Re: [zfs-discuss] need hint on pool setup
Bob, On 01/31/2012 09:54 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Thomas Nau wrote: Dear all We have two JBODs with 20 or 21 drives available per JBOD hooked up to a server. We are considering the following setups: RAIDZ2 made of 4 drives RAIDZ2 made of 6 drives The first option wastes more disk space but can survive a JBOD failure whereas the second is more space effective but the system goes down when a JBOD goes down. Each of the JBOD comes with dual controllers, redundant fans and power supplies so do I need to be paranoid and use option #1? Of course it also gives us more IOPs but high end logging devices should take care of that I think that the answer depends on the impact to your business if data is temporarily not available. If your business can not survive data being temporarily not available (for hours or even a week) then the more conserative approach may be warranted. We are talking about home directories at a university so some downtime is ok but fore sure now hours or even days. We do regular backups plus snapshot send-receive to a remote location. The main thing I was wondering about is if it's better to have a downtime if a JBOD fails (rare I assume) or to keep going without any redundancy left. If you have a service contract which assures that a service tech will show up quickly with replacement hardware in hand, then this may also influence the decision which should be made. The replacement hardware is kind of on-site as we use it for the disaster recovery on the remote location Another consideration is that since these JBODs connect to a server, the data will also be unavailable when the server is down. The server being down may in fact be a more significant factor than a JBOD being down. I skipped that, sorry. Of course all JOBDs are connected through multiple SAS HBAs to two servers so server failure is easy to handle Thanks for the thoughts Thomas ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] HP JBOD D2700 - ok?
2012-02-01 6:22, Ragnar Sundblad wrote: That is almost what I do, except that I only have one HBA. We haven't seen many HBAs fail during the years, none actually, so we thought it was overkill to double those too. But maybe we are wrong? Question: if you use two HBAs on different PCI buses to to MPxIO to the same JBODs, wouldn't this double your peak performance between motherboard and disks (beside adding resilience to failure of one of the paths)? This might be less important with JBODs of HDDs, but more important with external arrays of SSD disks... or very many HDDs :) Thanks in advance for clearing that up for me, //Jim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] need hint on pool setup
my 2c 1 just do mirror of 2 dev with 20 hdd with 1 spare 2 raidz2 with 5 dev for 20 hdd, with one spare Sent from my iPad On Feb 1, 2012, at 3:49, Thomas Nau thomas@uni-ulm.de wrote: Hi On 01/31/2012 10:05 PM, Hung-Sheng Tsao (Lao Tsao 老曹) Ph.D. wrote: what is your main application for ZFS? e.g. just NFS or iSCSI for home dir or VM? or Window client? Yes, fileservice only using CIFS, NFS, Samba and maybe iSCSI Is performance important? or space is more important? a good balance ;) what is the memory of your server? 96G do you want to use ZIL or L2ARC? ZEUS STECRAM as ZIL (mirrored); maybe SSDs and L2ARC what is your backup or DR plan? continuous rolling snapshot plus send/receive to remote site TSM backup at least once a week to tape; depends on how much time the TSM client needs to walk the filesystems You need to answer all these question first did so Thomas ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] very slow write performance on 151a
hi guys, does anyone know if a fix for this (space map thrashing) is in the works? i've been running into this on and off on a number of systems i manage. sometimes i can delete snapshots and things go back to normal, sometimes the only thing that works is enabling metaslab_debug. obviously the latter is only really an option for systems with a huge amount of ram. or: am i doing something wrong? milosz On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Jim Klimov jimkli...@cos.ru wrote: 2011-12-15 22:44, milosz цкщеу: There are a few metaslab-related tunables that can be tweaked as well. - Bill For the sake of completeness, here are the relevant lines I have in /etc/system: ** * fix up metaslab min size (recent default ~10Mb seems bad, * recommended return to 4Kb, we'll do 4*8K) * greatly increases write speed in filled-up pools set zfs:metaslab_min_alloc_size = 0x8000 set zfs:metaslab_smo_bonus_pct = 0xc8 ** These values were described in greater detail on the list this summer, I think. HTH, //Jim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Disk failing? High asvc_t and %b.
