Re: [zfs-discuss] One dataset per user?
Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.com writes: There are legitimate specific reasons to use separate filesystems in some circumstances. But if you can't name one reason why it's better ... then it's not better for you. Having separate filesystems per user lets you create user-specific quotas and reservations, lets you allow users to make their own snapshots, and lets you do zfs send/recv replication of single user home directories (for backup or move to another pool), and even allow the users to do that on their own. -- Usenet is not a right. It is a right, a left, a jab, and a sharp uppercut to the jaw. The postman hits! You have new mail. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] modified mdb and zdb
Hi, I would really apreciate if any of you can help me get the modified mdb and zdb (in any version of OpenSolaris) for digital forensic reserch purpose. Thank you. Jonathan Cifuentes _ Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=createwx_url=/friends.aspxmkt=en-us___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] root pool expansion
Right now I have a machine with a mirrored boot setup. The SAS drives are 43Gs and the root pool is getting full. I do a backup of the pool nightly, so I feel confident that I don't need to mirror the drive and can break the mirror and expand the pool with the detached drive. I understand how to do this on a normal pool, but is there any restrictions for doing this on the root pool? Are there any grub issues? Thanks, Gary -- 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] root pool expansion
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Gary Gendel wrote: Right now I have a machine with a mirrored boot setup. The SAS drives are 43Gs and the root pool is getting full. I do a backup of the pool nightly, so I feel confident that I don't need to mirror the drive and can break the mirror and expand the pool with the detached drive. I understand how to do this on a normal pool, but is there any restrictions for doing this on the root pool? Are there any grub issues? You cannot stripe a root pool. Best you could do in this instance is to create a new pool from the detached mirror. You may want to consider keepting the redundancy of the mirror config so that zfs can automatically repair any corruption it detects. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Mirrored raidz
From: Richard Elling [mailto:richard.ell...@gmail.com] http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/PSARC/2010/193/mail Agree. This is a better solution because some configurable parameters are hidden from zfs get all Forgive me for not seeing it ... That link is extremely dense, and 34 pages long ... Is there an option, that will capture properties better than get all? What is the suggested solution? I don't see anything in man zfs ... but maybe it's only available in a later version of zfs? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz2 + spare or raidz3 and no spare for nine 1.5 TB SATA disks?
On Jul 27, 2010, at 10:37 PM, Jack Kielsmeier wrote: The only other zfs pool in my system is a mirrored rpool (2 500 gb disks). This is for my own personal use, so it's not like the data is mission critical in some sort of production environment. The advantage I can see with going with raidz2 + spare over raidz3 and no spare is I would spend much less time running in a degraded state when a drive fails (I'd have to RMA the drive and wait most likely a week or more for a replacement). raidz3 with no spare will be better than raidz2+spare in all single-set cases. The disadvantage of raidz2 + spare is the event of a triple disk failure. This is most likely not going to occur with 9 disks, but certainly is possible. If 3 disks fail before one can be rebuilt with the spare, the data will be lost. So, I guess the main question I have is, how much a performance hit is noticed when a raidz3 array is running in a degraded state? The performance will be similar, but in the non-degraded case, the raidz3 will perform better for small, random reads. -- richard -- Richard Elling rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 Enterprise class storage for everyone www.nexenta.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz2 + spare or raidz3 and no spare for nine 1.5 TB SATA disks?
