Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS commands hang after several zfs receives
Ian Collins wrote: I have a case open for this problem on Solaris 10u7. The case has been identified and I've just received an IDR,which I will test next week. I've been told the issue is fixed in update 8, but I'm not sure if there is an nv fix target. I'll post back once I've abused a test system for a while. The IDR I was sent appears to have fixed the problem. I have been abusing the box for a couple of weeks without any lockups. Roll on update 8! -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send older version?
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Marty Scholes wrote: I really want to move back to 2009.06 and keep all of my files / snapshots. Is there a way somehow to zfs send an older stream that 2009.06 will read so that I can import that into 2009.06? Can I even create an older pool/dataset using 122? Ideally I would provision an older version of the data and simply reinstall 2009.06 and just import the pool created under 122. The zfs send stream is dependent on the version of the filesystem, so the only way to create an older stream is to create a back-versioned filesystem: zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem You can see what versions your system supports by using the zfs upgrade command: # zfs upgrade -v The following filesystem versions are supported: VER DESCRIPTION --- 1 Initial ZFS filesystem version 2 Enhanced directory entries 3 Case insensitive and File system unique identifer (FUID) 4 userquota, groupquota properties For more information on a particular version, including supported releases, see: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/version/zpl/N Where 'N' is the version number. # Of course, creating a version 3 or earlier system will not allow you to use user group quotas, for example, but at least you'll be able to zfs-send that filesystem to a version of zfs that can only understand the earlier versions. It seems this would be a regular request. If I understand it correctly, an older BE cannot read upgraded pools and file systems, so a boot image upgrade followed by a zfs and zpool upgrade would kill a shop's ability to fall back. Or am I mistaken? You're not mistaken. Regards, markm ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send older version?
On 09/15/09 02:07 PM, Mark J Musante wrote: zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem is possible to implement into a future version of ZFS a released send command, like: # zfs send -r2 snap ... to send a specific release (version 2 in the example) of the metadata? -- Luca Morettoni luca(AT)morettoni.net | OpenSolaris SCA #OS0344 Web/BLOG: http://www.morettoni.net/ | http://twitter.com/morettoni jugUmbria founder - https://jugUmbria.dev.java.net/ | Thawte notary ITL-OSUG leader - http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/itl-osug/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS commands hang after several zfs receives
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 08:48:20PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Ian Collins wrote: I have a case open for this problem on Solaris 10u7. The case has been identified and I've just received an IDR,which I will test next week. I've been told the issue is fixed in update 8, but I'm not sure if there is an nv fix target. I'll post back once I've abused a test system for a while. The IDR I was sent appears to have fixed the problem. I have been abusing the box for a couple of weeks without any lockups. Roll on update 8! Was that IDR140221-17? That one fixed a deadlock bug for us back in May. -- -Gary Mills--Unix Group--Computer and Network Services- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send older version?
The zfs send stream is dependent on the version of the filesystem, so the only way to create an older stream is to create a back-versioned filesystem: zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem You can see what versions your system supports by using the zfs upgrade command: Thanks for the feedback. So if I have a version X pool/filesystem set, does that mean the way to move it back to an older version of TANK is to do something like: * Create OLDTANK with version=N * For each snapshot in TANK ** (cd tank_snapshot; tar cvf -) | (cd old_tank; tar xvf -) ** zfs snapshot oldtank the_snapshot_name This seems rather involved to get my current files/snaps into an older format. What did I miss? Thanks again, Marty -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS commands hang after several zfs receives
The case has been identified and I've just received an IDR,which I will test next week. I've been told the issue is fixed in update 8, but I'm not sure if there is an nv fix target. Anyone know if there Is an opensolaris fix for this issue and when? These seem to be related. http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=112808 -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS commands hang after several zfs receives
Hi, I think I've run into the same issue on OpenSolaris 2009.06. Does anybody know when this issue will be solved in OpenSolaris? What's the BugID? Thanks, Constantin Gary Mills wrote: On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 08:48:20PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Ian Collins wrote: I have a case open for this problem on Solaris 10u7. The case has been identified and I've just received an IDR,which I will test next week. I've been told the issue is fixed in update 8, but I'm not sure if there is an nv fix target. I'll post back once I've abused a test system for a while. The IDR I was sent appears to have fixed the problem. I have been abusing the box for a couple of weeks without any lockups. Roll on update 8! Was that IDR140221-17? That one fixed a deadlock bug for us back in May. -- Constantin Gonzalez Sun Microsystems GmbH, Germany Principal Field Technologisthttp://blogs.sun.com/constantin Tel.: +49 89/4 60 08-25 91 http://google.com/search?q=constantin+gonzalez Sitz d. Ges.: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1, 85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Wolf Frenkel Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] EON 0.59.3 based on snv_122 released
EON ZFS NAS 0.59.3 based on snv_122 released! Embedded Operating system/Networking (EON), RAM based live ZFS NAS appliance is released on Genunix! Much thanks to Al at Genunix.org for download hosting and serving the opensolaris community. It is available in a CIFS and Samba flavor EON 64-bit x86 CIFS ISO image version 0.59.3 based on snv_122 * eon-0.593-122-64-cifs.iso * MD5: 8be86fb315b5b4929a04e0346ed0168c * Size: ~89Mb * Released: Monday 14-September-2009 EON 64-bit x86 Samba ISO image version 0.59.3 based on snv_122 * eon-0.593-122-64-smb.iso * MD5: f68fefdc525a517b9c4b66028ae4347e * Size: ~101Mb * Released: Monday 14-September-2009 EON 32-bit x86 CIFS ISO image version 0.59.3 based on snv_122 * eon-0.593-122-32-cifs.iso * MD5: fa71f059aa1eeefbcda597b98006ba9f * Size: ~56Mb * Released: Monday 14-September-2009 EON 32-bit x86 Samba ISO image version 0.59.3 based on snv_122 * eon-0.593-122-32-smb.iso * MD5: 1b9861a780dc01da36ca17d1b4450132 * Size: ~69Mb * Released: Monday 14-September-2009 New/Fixes: - added 32/64-bit drivers: bnx, igb - Workaround fix for IP validation in setup.sh - added /usr/local/sbin for bin kit to bashrc -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send older version?
