Re: [zfs-discuss] Directory is not accessible
How can one remove a directory containing corrupt files or a corrupt file itself? For me rm just gives input/output error. Sami Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com wrote: From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Sami Tuominen Unfortunately there aren't any snapshots. The version of zpool is 15. Is it safe to upgrade that? Is zpool clear -F supported or of any use here? The only thing that will be of use to restore your data will be a backup. To forget about the lost data and make the error message go away, simply rm the bad directory (and/or its parent). You're probably wondering, you have redundancy and no faulted devices, so how could this happen? There are a few possible explanations, but they're all going to have one thing in common: At some point, something got corrupted before it was written corrupted and the redundant copy also written corrupted. It might be you had a CPU error, or some parity error in non-ECC ram, or a bus glitch or bad firmware in the HBA, for example. The fact remains, something was written corrupted, and the redundant copy was also written corrupted. All you can do is restore from a snapshot, restore from a backup, or accept it for what it is and make the error go away. Sorry to hear it... ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Appliance as a general-purpose server question
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Jim Klimov I wonder if it would make weird sense to get the boxes, forfeit the cool-looking Fishworks, and install Solaris/OI/Nexenta/whatever to get the most flexibility and bang for a buck from the owned hardware... This is what we decided to do at work, and this is the reason why. But we didn't buy the appliance-branded boxes; we just bought normal servers running solaris. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] dm-crypt + ZFS on Linux
After searching for dm-crypt and ZFS on Linux and finding too little information, I shall ask here. Please keep in mind this in the context of running this in a production environment. We have the need to encypt our data, approximately 30TB on three ZFS volumes under Solaris 10. The volumes currently reside on iscsi sans connected via 10Gb/s ethernet. We have tested Solaris 11 with ZFS encrypted volumes and found the performance to be very poor and have an open bug report with Oracle. We are a Linux shop and since performance is so poor and still no resolution, we are considering ZFS on Linux with dm-crypt. I have read once or twice that if we implemented ZFS + dm-crypt we would loose features, however which features are not specified. We currently mirror the volumes across identical iscsi sans with ZFS and we use hourly ZFS snapshots to update our DR site. Which features of ZFS are lost if we use dm-crypt? My guess would be they are related to raidz but unsure. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] dm-crypt + ZFS on Linux
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 9:49 AM, John Baxter johnleebax...@gmail.comwrote: We have the need to encypt our data, approximately 30TB on three ZFS volumes under Solaris 10. The volumes currently reside on iscsi sans connected via 10Gb/s ethernet. We have tested Solaris 11 with ZFS encrypted volumes and found the performance to be very poor and have an open bug report with Oracle. We are a Linux shop and since performance is so poor and still no resolution, we are considering ZFS on Linux with dm-crypt. I have read once or twice that if we implemented ZFS + dm-crypt we would loose features, however which features are not specified. We currently mirror the volumes across identical iscsi sans with ZFS and we use hourly ZFS snapshots to update our DR site. Which features of ZFS are lost if we use dm-crypt? My guess would be they are related to raidz but unsure. Why don't you just use a SAN that supports full drive encryption? There should be basically 0 performance overhead. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] dm-crypt + ZFS on Linux
Replacing the SANs is cost prohibitive. On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Tim Cook t...@cook.ms wrote: On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 9:49 AM, John Baxter johnleebax...@gmail.comwrote: We have the need to encypt our data, approximately 30TB on three ZFS volumes under Solaris 10. The volumes currently reside on iscsi sans connected via 10Gb/s ethernet. We have tested Solaris 11 with ZFS encrypted volumes and found the performance to be very poor and have an open bug report with Oracle. We are a Linux shop and since performance is so poor and still no resolution, we are considering ZFS on Linux with dm-crypt. I have read once or twice that if we implemented ZFS + dm-crypt we would loose features, however which features are not specified. We currently mirror the volumes across identical iscsi sans with ZFS and we use hourly ZFS snapshots to update our DR site. Which features of ZFS are lost if we use dm-crypt? My guess would be they are related to raidz but unsure. Why don't you just use a SAN that supports full drive encryption? There should be basically 0 performance overhead. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] dm-crypt + ZFS on Linux