The performance will be similar, but in the non-degraded case, the raidz3 will perform better for small, random reads. Why is this? The two will have the same amount of data drives Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 r...@karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer på norsk. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] root pool expansion
Hi Gary, If your root pool is getting full, you can replace the root pool disk with a larger disk. My recommendation is to attach the replacement disk, let the replacement disk resilver, install the boot blocks, and then detach the smaller disk. The system will see the expanded space automatically. A mirrored root pool configuration is a good suggestion too. You need to follow the steps in the ZFS troubleshooting wiki (as suggested) to label and partition the replacement disk. http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Troubleshooting_Guide Replacing/Relabeling the Root Pool Disk Thanks, Cindy On 07/28/10 07:32, Gary Gendel wrote: Right now I have a machine with a mirrored boot setup. The SAS drives are 43Gs and the root pool is getting full. I do a backup of the pool nightly, so I feel confident that I don't need to mirror the drive and can break the mirror and expand the pool with the detached drive. I understand how to do this on a normal pool, but is there any restrictions for doing this on the root pool? Are there any grub issues? Thanks, Gary ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz2 + spare or raidz3 and no spare for nine 1.5 TB SATA disks?
On Jul 28, 2010, at 8:34 AM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote: The performance will be similar, but in the non-degraded case, the raidz3 will perform better for small, random reads. Why is this? The two will have the same amount of data drives The simple small, random read model for homogeneous drives: I = small, random IOPS of one drive D = number of data disks P = number of parity disks total IOPS = I * (D+P)/D raidz2: P=2 total IOPS = I * (D+2)/D raidz3: P=3 total IOPS = I * (D+3)/D -- richard -- Richard Elling rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 Enterprise class storage for everyone www.nexenta.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] COMSTAR iscsi replication - dataset busy
Hi all, I have in lab two servers running snv_134 and while doing some experiences with iscsi volumes and replication i came up to a road-block that i would like to ask for your help. So in server A i have a lun created in COMSTAR without any views attach to it and i can zfs send it to server B without problems. Now on server B i created a view on that volume and there's a linux machine accessing this volume over iscsi. As soon as i created the view of the lun on server B the process of zfs send incremental (or not btw) stops working , giving me the message of dataset busy. So, if i stop the linux machine of accessing the lun in server B, the problem keeps on, if i remove the COMSTAR view the problem keeps on, but i remove the lu in COMSTAR then it works.. Is there any other way to bypass this issue? Thanks, Bruno -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz2 + spare or raidz3 and no spare for nine 1.5 TB SATA disks?
Thanks, Looks like I'll be using raidz3. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zfs allow does not work for rpool
I am trying to give a general user permissions to create zfs filesystems in the rpool. zpool set=delegation=on rpool zfs allow user create rpool both run without any issues. zfs allow rpool reports the user does have create permissions. zfs create rpool/test cannot create rpool/test : permission denied. Can you not allow to the rpool? -- 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 allow does not work for rpool
Hi Mark, A couple of things are causing this to fail: 1. The user needs permissions to the underlying mount point. 2. The user needs both create and mount permissions to create ZFS datasets. See the syntax below, which might vary depending on your Solaris release. Thanks, Cindy # chmod A+user:cindys:add_subdirectory:fd:allow /rpool # zfs allow cindys create,mount rpool # su - cindys % /usr/sbin/zfs create rpool/cindys On 07/28/10 11:23, Mike DeMarco wrote: I am trying to give a general user permissions to create zfs filesystems in the rpool. zpool set=delegation=on rpool zfs allow user create rpool both run without any issues. zfs allow rpool reports the user does have create permissions. zfs create rpool/test cannot create rpool/test : permission denied. Can you not allow to the rpool? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs allow does not work for rpool
Thanks adding mount did allow me to create it but does not allow me to create the mountpoint. -- 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 allow does not work for rpool
Mike, Did you also give the user permissions to the underlying mount point: # chmod A+user:user-name:add_subdirectory:fd:allow /rpool If so, please let me see the syntax and error messages. Thanks, Cindy On 07/28/10 12:23, Mike DeMarco wrote: Thanks adding mount did allow me to create it but does not allow me to create the mountpoint. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Tips for ZFS tuning for NFS store of VM images
-Original Message- From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of sol Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 3:12 PM To: Richard Elling; Gregory Gee Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Tips for ZFS tuning for NFS store of VM images Richard Elling wrote: Gregory Gee wrote: I am using OpenSolaris to host VM images over NFS for XenServer. I'm looking for tips on what parameters can be set to help optimize my ZFS pool that holds my VM images. There is nothing special about tuning for VMs, the normal NFS tuning applies. That's not been my experience. Out of the box VMware server would not work with the VMs stored on a zfs pool via NFS. I've not yet found out why but the analytics showed millions of getattr/access/lookup compared to read/write. A partial workaround was to turn off access time on the share and to mount with noatime,actimeo=60 But that's not perfect because when left along the VM got into a stuck state. I've never seen that state before when the VM was hosted on a local disk. Hosting VMs on NFS is not working well so far... My guess is that it's a VMware Server + NFS client issue, not a VMs on NFS issue. I'm using an OpenSolaris b134 system as an 'experimental' NFS datastore for VMware vSphere/ESX and it works great. I've had as many as 30 mixed-IO VMs running on the system with no reported issues. -Will ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] How can a mirror lose a file?