I suspect that something is wrong with one of my disks. This is the output from iostat: extended device statistics errors --- r/sw/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b s/w h/w trn tot device 2.0 18.9 38.1 160.9 0.0 0.10.13.2 0 6 0 0 0 0 c5d0 2.7 18.8 59.3 160.9 0.0 0.10.23.2 0 6 0 0 0 0 c5d1 0.0 36.81.1 3593.7 0.0 0.10.02.9 0 8 0 0 0 0 c6t66d0 0.0 38.20.0 3693.7 0.0 0.20.04.6 0 12 0 0 0 0 c6t70d0 0.0 38.10.0 3693.7 0.0 0.10.02.4 0 5 0 0 0 0 c6t74d0 0.0 42.00.0 4155.4 0.0 0.00.00.6 0 2 0 0 0 0 c6t76d0 0.0 36.90.0 3593.7 0.0 0.10.01.4 0 3 0 0 0 0 c6t78d0 0.0 41.70.0 4155.4 0.0 0.00.01.2 0 4 0 0 0 0 c6t80d0 The disk in question is c6t70d0 - it shows consistently higher %b and asvc_t than the other disks in the pool. The output is from a 'zfs receive' after about 3 hours. The two c5dx disks are the 'rpool' mirror, the others belong to the 'backup' pool. admin@master:~# zpool status pool: backup state: ONLINE scan: scrub repaired 0 in 5h7m with 0 errors on Tue Jan 31 04:55:31 2012 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM backup ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t78d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t66d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t70d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t74d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-2 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t76d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t80d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors admin@master:~# zpool list NAME SIZE ALLOC FREECAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT backup 4.53T 1.37T 3.16T30% 1.00x ONLINE - admin@master:~# uname -a SunOS master 5.11 oi_148 i86pc i386 i86pc Should I be worried? And what other commands can I use to investigate further? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Disk failing? High asvc_t and %b.
On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Jan Hellevik wrote: The disk in question is c6t70d0 - it shows consistently higher %b and asvc_t than the other disks in the pool. The output is from a 'zfs receive' after about 3 hours. The two c5dx disks are the 'rpool' mirror, the others belong to the 'backup' pool. Are all of the disks the same make and model? What type of chassis are the disks mounted in? Is it possible that the environment that this disk experiences is somehow different than the others (e.g. due to vibration)? Should I be worried? And what other commands can I use to investigate further? It is difficult to say if you should be worried. Be sure to do 'iostat -xe' to see if there are any accumulating errors related to the disk. 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] Disk failing? High asvc_t and %b.
Hi! On Feb 1, 2012, at 7:43 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Jan Hellevik wrote: The disk in question is c6t70d0 - it shows consistently higher %b and asvc_t than the other disks in the pool. The output is from a 'zfs receive' after about 3 hours. The two c5dx disks are the 'rpool' mirror, the others belong to the 'backup' pool. Are all of the disks the same make and model? What type of chassis are the disks mounted in? Is it possible that the environment that this disk experiences is somehow different than the others (e.g. due to vibration)? They are different makes - I try to make pairs of different brands to minimise risk. The disks are in a Rackable Systems enclosure (disk shelf?). 16 disks, all SATA. Connected to a SASUC8I controller on the server. This is a backup server I recently put together to keep backups from my main server. I put in the disks from the old 'backup' pool and have started a 2TB zfs send/receive from my main server. So far thing look ok, it is just the somewhat high values on that one disk that worries me a little. Should I be worried? And what other commands can I use to investigate further? It is difficult to say if you should be worried. Be sure to do 'iostat -xe' to see if there are any accumulating errors related to the disk. This is the most current output from iostat. It has been running a zfs receive for more than a day. No errors. zpool status also reports no errors. extended device statistics errors --- r/sw/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b s/w h/w trn tot device 8.1 18.7 142.5 180.4 0.0 0.10.13.2 0 8 0 0 0 0 c5d0 10.2 18.7 186.3 180.4 0.0 0.10.13.3 0 9 0 0 0 0 c5d1 0.0 36.70.0 3595.8 0.0 0.10.03.2 0 9 0 0 0 0 c6t66d0 0.0 36.00.0 3642.2 0.0 0.10.03.9 0 12 0 0 0 0 c6t70d0 0.0 36.10.0 3642.2 0.0 0.10.02.9 0 5 0 0 0 0 c6t74d0 0.0 39.60.0 4071.8 0.0 0.00.00.7 0 2 0 0 0 0 c6t76d0 0.20.00.30.