John Baxter johnleebax...@gmail.com wrote: After searching for dm-crypt and ZFS on Linux and finding too little information, I shall ask here. Please keep in mind this in the context of running this in a production environment. We have the need to encypt our data, approximately 30TB on three ZFS volumes under Solaris 10. The volumes currently reside on iscsi sans connected via 10Gb/s ethernet. We have tested Solaris 11 with ZFS encrypted volumes and found the performance to be very poor and have an open bug report with Oracle. Was the performance acceptable without encryption? We are a Linux shop and since performance is so poor and still no resolution, we are considering ZFS on Linux with dm-crypt. I have read once or twice that if we implemented ZFS + dm-crypt we would loose features, however which features are not specified. We currently mirror the volumes across identical iscsi sans with ZFS and we use hourly ZFS snapshots to update our DR site. Which features of ZFS are lost if we use dm-crypt? My guess would be they are related to raidz but unsure. It depends on where you put the encryption layer. If you put it below ZFS, no ZFS feature has to be lost although bugs in the encryption layer may make the whole setup less reliable. Of course that's true for Oracle's ZFS encryption as well. If you put the encryption layer on top of ZFS, features like compression and deduplication should be ineffective. It will not encrypt the ZFS metadata, but it allows you to keep parts of the data on the pool intentionally (or unintentionally) unencrypted. If your application doesn't work with raw devices, you need a file system on top of the encryption layer again. I'm not aware of anything raidz-related that is lost in either setup. I haven't used ZFS with dm-crypt on GNU/Linux, but if I had to, I'd put dm-crypt below ZFS and would rather split the pool than put dm-crypt on top of ZFS. My impression is that ext4 on dm-crypt on ZFS is a popular setup (among bloggers), but I have no idea why and certainly wouldn't want to use it in a production environment. Just in case your GNU/Linux experiments don't work out, you could also try ZFS on Geli on FreeBSD which works reasonably well. Fabian signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] dm-crypt + ZFS on Linux
On Nov 23, 2012, at 11:56 AM, Fabian Keil freebsd-lis...@fabiankeil.de wrote: Just in case your GNU/Linux experiments don't work out, you could also try ZFS on Geli on FreeBSD which works reasonably well. For illumos-based distros or Solaris 11, using ZFS with lofi has been well discussed for many years. Prior to the crypto option being integrated as a first class citizen in OpenSolaris, the codename used was xlofi, so try that in your google searches, or look at the man page for lofiadm -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Appliance as a general-purpose server question
On 11/23/2012 5:50 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) wrote: From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Jim Klimov I wonder if it would make weird sense to get the boxes, forfeit the cool-looking Fishworks, and install Solaris/OI/Nexenta/whatever to get the most flexibility and bang for a buck from the owned hardware... This is what we decided to do at work, and this is the reason why. But we didn't buy the appliance-branded boxes; we just bought normal servers running solaris. I gave up and am now buying HP-branded hardware for running Solaris on it. Particularly if you get off-lease used hardware (for which, HP is still very happy to let you buy a HW support contract), it's cheap, and HP has a lot of Solaris drivers for their branded stuff. Their whole SmartArray line of adapters has much better Solaris driver coverage than the generic stuff or the equivalent IBM or Dell items. For instance, I just got a couple of DL380 G5 systems with dual Harpertown CPUs, fully loaded with 8 2.5 SAS drives and 32GB of RAM, for about $800 total. You can attach their MSA30/50/70-series (or DS2700-series, if you want new) as dumb JBODs via SAS, and the nice SmartArray controllers have 1GB of NVRAM, which is sufficient for many purposes, so you don't even have cough up the dough for a nice ZIL SSD. HP even made a sweet little appliance thing that was designed for Windows, but happens to run Solaris really, really well. The DL320s (the s is part of the model designation). 14x 3.5 SAS/SATA hot swap bays, a Xeon 3070 dual-core CPU, SmartArray controller, 2 x GB Nic, LOM, and a free 1x PCI-E expansion slot. The only drawback is that it only takes up to 8GB of RAM. It makes a *fabulous* little backup system for logs and stuff, and it's under about $2000 even after you splurge for 1TB drives and an SSD for the thing. I am in the market for something newer than that, though. Anyone know what HP's using as a replacement for the DL320s? -Erik ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