On 09/15/09 06:27, Luca Morettoni wrote: On 09/15/09 02:07 PM, Mark J Musante wrote: zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem is possible to implement into a future version of ZFS a released send command, like: # zfs send -r2 snap ... to send a specific release (version 2 in the example) of the metadata? I just created a RFE for this problem in general: 6882134. I'm not sure the above suggestion is the best way to solve the problem, but we do need some kind of support for inter-version send stream readability. Lori ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] How to map solaris disk devices to physical location for ZFS pool setup
Hi, I'm setting up a ZFS environment running on a Sun x4440 + J4400 arrays (similar to 7410 environment) and I was trying to figure out the best way to map a disk drive physical location (tray and slot) to the Solaris device c#t#d#. Do I need to install the CAM software to do this, or is there another way? I would like to understand the solaris device to physical drive location so that I can setup my ZFS pool mirrors/raid properly. I'm currently running Solaris Express build 119. Thanks, David -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Lightning SSD with 180,000 IOPs, 320MB/s writes
http://www.dailytech.com/Startup+Drops+Bombshell+Lightning+SSD+With+180k+IOPS+500320+MBs+ReadWrites/article16249.htm Pliant Technologies just released two Lightning high performance enterprise SSDs that threaten to blow away the competition. The drives uses proprietary ASICs to deliver an incredible input-output performance per second (IOPS) that close to doubles the fastest of its competitors. The Enterprise Flash Drive (EFD) LS offers 180,000 IOPS in a 3.5 form factor, while the 2.5 form factor EFD LB claims 140,000 IOPS of performance. If that's not enough to sate the appetite of even the most die-hard flash drive enthusiast, this will be -- the drives also offer 500MB/sec and 320 MB/sec reads and 420MB/sec read and 220MB/sec write rates for the 3.5 and 2.5, respectively. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Lightning SSD with 180,000 IOPs, 320MB/s writes
http://www.plianttechnology.com/lightning_ls.php Write Endurance Unlimited :) -- Roman Naumenko ro...@frontline.ca -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Why is Solaris 10 ZFS performance so terrible?
On Sep 15, 2009, at 5:21 PM, Richard Elling wrote: On Sep 15, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Dale Ghent wrote: On Sep 10, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Rich Morris wrote: On 07/28/09 17:13, Rich Morris wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: Sun has opened internal CR 6859997. It is now in Dispatched state at High priority. CR 6859997 has recently been fixed in Nevada. This fix will also be in Solaris 10 Update 9. This fix speeds up the sequential prefetch pattern described in this CR without slowing down other prefetch patterns. Some kstats have also been added to help improve the observability of ZFS file prefetching. Awesome that the fix exists. I've been having a hell of a time with device-level prefetch on my iscsi clients causing tons of ultimately useless IO and have resorted to setting zfs_vdev_cache_max=1. This only affects metadata. Wouldn't it be better to disable prefetching for data? Well, that's a surprise to me, but the zfs_vdev_cache_max=1 did provide relief. Just a general description of my environment: My setup consists of several s10uX iscsi clients which get LUNs from a pairs of thumpers. Each thumper pair exports identical LUNs to each iscsi client, and the client in turn mirrors each LUN pair inside a local zpool. As more space is needed on a client, a new LUN is created on the pair of thumpers, exported to the iscsi client, which then picks it up and we add a new mirrored vdev to the client's existing zpool. This is so we have data redundancy across chassis, so if one thumper were to fail or need patching, etc, the iscsi clients just see one of side of their mirrors drop out. The problem that we observed on the iscsi clients was that, when viewing things through 'zpool iostat -v', far more IO was being requested from the LUs than was being registered for the vdev those LUs were a member of. Being that that was a iscsi setup with stock thumpers (no SSD ZIL, L2ARC) serving the LUs, this apparently overhead caused far more uneccessary disk IO on the thumpers, thus starving out IO for data that was actually needed. The working set is lots of small-ish files, entirely random IO. If zfs_vdev_cache_max only affects metadata prefetches, which parameter affects data prefetches ? I have to admit that disabling device-level prefetching was a shot in the dark, but it did result in drastically reduced contention on the thumpers. /dale Question though... why is bug fix that can be a watershed for performance be held back for so long? s10u9 won't be available for at least 6 months from now, and with a huge environment, I try hard not to live off of IDRs. Am I the only one that thinks this is way too conservative? It's just maddening to know that a highly beneficial fix is out there, but its release is based on time rather than need. Sustaining really needs to be more proactive when it comes to this stuff. /dale ___ 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] Why is Solaris 10 ZFS performance so terrible?