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c6t77d0 0.2 36.80.3 3595.8 0.0 0.10.01.9 0 4 0 0 0 0 c6t78d0 0.20.00.30.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c6t79d0 0.2 39.60.3 4071.6 0.0 0.10.01.6 0 5 0 0 0 0 c6t80d0 0.20.00.30.0 0.0 0.00.00.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c6t81d0 admin@master:/export/home/admin$ zpool list NAME SIZE ALLOC FREECAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT backup 4.53T 2.17T 2.36T47% 1.00x ONLINE - admin@master:/export/home/admin$ zpool status pool: backup state: ONLINE scan: scrub repaired 0 in 5h7m with 0 errors on Tue Jan 31 04:55:31 2012 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM backup ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t78d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t66d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t70d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t74d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-2 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t76d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t80d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Disk failing? High asvc_t and %b.
Hi Jan, These commands will tell you if FMA faults are logged: # fmdump # fmadm faulty This command will tell you if errors are accumulating on this disk: # fmdump -eV | more Thanks, Cindy On 02/01/12 11:20, Jan Hellevik wrote: I suspect that something is wrong with one of my disks. This is the output from iostat: extended device statistics errors --- r/sw/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b s/w h/w trn tot device 2.0 18.9 38.1 160.9 0.0 0.10.13.2 0 6 0 0 0 0 c5d0 2.7 18.8 59.3 160.9 0.0 0.10.23.2 0 6 0 0 0 0 c5d1 0.0 36.81.1 3593.7 0.0 0.10.02.9 0 8 0 0 0 0 c6t66d0 0.0 38.20.0 3693.7 0.0 0.20.04.6 0 12 0 0 0 0 c6t70d0 0.0 38.10.0 3693.7 0.0 0.10.02.4 0 5 0 0 0 0 c6t74d0 0.0 42.00.0 4155.4 0.0 0.00.00.6 0 2 0 0 0 0 c6t76d0 0.0 36.90.0 3593.7 0.0 0.10.01.4 0 3 0 0 0 0 c6t78d0 0.0 41.70.0 4155.4 0.0 0.00.01.2 0 4 0 0 0 0 c6t80d0 The disk in question is c6t70d0 - it shows consistently higher %b and asvc_t than the other disks in the pool. The output is from a 'zfs receive' after about 3 hours. The two c5dx disks are the 'rpool' mirror, the others belong to the 'backup' pool. admin@master:~# zpool status pool: backup state: ONLINE scan: scrub repaired 0 in 5h7m with 0 errors on Tue Jan 31 04:55:31 2012 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM backup ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t78d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t66d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t70d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t74d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-2 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t76d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t80d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors admin@master:~# zpool list NAME SIZE ALLOC FREECAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT backup 4.53T 1.37T 3.16T30% 1.00x ONLINE - admin@master:~# uname -a SunOS master 5.11 oi_148 i86pc i386 i86pc Should I be worried? And what other commands can I use to investigate further? ___ 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] GUI to set ACLs
Achim Wolpers wrote: I'm searching for a GUI tool to set ZFS (NFSv4) ACLs. I found some nautilus add ons in the web but they don't seen to work with nautilus shipped with OI. Any solution? I've been looking for something like this for ages, but as far as I know none exists. It certainly seems like a logical idea. Then again, Solaris doesn't have all that many desktop users so I guess the user base would be limited. Maybe they could integrate it with Ops Center somehow. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Learn more about Merchant Link at www.merchantlink.com. THIS MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL. This e-mail message and any attachments are proprietary and confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not print, distribute, or copy this message or any attachments. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message and any attachments from your computer. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Disk failing? High asvc_t and %b.