Hi Having just done a scrub of a mirror I've lost a file and I'm curious how this can happen in a mirror. Doesn't it require the almost impossible scenario of exactly the same sector being trashed on both disks? However the zpool status shows checksum errors not I/O errors and I'm not sure what that means in this case. I thought that a zfs mirror would be the ultimate in protection but it's not! Any ideas why and how to protect against this in the future? (BTW it's osol official release 2009.06 snv_111b) # zpool status -v pool: liver state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data corruption. Applications may be affected. action: Restore the file in question if possible. Otherwise restore the entire pool from backup. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-8A scrub: scrub completed after 3h31m with 1 errors config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM liver ONLINE 0 0 1 mirror ONLINE 0 0 2 c9d0p0 ONLINE 0 0 2 c10d0p0 ONLINE 0 0 2 errors: Permanent errors have been detected in the following files: ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How can a mirror lose a file?
On Jul 28, 2010, at 12:41 PM, sol wrote: Having just done a scrub of a mirror I've lost a file and I'm curious how this can happen in a mirror. Doesn't it require the almost impossible scenario of exactly the same sector being trashed on both disks? However the zpool status shows checksum errors not I/O errors and I'm not sure what that means in this case. It means that the data read back from the disk is not what ZFS thought it wrote. I thought that a zfs mirror would be the ultimate in protection but it's not! Are you saying you would rather have the data silently corrupted? Any ideas why and how to protect against this in the future? This can happen if there is a failure in a common system component during the write (eg. main memory, HBA, PCI bus, CPU, bridges, etc.) (BTW it's osol official release 2009.06 snv_111b) On more modern releases, the details of the corruption are shown in the FMA dump. However, this feature does not exist in OpenSolaris 2009.06. -- richard # zpool status -v pool: liver state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data corruption. Applications may be affected. action: Restore the file in question if possible. Otherwise restore the entire pool from backup. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-8A scrub: scrub completed after 3h31m with 1 errors config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM liver ONLINE 0 0 1 mirror ONLINE 0 0 2 c9d0p0 ONLINE 0 0 2 c10d0p0 ONLINE 0 0 2 errors: Permanent errors have been detected in the following files: -- Richard Elling rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 Enterprise class storage for everyone www.nexenta.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How can a mirror lose a file?