Reference below... On Sep 15, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Dale Ghent wrote: On Sep 15, 2009, at 5:21 PM, Richard Elling wrote: On Sep 15, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Dale Ghent wrote: On Sep 10, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Rich Morris wrote: On 07/28/09 17:13, Rich Morris wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: Sun has opened internal CR 6859997. It is now in Dispatched state at High priority. CR 6859997 has recently been fixed in Nevada. This fix will also be in Solaris 10 Update 9. This fix speeds up the sequential prefetch pattern described in this CR without slowing down other prefetch patterns. Some kstats have also been added to help improve the observability of ZFS file prefetching. Awesome that the fix exists. I've been having a hell of a time with device-level prefetch on my iscsi clients causing tons of ultimately useless IO and have resorted to setting zfs_vdev_cache_max=1. This only affects metadata. Wouldn't it be better to disable prefetching for data? Well, that's a surprise to me, but the zfs_vdev_cache_max=1 did provide relief. Just a general description of my environment: My setup consists of several s10uX iscsi clients which get LUNs from a pairs of thumpers. Each thumper pair exports identical LUNs to each iscsi client, and the client in turn mirrors each LUN pair inside a local zpool. As more space is needed on a client, a new LUN is created on the pair of thumpers, exported to the iscsi client, which then picks it up and we add a new mirrored vdev to the client's existing zpool. This is so we have data redundancy across chassis, so if one thumper were to fail or need patching, etc, the iscsi clients just see one of side of their mirrors drop out. The problem that we observed on the iscsi clients was that, when viewing things through 'zpool iostat -v', far more IO was being requested from the LUs than was being registered for the vdev those LUs were a member of. Being that that was a iscsi setup with stock thumpers (no SSD ZIL, L2ARC) serving the LUs, this apparently overhead caused far more uneccessary disk IO on the thumpers, thus starving out IO for data that was actually needed. The working set is lots of small-ish files, entirely random IO. If zfs_vdev_cache_max only affects metadata prefetches, which parameter affects data prefetches ? There are two main areas for prefetch: at the transactional object layer (DMU) and the pooled storage level (VDEV). zfs_vdev_cache_max works at the VDEV level, obviously. The DMU knows more about the context of the data and is where the intelligent prefetching algorithm works. You can easily observe the VDEV cache statistics with kstat: # kstat -n vdev_cache_stats module: zfs instance: 0 name: vdev_cache_statsclass:misc crtime 38.83342625 delegations 14030 hits105169 misses 59452 snaptime4564628.18130739 This represents a 59% cache hit rate, which is pretty decent. But you will notice far fewer delegations+hits+misses than real IOPS because it is only caching metadata. Unfortunately, there is not a kstat for showing the DMU cache stats. But a DTrace script can be written or, even easier, lockstat will show if you are spending much time in the zfetch_* functions. More details are in the Evil Tuning Guide, including how to set zfs_prefetch_disable http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide I have to admit that disabling device-level prefetching was a shot in the dark, but it did result in drastically reduced contention on the thumpers. That is a little bit surprising. I would expect little metadata activity for iscsi service. It would not be surprising for older Solaris 10 releases, though. It was fixed in NV b70, circa July 2007. -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Why is Solaris 10 ZFS performance so terrible?
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Dale Ghent wrote: Question though... why is bug fix that can be a watershed for performance be held back for so long? s10u9 won't be available for at least 6 months from now, and with a huge environment, I try hard not to live off of IDRs. As someone who currently faces kernel panics with recent U7+ kernel patches (on AMD64 and SPARC) related to PCI bus upset, I expect that Sun will take the time to make sure that the implementation is as good as it can be and is thoroughly tested before release. 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
[zfs-discuss] zfs not sharing nfs shares on OSOl 2009.06?
Hi, I'm trying to identify why my nfs server does not work. I'm using a more or less core install of OSOL 2009.06 (release) and installed and configured a nfs server. The issue: nfs server won't start - it can't find any filesystems in /etc/dfs/sharetab. the zfs file systems do have sharenfs=on property (infact the pool the used to be on a working NV build 100). Some investigations that I did: zfs create -o sharenfs=os tank1/home/nfs # just an example fs cannot share 'tank1/home/nfs': share(1M) failed filesystem successfully create, but not shared sharemgr list -v default enabled nfs zfs enabled nfs smb svcs -a | grep nfs disabled 19:52:51 svc:/network/nfs/client:default disabled 21:05:36 svc:/network/nfs/server:default online 19:53:23 svc:/network/nfs/status:default online 19:53:25 svc:/network/nfs/nlockmgr:default online 19:53:25 svc:/network/nfs/mapid:default online 19:53:30 svc:/network/nfs/rquota:default online 21:05:24 svc:/network/nfs/cbd:default cat /etc/dfs/sharetab is empty sharemgr start -v -P nfs zfs Starting group zfs share # no response share -F nfs /tank1/home/nfs zfs Could not share: /tank1/home/nfs: system error pkg list | grep nfs SUNWnfsc 0.5.11-0.111installed SUNWnfsckr 0.5.11-0.111installed SUNWnfss 0.5.11-0.111installed Note: I also enabled the smb server (CIFS), which works fine (and fills sharetab) Any suggestion how to resolve this? Am I missing an ips package or a file? Regards, Tom de Waal ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Why is Solaris 10 ZFS performance so terrible?
On Sep 15, 2009, at 6:28 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Dale Ghent wrote: Question though... why is bug fix that can be a watershed for performance be held back for so long? s10u9 won't be available for at least 6 months from now, and with a huge environment, I try hard not to live off of IDRs. As someone who currently faces kernel panics with recent U7+ kernel patches (on AMD64 and SPARC) related to PCI bus upset, I expect that Sun will take the time to make sure that the implementation is as good as it can be and is thoroughly tested before release. Are you referring the the same testing that gained you this PCI panic feature in s10u7? Testing is a no-brainer, and I would expect that there already exists some level of assurance that a CR fix is correct at the point of putback. But I've dealt with many bugs both very recently and long in the past where a fix has existed in nevada for months, even a year, before I got bit by the same bug in s10 and then had to go through the support channels to A) convince whomever I'm talking to that, yes, I'm hitting this bug, B) yes, there is a fix, and then C) pretty please can I have an IDR Just this week I'm wrapping up testing of a IDR which addresses a e1000g hardware errata that was fixed in onnv earlier this year in February. For something that addresses a hardware issue on a Intel chipset used on shipping Sun servers, one would think that Sustaining would be on the ball and get that integrated ASAP. But the current mode of operation appears to be no CR, no backport, which leaves us customers needlessly running into bugs and then begging for their fixes... or hearing the dreaded oh that fix will be available two updates from now. Not cool. /dale /dale ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs not sharing nfs shares on OSOl 2009.06?
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Tom de Waal tom.dew...@sun.com wrote: Hi, I'm trying to identify why my nfs server does not work. I'm using a more or less core install of OSOL 2009.06 (release) and installed and configured a nfs server. The issue: nfs server won't start - it can't find any filesystems in /etc/dfs/sharetab. the zfs file systems do have sharenfs=on property (infact the pool the used to be on a working NV build 100). Some investigations that I did: zfs create -o sharenfs=os tank1/home/nfs # just an example fs cannot share 'tank1/home/nfs': share(1M) failed filesystem successfully create, but not shared sharemgr list -v default enabled nfs zfs enabled nfs smb svcs -a | grep nfs disabled 19:52:51 svc:/network/nfs/client:default disabled 21:05:36 svc:/network/nfs/server:default online 19:53:23 svc:/network/nfs/status:default online 19:53:25 svc:/network/nfs/nlockmgr:default online 19:53:25 svc:/network/nfs/mapid:default online 19:53:30 svc:/network/nfs/rquota:default online 21:05:24 svc:/network/nfs/cbd:default cat /etc/dfs/sharetab is empty sharemgr start -v -P nfs zfs Starting group zfs share # no response share -F nfs /tank1/home/nfs zfs Could not share: /tank1/home/nfs: system error pkg list | grep nfs SUNWnfsc 0.5.11-0.111 installed SUNWnfsckr 0.5.11-0.111 installed SUNWnfss 0.5.11-0.111 installed Note: I also enabled the smb server (CIFS), which works fine (and fills sharetab) Any suggestion how to resolve this? Am I missing an ips package or a file? Make sure the hosts that are trying to connect resolve properly either by DNS or by putting them in the /etc/hosts file. Brandon ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Lightning SSD with 180,000 IOPs, 320MB/s writes
Quoting Brian Hechinger wo...@4amlunch.net: If you need to ask you can't afford it? :-D -brian -- We can all dream can't we? This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. This communication may contain material protected by the attorney-client privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs not sharing nfs shares on OSOl 2009.06?
Tom What's in the NFS server log? (svcs -x) BTW: Why are the NFS services disabled? If it has a problem I would have expected it to be in state maintenance. http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2252/smf-5?a=view DISABLED The instance is disabled. Enabling the service results in a transition to the offline state and eventually to the online state with all dependencies satisfied. MAINTENANCE The instance is enabled, but not able to run. Administrative action (through svcadm clear) is required to move the instance out of the maintenance state. The maintenance state might be a temporarily reached state if an administrative operation is underway. Trevor Tom de Waal wrote: Hi, I'm trying to identify why my nfs server does not work. I'm using a more or less core install of OSOL 2009.06 (release) and installed and configured a nfs server. The issue: nfs server won't start - it can't find any filesystems in /etc/dfs/sharetab. the zfs file systems do have sharenfs=on property (infact the pool the used to be on a working NV build 100). Some investigations that I did: zfs create -o sharenfs=os tank1/home/nfs # just an example fs cannot share 'tank1/home/nfs': share(1M) failed filesystem successfully create, but not shared sharemgr list -v default enabled nfs zfs enabled nfs smb svcs -a | grep nfs disabled 19:52:51 svc:/network/nfs/client:default disabled 21:05:36 svc:/network/nfs/server:default online 19:53:23 svc:/network/nfs/status:default online 19:53:25 svc:/network/nfs/nlockmgr:default online 19:53:25 svc:/network/nfs/mapid:default online 19:53:30 svc:/network/nfs/rquota:default online 21:05:24 svc:/network/nfs/cbd:default cat /etc/dfs/sharetab is empty sharemgr start -v -P nfs zfs Starting group "zfs" share # no response share -F nfs /tank1/home/nfs zfs Could not share: /tank1/home/nfs: system error pkg list | grep nfs SUNWnfsc 0.5.11-0.111installed SUNWnfsckr 0.5.11-0.111installed SUNWnfss 0.5.11-0.111installed Note: I also enabled the smb server (CIFS), which works fine (and fills sharetab) Any suggestion how to resolve this? Am I missing an ips package or a file? Regards, Tom de Waal ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Trevor Pretty | Technical Account Manager | +64 9 639 0652 | +64 21 666 161 Eagle Technology Group Ltd. Gate D, Alexandra Park, Greenlane West, Epsom Private Bag 93211, Parnell, Auckland www.eagle.co.nz This email is confidential and may be legally privileged. If received in error please destroy and immediately notify us. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfs support ?
Hi! Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs etc.) are supported by tmpfs ? Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.ma...@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Lightning SSD with 180,000 IOPs, 320MB/s writes
Neal Pollack Neal.Pollack at Sun.COM writes: Pliant Technologies just released two Lightning high performance enterprise SSDs that threaten to blow away the competition. One can build an SSD-based storage device that gives you: o 320GB of storage capacity (2.1x better than their 2.5 model: 150GB) o 1000 MB/s sequential reads (2.4x better than their 2.5 model: 420MB/s) o 280 MB/s sequential writes (1.3x better than their 2.5 model: 220MB/s) o 140k random 4kB read IOPS (1.2x better than their 2.5 model: 120k) o 26k random 4kB write IOPS (Pliant doesn't document it) o at a price of $920 (half the MINIMUM price hinted by Pliant ) This device is a ZFS stripe of 4 80GB Intel 34nm MLC devices ($230 each). Now, the acute reader will observe that: o Pliant's device is SLC, mine is MLC (shorter life - but so cheap it can be replaced cheaply) o The Pliant specs I quote above are from their website, some press releases quote slighly higher numbers o Pliant's device fits in a single 2.5 bay, mine requires 4 o Pliant doesn't quote random 4kB *write* IOPS performance - if I were a potential buyer, I would ask them before buying As a side note, I personally measure 15k random 4kB write IOPS on my Intel 34nm MLC 80GB drive whereas Intel's official number is 6.6k - they probably give a pessimistic number representing the performance of the drive after having been aged. -mrb ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfs support ?
Roland Mainz wrote: Hi! Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs etc.) are supported by tmpfs ? tmpfs does not support ACLs see _PC_ACL_ENABLED in [f]pathconf(2). You can query the file system for what type of ACLs it supports. Bye, Roland ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfs support ?
Norm Jacobs wrote: Roland Mainz wrote: Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs etc.) are supported by tmpfs ? I have some vague recollection that tmpfs doesn't support ACLs snd it appears to be so... Is there any RFE which requests the implementation of NFSv4-like ACLs for tmpfs yet ? ZFS opensolaris% touch /var/tmp/bar opensolaris% chmod A=user:lp:r:deny /var/tmp/bar opensolaris% TMPFS opensolaris% touch /tmp/bar opensolaris% chmod A=user:lp:r:deny /tmp/bar chmod: ERROR: Failed to set ACL: Operation not supported opensolaris% Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any other options ? [1]=The idea is to have a test module which checks whether ACL operations work correctly, however the testing framework must only run as normal, unpriviledged user... Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.ma...@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfs support ?