On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Jan Hellevik wrote: Are all of the disks the same make and model? They are different makes - I try to make pairs of different brands to minimise risk. Does your pairing maintain the same pattern of disk type across all the pairings? Some modern disks use 4k sectors while others still use 512 bytes. If the slow disk is a 4k sector model but the others are 512 byte models, then that would certainly explain a difference. Assuming that a couple of your disks are still unused, you could try replacing the suspect drive with an unused drive (via zfs command) to see if the slowness goes away. You could also make that vdev a triple-mirror since it is very easy to add/remove drives from a mirror vdev. Just make sure that your zfs syntax is correct so that you don't accidentally add a single-drive vdev to the pool (oops!). These sorts of things can be tested with zfs commands without physically moving/removing drives or endangering your data. 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] Disk failing? High asvc_t and %b.
On Feb 1, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, Jan Hellevik wrote: Are all of the disks the same make and model? They are different makes - I try to make pairs of different brands to minimise risk. Does your pairing maintain the same pattern of disk type across all the pairings? Not 100% percent sure I understand what you mean (english is not my first language). These are the disks: mirror-0: wd15ears + hd154ui mirror-1: wd15ears + hd154ui mirror-2: wd20ears + hd204ui Two pairs of 1.5TB and one pair of 2.0TB. I would like to have pairs of the same size, but these were the disks I had available, and since it is a backup pool I do not think it matters that much. If the flooding hadn't tripled the price of disks I would probably buy a few more, but not with the current price level. :-( I am waiting for a replacement 1.5TB disk and will replace the 'bad' one as soon as I get it. Some modern disks use 4k sectors while others still use 512 bytes. If the slow disk is a 4k sector model but the others are 512 byte models, then that would certainly explain a difference. AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS: 0. c5d0 ?xH?0?0??? cyl 14590 alt 2 hd 255 sec 63 1. c5d1 ?xH?0?0??? cyl 14590 alt 2 hd 255 sec 63 2. c6t66d0 ATA-WDC WD15EARS-00Z-0A80-1.36TB 3. c6t67d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD501LJ-0-12-465.76GB 4. c6t68d0 ATA-WDC WD6400AAKS-2-3B01-596.17GB 5. c6t69d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD501LJ-0-12-465.76GB 6. c6t70d0 ATA-WDC WD15EARS-00Z-0A80-1.36TB 7. c6t71d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD501LJ-0-13-465.76GB 8. c6t72d0 ATA-WDC WD6400AAKS--3B01 cyl 38909 alt 2 hd 255 sec 126 9. c6t73d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD501LJ-0-13-465.76GB 10. c6t74d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD154UI-1118-1.36TB 11. c6t75d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD501LJ-0-11-465.76GB 12. c6t76d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD204UI-0001-1.82TB 13. c6t77d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD501LJ-0-11-465.76GB 14. c6t78d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD154UI-1118-1.36TB 15. c6t79d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD501LJ-0-11-465.76GB 16. c6t80d0 ATA-WDC WD20EARS-00M-AB51-1.82TB 17. c6t81d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD501LJ-0-11-465.76GB mirror-0 2. c6t66d0 ATA-WDC WD15EARS-00Z-0A80-1.36TB 14. c6t78d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD154UI-1118-1.36TB mirror-1 6. c6t70d0 ATA-WDC WD15EARS-00Z-0A80-1.36TB 10. c6t74d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD154UI-1118-1.36TB mirror-2 12. c6t76d0 ATA-SAMSUNG HD204UI-0001-1.82TB 16. c6t80d0 ATA-WDC WD20EARS-00M-AB51-1.82TB You can see that mirror-0 and mirror-1 have identical disk pairs. BTW: Can someone explain why this: 8. c6t72d0 ATA-WDC WD6400AAKS--3B01 cyl 38909 alt 2 hd 255 sec 126 is not shown the same way as this: 4. c6t68d0 ATA-WDC WD6400AAKS-2-3B01-596.17GB Why the cylinder/sector in line 8? Assuming that a couple of your disks are still unused, you could try replacing the suspect drive with an unused drive (via zfs command) to see if the slowness goes away. You could also make that vdev a triple-mirror since it is very easy to add/remove drives from a mirror vdev. Just make sure that your zfs syntax is correct so that you don't accidentally add a single-drive vdev to the pool (oops!). These sorts of things can be tested with zfs commands without physically moving/removing drives or endangering your data. If I had available disks, I would. As of now, the are all busy. :-) Thanks for the advice! 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] GUI to set ACLs