On 07/29/10 07:41 AM, sol wrote: Hi Having just done a scrub of a mirror I've lost a file and I'm curious how this can happen in a mirror. Doesn't it require the almost impossible scenario of exactly the same sector being trashed on both disks? However the zpool status shows checksum errors not I/O errors and I'm not sure what that means in this case. I thought that a zfs mirror would be the ultimate in protection but it's not! Any ideas why and how to protect against this in the future? Bad memory? Use ECC memory and test it. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Tips for ZFS tuning for NFS store of VM images
On Jul 28, 2010, at 12:11 PM, sol wrote: Richard Elling wrote: Gregory Gee wrote: I am using OpenSolaris to host VM images over NFS for XenServer. I'm looking for tips on what parameters can be set to help optimize my ZFS pool that holds my VM images. There is nothing special about tuning for VMs, the normal NFS tuning applies. That's not been my experience. Out of the box VMware server would not work with the VMs stored on a zfs pool via NFS. I do this regularly and know many people who run this way. I've not yet found out why but the analytics showed millions of getattr/access/lookup compared to read/write. These are requests from the client being serviced by the server. To find out why the client is sending such requests, you'll need to look at the client. A partial workaround was to turn off access time on the share and to mount with noatime,actimeo=60 Yes, these are common NFS tunables. -- richard But that's not perfect because when left along the VM got into a stuck state. I've never seen that state before when the VM was hosted on a local disk. Hosting VMs on NFS is not working well so far... -- Richard Elling rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 Enterprise class storage for everyone www.nexenta.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How can a mirror lose a file?
Hi Sol, What kind of disks? You should be able to use the fmdump -eV command to identify when the checksum errors occurred. Thanks, Cindy On 07/28/10 13:41, sol wrote: Hi Having just done a scrub of a mirror I've lost a file and I'm curious how this can happen in a mirror. Doesn't it require the almost impossible scenario of exactly the same sector being trashed on both disks? However the zpool status shows checksum errors not I/O errors and I'm not sure what that means in this case. I thought that a zfs mirror would be the ultimate in protection but it's not! Any ideas why and how to protect against this in the future? (BTW it's osol official release 2009.06 snv_111b) # zpool status -v pool: liver state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data corruption. Applications may be affected. action: Restore the file in question if possible. Otherwise restore the entire pool from backup. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-8A scrub: scrub completed after 3h31m with 1 errors config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM liver ONLINE 0 0 1 mirror ONLINE 0 0 2 c9d0p0 ONLINE 0 0 2 c10d0p0 ONLINE 0 0 2 errors: Permanent errors have been detected in the following files: ___ 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] Mirrored raidz
From: Darren J Moffat [mailto:darr...@opensolaris.org] It basically says that 'zfs send' gets a new '-b' option so send back properties, and 'zfs recv' gets a '-o' and '-x' option to allow explicit set/ignore of properties in the stream. It also adds a '-r' option for 'zfs set'. If/when the approved changes integrate it will look like: Based on the source code change history for onnv-gate it doesn't appear to have integrated yet. Ahh. So, for now I'm sticking with zpool get all and zfs get all stored in a text file, unless somebody has a better idea... ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How can a mirror lose a file?
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Richard Elling This can happen if there is a failure in a common system component during the write (eg. main memory, HBA, PCI bus, CPU, bridges, etc.) I bet that's the cause. Because as sol said ... Doesn't it require the almost impossible scenario of exactly the same sector being trashed on both disks? Basically, yeah. And it's time to start thinking up ways almost impossible isn't quite as impossible as you thought it was. Regular scrubs, snapshots, and backups are your friends. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Fwd: zpool import despite missing log [PSARC/2010/292 Self Review]