Interesting question takes a few minutes to test... http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2252/acl-5?l=ena=viewq=acl%285%29+ http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2239/chmod-1?l=ena=view ZFS [tp47...@norton:] df . Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on rpool/export/home/tp47565 16G 1.2G 9.7G 11% /export/home/tp47565 [tp47...@norton:] touch file.3 [tp47...@norton:] ls -v file.3 -rw-r- 1 tp47565 staff 0 Sep 16 15:02 file.3 0:owner@:execute:deny 1:owner@:read_data/write_data/append_data/write_xattr/write_attributes /write_acl/write_owner:allow 2:group@:write_data/append_data/execute:deny 3:group@:read_data:allow 4:everyone@:read_data/write_data/append_data/write_xattr/execute /write_attributes/write_acl/write_owner:deny 5:everyone@:read_xattr/read_attributes/read_acl/synchronize:allow [tp47...@norton:] chmod A+user:lp:read_data:deny file.3 [tp47...@norton:] ls -v file.3 -rw-r-+ 1 tp47565 staff 0 Sep 16 15:02 file.3 0:user:lp:read_data:deny 1:owner@:execute:deny 2:owner@:read_data/write_data/append_data/write_xattr/write_attributes /write_acl/write_owner:allow 3:group@:write_data/append_data/execute:deny 4:group@:read_data:allow 5:everyone@:read_data/write_data/append_data/write_xattr/execute /write_attributes/write_acl/write_owner:deny 6:everyone@:read_xattr/read_attributes/read_acl/synchronize:allow [tp47...@norton:] Let's try the new ACLs on tmpfs [tp47...@norton:] cd /tmp [tp47...@norton:] df . Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on swap 528M 12K 528M 1% /tmp [tp47...@norton:] grep swap /etc/vfstab swap - /tmp tmpfs - yes - /dev/zvol/dsk/rpool/swap - - swap - no - [tp47...@norton:] [tp47...@norton:] touch file.3 [tp47...@norton:] ls -v file.3 -rw-r- 1 tp47565 staff 0 Sep 16 14:58 file.3 0:user::rw- 1:group::r-- #effective:r-- 2:mask:rwx 3:other:--- [tp47...@norton:] [tp47...@norton:] chmod A+user:lp:read_data:deny file.3 chmod: ERROR: ACL type's are different [tp47...@norton:] So tmpfs does not support the new ACLs Do I have to do the old way as well? Roland Mainz wrote: Hi! Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if "yes" - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs etc.) are supported by tmpfs ? Bye, Roland -- Trevor Pretty | Technical Account Manager | +64 9 639 0652 | +64 21 666 161 Eagle Technology Group Ltd. Gate D, Alexandra Park, Greenlane West, Epsom Private Bag 93211, Parnell, Auckland www.eagle.co.nz This email is confidential and may be legally privileged. If received in error please destroy and immediately notify us. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfs support ?
Roland Mainz wrote: Norm Jacobs wrote: Roland Mainz wrote: Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs etc.) are supported by tmpfs ? I have some vague recollection that tmpfs doesn't support ACLs snd it appears to be so... Is there any RFE which requests the implementation of NFSv4-like ACLs for tmpfs yet ? ZFS opensolaris% touch /var/tmp/bar opensolaris% chmod A=user:lp:r:deny /var/tmp/bar opensolaris% TMPFS opensolaris% touch /tmp/bar opensolaris% chmod A=user:lp:r:deny /tmp/bar chmod: ERROR: Failed to set ACL: Operation not supported opensolaris% Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any other options ? Use function interposition. I am currently updating an ACL manipulation application and I use mocks for the acl get/set functions. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfssupport?
Ian Collins wrote: Roland Mainz wrote: Norm Jacobs wrote: Roland Mainz wrote: Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs etc.) are supported by tmpfs ? I have some vague recollection that tmpfs doesn't support ACLs snd it appears to be so... Is there any RFE which requests the implementation of NFSv4-like ACLs for tmpfs yet ? ZFS opensolaris% touch /var/tmp/bar opensolaris% chmod A=user:lp:r:deny /var/tmp/bar opensolaris% TMPFS opensolaris% touch /tmp/bar opensolaris% chmod A=user:lp:r:deny /tmp/bar chmod: ERROR: Failed to set ACL: Operation not supported opensolaris% Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any other options ? Use function interposition. Umpf... the matching code is linked with -Bdirect ... AFAIK I can't interpose library functions linked with this option, right ? Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.ma...@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfssupport?
Roland Mainz wrote: Ian Collins wrote: Roland Mainz wrote: Norm Jacobs wrote: Roland Mainz wrote: Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs etc.) are supported by tmpfs ? I have some vague recollection that tmpfs doesn't support ACLs snd it appears to be so... Is there any RFE which requests the implementation of NFSv4-like ACLs for tmpfs yet ? ZFS opensolaris% touch /var/tmp/bar opensolaris% chmod A=user:lp:r:deny /var/tmp/bar opensolaris% TMPFS opensolaris% touch /tmp/bar opensolaris% chmod A=user:lp:r:deny /tmp/bar chmod: ERROR: Failed to set ACL: Operation not supported opensolaris% Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any other options ? Use function interposition. Umpf... the matching code is linked with -Bdirect ... AFAIK I can't interpose library functions linked with this option, right ? I never build test harnesses with explicit ld options (I use the C or C++ compiler for linking). There is a note about interposition in the ld man page description of -B. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Why is Solaris 10 ZFS performance so terrible?