On Wed, February 1, 2012 14:03, Linder, Doug wrote: Achim Wolpers wrote: I'm searching for a GUI tool to set ZFS (NFSv4) ACLs. I found some nautilus add ons in the web but they don't seen to work with nautilus shipped with OI. Any solution? I've been looking for something like this for ages, but as far as I know none exists. It certainly seems like a logical idea. Then again, Solaris doesn't have all that many desktop users so I guess the user base would be limited. Maybe they could integrate it with Ops Center somehow. Well, more and more file systems will be using NFSv4-style ACLs, so it'd be useful on platforms besides Solaris. At $WORK we have an Isilon that has these ACLs on OneFS, and we've found it easier to go in via Windows and CIFS and edit the ACLs than trying to use the CLI tools for some of the convoluted permissions we have to deal with (e.g., multiple research groups, with some users getting write access on top of the base read access that they'd normally have; add inheritance on top of that for newly created directories sub-trees, etc.). I think if you can SSH into a server with X11 forwarding enable and have the editor run on the system, with the GUI showing up on the admin's desktop, then it'd be handy. Editing complicated ACLs isn't just for your desktop. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] HP JBOD D2700 - ok?
On Feb 1, 2012, at 4:09 AM, Jim Klimov wrote: 2012-02-01 6:22, Ragnar Sundblad wrote: That is almost what I do, except that I only have one HBA. We haven't seen many HBAs fail during the years, none actually, so we thought it was overkill to double those too. But maybe we are wrong? Question: if you use two HBAs on different PCI buses to to MPxIO to the same JBODs, wouldn't this double your peak performance between motherboard and disks (beside adding resilience to failure of one of the paths)? In general, for HDDs no, for SSDs yes. This might be less important with JBODs of HDDs, but more important with external arrays of SSD disks... or very many HDDs :) With a fast SSD, you can easily get 700+ MB/sec when using mpxio, even with a single HBA. -- richard -- ZFS Performance and Training richard.ell...@richardelling.com +1-760-896-4422 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] HP JBOD D2700 - ok?
Thanks for the info, James! On Jan 31, 2012, at 6:58 PM, James C. McPherson wrote: On 1/02/12 12:40 PM, Ragnar Sundblad wrote: ... I still don't really get what stmsboot -u actually does (and if - and if so how much - this differs between x86 and sparc). Would it be impolite to ask you to elaborate on this a little? Not at all. Here goes. /usr/sbin/stmsboot -u arms the mpxio-upgrade service so that it runs when you reboot. The mpxio-upgrade service #1 execs /lib/stmsboot_util -u, to do the actual rewriting of vfstab #2 execs metadevadm if you have any SVM metadevices #3 updates your boot archive #4 execs dumpadm to ensure that you have the correct dump device listed in /etc/dumpadm.conf #5 updates your boot path property on x64, if required. Most or all of these are UFS-oriented. I've never found a need to run stmsboot when using ZFS root, even when changing from non-mpxio to mpxio. Incidentally, the process to change from IDE legacy mode to AHCI for the boot drive is very similar, but the Oracle docs say you have to reinstall the OS. Clearly we can do that without reinstalling the OS, as shown in the ZFS-discuss archives. -- richard /lib/stmsboot_util is the binary which does the heavy lifting. Each vfstab device element is checked - the cache that was created prior to the reboot is used to identify where the new paths are. You can see this cache by running strings over /etc/mpxio/devid_path.cache. This is all available for your perusal at http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/cmd/stmsboot/ cheers, James -- Oracle http://www.jmcp.homeunix.com/blog ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- ZFS Performance and Training richard.ell...@richardelling.com +1-760-896-4422 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
