -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexsan SATABeast and ZFS
On March 9, 2009 12:06:40 PM +0100 Lars-Gunnar Persson lars-gunnar.pers...@nersc.no wrote: I'm trying to implement a Nexsan SATABeast ... 1. On the external disk array, I not able to configure JBOD or RAID 0 or 1 with just one disk. exactly why i didn't buy this product. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] cannot mount '/export' directory is not empty
Hi Tomas, thanks for the answer. Unfortunately, it didn't help much. However I can mount all file systems, but system is broken - desktop wont come up. Could not update ICEauthority file /.ICEauthority There is a problem with the configuration serve. (/usr/lib/gconf-check-2-exited with status 256) Then I can see wallpaper and cursor. That's it, nothing more. Regards, Jan Hlodan Tomas Ögren wrote: On 09 March, 2009 - Jan Hlodan sent me these 1,7K bytes: Hello, I am desperate. Today I realized that my OS 108 doesn't want to boot. I have no idea what I screwed up. I upgraded on 108 last week without any problems. Here is where I'm stuck: Reading ZFS config: done. Mounting ZFS filesystems: (1/17) cannot mount '/export': directory is not empty (17/17) $ svcs -x svc:/system/filesystem/local:default (local file system mounts) State: maintenance since ... Impact: 45 dependent services are not running. svc:/network/rpc/smserver:default (removable media management) State: uninitialized since... Impact: 2 dependent services are not running. $ zfs mount rpool/ROOT/opensolaris-2/ rpool/export/home/export/home/wewek rpool /rpool tank /tank tank/projects/tank/projects . . . . $ pfexec zfs mount -a cannot mount '/export': directory is not empty I can mount rpool/export by -O option but I'll lost my home directory and Gnome can't come up. $ pfexec zfs mount -O rpool/export $ svcadm clear filesystem/local:default Mounting ZFS filesystems: (17/17) GDM login comes up, after log in: Your home directory is listed as: '/export/home/wewek' but it doesn't appear to exist. Do you want to log in with the / (root) directory as your home directory? It's unlikely anything will work unless you use a failsafe session. Can you help me please? I don't want to loose all my configurations. It seems like you have some stuff in /export which does not belong to the filesystem that should be mounted in /export That is, you have /export/somefileordirectory that belongs to the / filesystem.. Try this: pfexec mv /export /oldexport pfexec mkdir /export pfexec zfs mount -a /Tomas ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] cannot mount '/export' directory is not empty
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Jan Hlodan jan.hlo...@sun.com wrote: Hi Tomas, thanks for the answer. Unfortunately, it didn't help much. However I can mount all file systems, but system is broken - desktop wont come up. Could not update ICEauthority file /.ICEauthority There is a problem with the configuration serve. (/usr/lib/gconf-check-2-exited with status 256) Then I can see wallpaper and cursor. That's it, nothing more. There's a bug with mounting hierarchical mounts (i.e. trying to mount /export/home before /export or such), you might be hitting that (unfortunately the bugid escapes me at the moment). ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] How to unwind raidz1 or zpool
I'm probably overlooking a lot of functionality in man zfs but as always its difficult to really understand the various cmds and properties when lacking real experience. After having a created zpool raidz1 from various parts of installed disks, is there a command available to quickly see the underlying architecture again? For example: For mat shows these two disks 0. c3d0 [...] 1. c3d1 [...] ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to unwind raidz1 or zpool
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 18:48, Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com wrote: I'm probably overlooking a lot of functionality in man zfs but as always its difficult to really understand the various cmds and properties when lacking real experience. After having a created zpool raidz1 from various parts of installed disks, is there a command available to quickly see the underlying architecture again? Does zpool status do what you want? Will ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] How to unwind raidz1 or zpool
[ Sorry to have inadvertantly hit send in earlier duplicate] I'm probably overlooking a lot of functionality in man zpool but as always its difficult to really understand the various cmds and properties when lacking real experience. After having created zpool raidz1 from various parts of installed disks, is there a command available to quickly see the underlying architecture again? For example: Format shows these two disks 0. c3d0 [...] 1. c3d1 [...] c3d0 is divided into 2 fdisk partitions. (c3d0p1 c3d0p2) c3d1 is divided into 3 fdisk paritions with the rest unpartitoned. (c3d1p1 c3d1p2 c3d1p3) rpool is on c3d0p1 Just as a learning exercise... I created a zpool raidz1: zpool create t1 raidz1 c3d0p2 c3d1p1 c3d1p2 I just divided up the disks to have several mock discs to work with. Its nice that I don´t really need to concern myself with that underlying structure, but if I ever wanted to see that underlying structure again, how can I make zpool show it? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to unwind raidz1 or zpool
Will Murnane will.murn...@gmail.com writes: After having a created zpool raidz1 from various parts of installed disks, is there a command available to quickly see the underlying architecture again? Does zpool status do what you want? It sure does... sorry about the line noise. It wasn't obvious from the examples I saw since they were only run against 1 underlying structure, and I just overlooked the disk name in the output... Thanks. ps- I tried to cancel that post since I let it get away before having finished it... so there is another unnecessarily windier semi-clone. In the thread. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexsan SATABeast and ZFS
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 12:06:40 +0100, Lars-Gunnar Persson lars-gunnar.pers...@nersc.no wrote: 1. On the external disk array, I not able to configure JBOD or RAID 0 or 1 with just one disk. In some arrays it seems to be possible to configure separate disks by offering the array just one disk in one slot at a time, and, very important, leaving all other slots empty(!). Repeat for as many disks as you have, seating each disk in its own slot, and all other slots empty. (ok, it's just hear-say, but it might be worth a try with the first 4 disks or so). -- ( Kees Nuyt ) c[_] ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