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Dale Ghent wrote: As someone who currently faces kernel panics with recent U7+ kernel patches (on AMD64 and SPARC) related to PCI bus upset, I expect that Sun will take the time to make sure that the implementation is as good as it can be and is thoroughly tested before release. Are you referring the the same testing that gained you this PCI panic feature in s10u7? No. The system worked with the kernel patch corresponding to baseline S10U7. Problems started with later kernel patches (which seem to be much less tested). Of course there could actually be a real hardware problem. Regardless, when the integrity of our data is involved, I prefer to wait for more testing rather than to potentially have to recover the pool from backup. 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] Intel X25-E SSD in x4500 followup
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009, Eric Schrock wrote: Actually, it's not one byte - the entire page is garbage (as we saw in the dtrace output). But I'm guessing that smartctl (and hardware SATL) is aborting on the first invalid record, while we keep going and blindly translate one form of garbage into another. I updated to the new X25-E firmware, and I think it might have resolved the problem. smartctl under Linux no longer give a warning, and the diskstat check under Solaris no longer appears to have garbage. I attached output from smartctl, diskstat, and the dtrace script at the bottom, does it look like the firmware is returning valid stuff now? Absolutely. The SATA code could definitely be cleaned up to bail when processing an invalid record. I can file a CR for you if you haven't already done so. I haven't; even if the new firmware does resolve the problem, I like robustness :), so it would still be nice in general for the code to be more forgiving and perhaps just log a warning. Thanks... -- smartctl version 5.38 [x86_64-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === Device Model: SSDSA2SH032G1GN INTEL Serial Number:CVEM902600J6032HGN Firmware Version: 045C8850 User Capacity:32,000,000,000 bytes Device is:Not in smartctl database [for details use: -P showall] ATA Version is: 7 ATA Standard is: ATA/ATAPI-7 T13 1532D revision 1 Local Time is:Mon Sep 14 18:26:09 2009 PDT SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability. SMART support is: Enabled === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED See vendor-specific Attribute list for marginal Attributes. General SMART Values: Offline data collection status: (0x00) Offline data collection activity was never started. Auto Offline Data Collection: Disabled. Self-test execution status: ( 32) The self-test routine was interrupted by the host with a hard or soft reset. Total time to complete Offline data collection: ( 1) seconds. Offline data collection capabilities:(0x75) SMART execute Offline immediate. No Auto Offline data collection support. Abort Offline collection upon new command. No Offline surface scan supported. Self-test supported. Conveyance Self-test supported. Selective Self-test supported. SMART capabilities:(0x0003) Saves SMART data before entering power-saving mode. Supports SMART auto save timer. Error logging capability:(0x01) Error logging supported. General Purpose Logging supported. Short self-test routine recommended polling time:( 2) minutes. Extended self-test routine recommended polling time:( 2) minutes. Conveyance self-test routine recommended polling time:( 1) minutes. SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 5 Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 3 Spin_Up_Time0x 100 000 000Old_age Offline In_the_past 0 4 Start_Stop_Count0x 100 000 000Old_age Offline In_the_past 0 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0002 100 100 000Old_age Always - 0 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0002 100 100 000Old_age Always - 68 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0002 100 100 000Old_age Always - 151 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0002 100 100 000Old_age Always - 22 232 Unknown_Attribute 0x0003 100 100 010Pre-fail Always - 0 233 Unknown_Attribute 0x0002 099 099 000Old_age Always - 0 225 Load_Cycle_Count0x 200 200 000Old_age Offline - 50147 226 Load-in_Time0x0002 255 000 000Old_age Always In_the_past 4294967295 227 Torq-amp_Count 0x0002 000 000 000Old_age Always FAILING_NOW 281474976710655 228 Power-off_Retract_Count 0x0002 000 000 000Old_age Always FAILING_NOW 4294967295 SMART Error Log Version: 1 No Errors Logged SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Short offline Completed without error 00%68 - # 2 Short offline
Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfs support ?
Roland Mainz wrote: Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any other options ? By all means, test with ZFS. But it's easy to do that: # mkfile 64m /zpool.file # zpool create test /zpool.file # zfs list test 67.5K 27.4M18K /test Rob T ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Intel X25-E SSD in x4500 followup
On Sep 15, 2009, at 8:32 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote: I updated to the new X25-E firmware, and I think it might have resolved the problem. smartctl under Linux no longer give a warning, and the diskstat check under Solaris no longer appears to have garbage. I attached output from smartctl, diskstat, and the dtrace script at the bottom, does it look like the firmware is returning valid stuff now? I don't have the ATA spec in front of me, but that that looks like pretty normal output to me. Glad to hear they addressed the issue. - Eric Absolutely. The SATA code could definitely be cleaned up to bail when processing an invalid record. I can file a CR for you if you haven't already done so. I haven't; even if the new firmware does resolve the problem, I like robustness :), so it would still be nice in general for the code to be more forgiving and perhaps just log a warning. Thanks... -- smartctl version 5.38 [x86_64-pc-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-8 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === Device Model: SSDSA2SH032G1GN INTEL Serial Number:CVEM902600J6032HGN Firmware Version: 045C8850 User Capacity:32,000,000,000 bytes Device is:Not in smartctl database [for details use: -P showall] ATA Version is: 7 ATA Standard is: ATA/ATAPI-7 T13 1532D revision 1 Local Time is:Mon Sep 14 18:26:09 2009 PDT SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability. SMART support is: Enabled === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED See vendor-specific Attribute list for marginal Attributes. General SMART Values: Offline data collection status: (0x00) Offline data collection activity was never started. Auto Offline Data Collection: Disabled. Self-test execution status: ( 32) The self-test routine was interrupted by the host with a hard or soft reset. Total time to complete Offline data collection: ( 1) seconds. Offline data collection capabilities:(0x75) SMART execute Offline immediate. No Auto Offline data collection support. Abort Offline collection upon new command. No Offline surface scan supported. Self-test supported. Conveyance Self-test supported. Selective Self-test supported. SMART capabilities:(0x0003) Saves SMART data before entering power-saving mode. Supports SMART auto save timer. Error logging capability:(0x01) Error logging supported. General Purpose Logging supported. Short self-test routine recommended polling time:( 2) minutes. Extended self-test routine recommended polling time:( 2) minutes. Conveyance self-test routine recommended polling time:( 1) minutes. SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 5 Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 3 Spin_Up_Time0x 100 000 000Old_age Offline In_the_past 0 4 Start_Stop_Count0x 100 000 000Old_age Offline In_the_past 0 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0002 100 100 000Old_age Always - 0 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0002 100 100 000Old_age Always - 68 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0002 100 100 000Old_age Always - 151 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0002 100 100 000Old_age Always - 22 232 Unknown_Attribute 0x0003 100 100 010Pre-fail Always - 0 233 Unknown_Attribute 0x0002 099 099 000Old_age Always - 0 225 Load_Cycle_Count0x 200 200 000Old_age Offline - 50147 226 Load-in_Time0x0002 255 000 000Old_age Always In_the_past 4294967295 227 Torq-amp_Count 0x0002 000 000 000Old_age Always FAILING_NOW 281474976710655 228 Power-off_Retract_Count 0x0002 000 000 000Old_age Always FAILING_NOW 4294967295 SMART Error Log Version: 1 No Errors Logged SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_DescriptionStatus Remaining LifeTime (hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Short offline Completed without error 00%68 - # 2 Short offline Completed without error 00%68 - # 3
Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfssupport?
Robert Thurlow wrote: Roland Mainz wrote: Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any other options ? By all means, test with ZFS. But it's easy to do that: # mkfile 64m /zpool.file # zpool create test /zpool.file # zfs list test 67.5K 27.4M18K /test I know... but AFAIK this requires root priviledges which the test suite won't have... Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.ma...@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Intel X25-E SSD in x4500 followup
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Eric Schrock wrote: I don't have the ATA spec in front of me, but that that looks like pretty normal output to me. Glad to hear they addressed the issue. Excellent; I reinstalled it in my test x4500, if no other issues show up I can try to get my proposal to install them in production going again; they make a huge difference for common sysadmin operations such as tarball extraction or code development scenarios like revision control checkouts. If I'm lucky maybe the ability to import a pool with a dead slog will make it into U8, that was the only other potential snag in my deployment plan, as I'd only have one SSD in each system. -- Paul B. Henson | (909) 979-6361 | http://www.csupomona.edu/~henson/ Operating Systems and Network Analyst | hen...@csupomona.edu California State Polytechnic University | Pomona CA 91768 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send older version?
Lori Alt wrote: On 09/15/09 06:27, Luca Morettoni wrote: On 09/15/09 02:07 PM, Mark J Musante wrote: zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem is possible to implement into a future version of ZFS a released send command, like: # zfs send -r2 snap ... to send a specific release (version 2 in the example) of the metadata? I just created a RFE for this problem in general: 6882134. I'm not sure the above suggestion is the best way to solve the problem, but we do need some kind of support for inter-version send stream readability. Lori I haven't see this specific problem, but it occurs to me thus: For the reverse of the original problem, where (say) I back up a 'zfs send' stream to tape, then later on, after upgrading my system, I want to get that stream back. Does 'zfs receive' support reading a version X stream and dumping it into a version X+N zfs filesystem? If not, frankly, that's a higher priority than the reverse. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send older version?
Erik Trimble wrote: Lori Alt wrote: On 09/15/09 06:27, Luca Morettoni wrote: On 09/15/09 02:07 PM, Mark J Musante wrote: zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem is possible to implement into a future version of ZFS a released send command, like: # zfs send -r2 snap ... to send a specific release (version 2 in the example) of the metadata? I just created a RFE for this problem in general: 6882134. I'm not sure the above suggestion is the best way to solve the problem, but we do need some kind of support for inter-version send stream readability. Lori I haven't see this specific problem, but it occurs to me thus: For the reverse of the original problem, where (say) I back up a 'zfs send' stream to tape, then later on, after upgrading my system, I want to get that stream back. Does 'zfs receive' support reading a version X stream and dumping it into a version X+N zfs filesystem? If not, frankly, that's a higher priority than the reverse. I think you'll find it isn't supported but it does work. That is there's no guarantee a new stream version will be upwardly compatible with an earlier one. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] Which kind of ACLs does tmpfssupport?
Roland Mainz wrote: Robert Thurlow wrote: Roland Mainz wrote: Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any other options ? By all means, test with ZFS. But it's easy to do that: # mkfile 64m /zpool.file # zpool create test /zpool.file # zfs list test 67.5K 27.4M18K /test I know... but AFAIK this requires root priviledges which the test suite won't have... It is also more difficult to test error conditions. Unless you really have to, don't use fancy link options for a test harness so you can easily interpose (or simply define) mock library calls. If you stick with regular dynamic linking, you can simply define your mock/stub library functions in your test code. Easy. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