fyi -- Robert Milkowski http://milek.blogspot.com Original Message Subject:zpool import despite missing log [PSARC/2010/292 Self Review] Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:38:22 -0600 From: Tim Haley tim.ha...@oracle.com To: psarc-...@sun.com CC: zfs-t...@sun.com I am sponsoring the following case for George Wilson. Requested binding is micro/patch. Since this is a straight-forward addition of a command line option, I think itqualifies for self review. If an ARC member disagrees, let me know and I'll convert to a fast-track. Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.70 03/30/10 SMI This information is Copyright (c) 2010, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: zpool import despite missing log 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: Author: George Wilson 1.3 Date of This Document: 26 July, 2010 4. Technical Description OVERVIEW: ZFS maintains a GUID (global unique identifier) on each device and the sum of all GUIDs of a pool are stored into the ZFS uberblock. This sum is used to determine the availability of all vdevs within a pool when a pool is imported or opened. Pools which contain a separate intent log device (e.g. a slog) will fail to import when that device is removed or is otherwise unavailable. This proposal aims to address this particular issue. PROPOSED SOLUTION: This fast-track introduce a new command line flag to the 'zpool import' sub-command. This new option, '-m', allows pools to import even when a log device is missing. The contents of that log device are obviously discarded and the pool will operate as if the log device were offlined. MANPAGE DIFFS: zpool import [-o mntopts] [-p property=value] ... [-d dir | -c cachefile] - [-D] [-f] [-R root] [-n] [-F] -a + [-D] [-f] [-m] [-R root] [-n] [-F] -a zpool import [-o mntopts] [-o property=value] ... [-d dir | -c cachefile] - [-D] [-f] [-R root] [-n] [-F] pool |id [newpool] + [-D] [-f] [-m] [-R root] [-n] [-F] pool |id [newpool] zpool import [-o mntopts] [ -o property=value] ... [-d dir | - -c cachefile] [-D] [-f] [-n] [-F] [-R root] -a + -c cachefile] [-D] [-f] [-m] [-n] [-F] [-R root] -a Imports all pools found in the search directories. Identical to the previous command, except that all pools + -m + +Allows a pool to import when there is a missing log device EXAMPLES: 1). Configuration with a single intent log device: # zpool status tank pool: tank state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM tankONLINE 0 0 0 c7t0d0ONLINE 0 0 0 logs c5t0d0ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # zpool import tank The devices below are missing, use '-m' to import the pool anyway: c5t0d0 [log] cannot import 'tank': one or more devices is currently unavailable # zpool import -m tank # zpool status tank pool: tank state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices could not be opened. Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state. action: Attach the missing device and online it using 'zpool online'. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-2Q scan: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM tank DEGRADED 0 0 0 c7t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 logs 1693927398582730352 UNAVAIL 0 0 0 was /dev/dsk/c5t0d0 errors: No known data errors 2). Configuration with mirrored intent log device: # zpool add tank log mirror c5t0d0 c5t1d0 zr...@diskmonster:/dev/dsk# zpool status tank pool: tank state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM tankONLINE 0 0 0 c7t0d0ONLINE 0 0 0 logs mirror-1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # zpool import 429789444028972405 The devices below are missing, use '-m' to import the pool anyway: mirror-1 [log] c5t0d0 c5t1d0 # zpool import -m tank # zpool status tank pool: tank state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices could not be opened. Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state. action: Attach the missing device and online it using 'zpool online'. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-2Q scan: none requested config: NAME
[zfs-discuss] ZFS read performance terrible
I appear to be getting between 2-9MB/s reads from individual disks in my zpool as shown in iostat -v I expect upwards of 100MBps per disk, or at least aggregate performance on par with the number of disks that I have. My configuration is as follows: Two Quad-core 5520 processors 48GB ECC/REG ram 2x LSI 9200-8e SAS HBAs (2008 chipset) Supermicro 846e2 enclosure with LSI sasx36 expander backplane 20 seagate constellation 2TB SAS harddrives 2x 8GB Qlogic dual-port FC adapters in target mode 4x Intel X25-E 32GB SSDs available (attached via LSI sata-sas interposer) mpt_sas driver multipath enabled, all four LSI ports connected for 4 paths available: f_sym, load-balance logical-block region size 11 on seagate drives f_asym_sun, load-balance none, on intel ssd drives currently not using the SSDs in the pools since it seems I have a deeper issue here. Pool configuration is four 2-drive mirror vdevs in one pool, and the same in another pool. 2 drives are for OS and 2 drives aren't being used at the moment. Where should I go from here to figure out what's wrong? Thank you in advance - I've spent days reading and testing but I'm not getting anywhere. P.S: I need the aid of some Genius here. -- 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 read performance terrible
How many iops per spindle are you getting? A rule of thumb I use is to expect no more than 125 iops per spindle for regular HDDs. SSDs are a different story of course. :) -- 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 read performance terrible
Hi r2ch The operations column shows about 370 operations for read - per spindle (Between 400-900 for writes) How should I be measuring iops? -- 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] Fwd: zpool import despite missing log [PSARC/2010/292 Self Review]
+1 On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Robert Milkowski mi...@task.gda.pl wrote: fyi -- Robert Milkowski http://milek.blogspot.com Original Message Subject: zpool import despite missing log [PSARC/2010/292 Self Review] Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:38:22 -0600 From: Tim Haley tim.ha...@oracle.com tim.ha...@oracle.com To: psarc-...@sun.com CC: zfs-t...@sun.com I am sponsoring the following case for George Wilson. Requested binding is micro/patch. Since this is a straight-forward addition of a command line option, I think itqualifies for self review. If an ARC member disagrees, let me know and I'll convert to a fast-track. Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.70 03/30/10 SMI This information is Copyright (c) 2010, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: zpool import despite missing log 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: Author: George Wilson 1.3 Date of This Document: 26 July, 2010 4. Technical Description OVERVIEW: ZFS maintains a GUID (global unique identifier) on each device and the sum of all GUIDs of a pool are stored into the ZFS uberblock. This sum is used to determine the availability of all vdevs within a pool when a pool is imported or opened. Pools which contain a separate intent log device (e.g. a slog) will fail to import when that device is removed or is otherwise unavailable. This proposal aims to address this particular issue. PROPOSED SOLUTION: This fast-track introduce a new command line flag to the 'zpool import' sub-command. This new option, '-m', allows pools to import even when a log device is missing. The contents of that log device are obviously discarded and the pool will operate as if the log device were offlined. MANPAGE DIFFS: zpool import [-o mntopts] [-p property=value] ... [-d dir | -c cachefile] - [-D] [-f] [-R root] [-n] [-F] -a + [-D] [-f] [-m] [-R root] [-n] [-F] -a zpool import [-o mntopts] [-o property=value] ... [-d dir | -c cachefile] - [-D] [-f] [-R root] [-n] [-F] pool |id [newpool] + [-D] [-f] [-m] [-R root] [-n] [-F] pool |id [newpool] zpool import [-o mntopts] [ -o property=value] ... [-d dir | - -c cachefile] [-D] [-f] [-n] [-F] [-R root] -a + -c cachefile] [-D] [-f] [-m] [-n] [-F] [-R root] -a Imports all pools found in the search directories. Identical to the previous command, except that all pools + -m + +Allows a pool to import when there is a missing log device EXAMPLES: 1). Configuration with a single intent log device: # zpool status tank pool: tank state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM tankONLINE 0 0 0 c7t0d0ONLINE 0 0 0 logs c5t0d0ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # zpool import tank The devices below are missing, use '-m' to import the pool anyway: c5t0d0 [log] cannot import 'tank': one or more devices is currently unavailable # zpool import -m tank # zpool status tank pool: tank state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices could not be opened. Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state. action: Attach the missing device and online it using 'zpool online'. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-2Q scan: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM tank DEGRADED 0 0 0 c7t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 logs 1693927398582730352 UNAVAIL 0 0 0 was /dev/dsk/c5t0d0 errors: No known data errors 2). Configuration with mirrored intent log device: # zpool add tank log mirror c5t0d0 c5t1d0 zr...@diskmonster:/dev/dsk# zpool status tank pool: tank state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM tankONLINE 0 0 0 c7t0d0ONLINE 0 0 0 logs mirror-1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # zpool import 429789444028972405 The devices below are missing, use '-m' to import the pool anyway: mirror-1 [log] c5t0d0 c5t1d0 # zpool import -m tank # zpool status tank pool: tank state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices could not be opened. Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue
