Re: [zfs-discuss] Solaris 10u9 with zpool version 22, but no DEDUP (version 21 reserved)
What, if you will use Zpools created with OSOL and Dedup on Solaris 10u9 Not supported. You are on your own, if you encounter any issues. -- Prabahar. On Sep 10, 2010, at 10:23 PM, Hans Foertsch wrote: bash-3.00# uname -a SunOS testxx10 5.10 Generic_142910-17 i86pc i386 i86pc bash-3.00# zpool upgrade -v This system is currently running ZFS pool version 22. The following versions are supported: VER DESCRIPTION --- 1 Initial ZFS version 2 Ditto blocks (replicated metadata) 3 Hot spares and double parity RAID-Z 4 zpool history 5 Compression using the gzip algorithm 6 bootfs pool property 7 Separate intent log devices 8 Delegated administration 9 refquota and refreservation properties 10 Cache devices 11 Improved scrub performance 12 Snapshot properties 13 snapused property 14 passthrough-x aclinherit 15 user/group space accounting 16 stmf property support 17 Triple-parity RAID-Z 18 Snapshot user holds 19 Log device removal 20 Compression using zle (zero-length encoding) 21 Reserved 22 Received properties For more information on a particular version, including supported releases, see the ZFS Administration Guide. this is an interesting condition.. What, if you will use Zpools created with OSOL and Dedup on Solaris 10u9 Hans Foertsch -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] Solaris 10u9 with zpool version 22, but no DEDUP (version 21 reserved)
On Sep 11, 2010, at 6:04 PM, P-O Yliniemi wrote: Will dedup ever be supported on ZFS/Solaris ? Yes in the next major release of Solaris. -- Prabahar. If not, will any possible problems be avoided if I remove (transfer data away from) any filesystems with dedup=on ? /PeO Prabahar Jeyaram skrev 2010-09-11 18:39: What, if you will use Zpools created with OSOL and Dedup on Solaris 10u9 Not supported. You are on your own, if you encounter any issues. -- Prabahar. On Sep 10, 2010, at 10:23 PM, Hans Foertsch wrote: bash-3.00# uname -a SunOS testxx10 5.10 Generic_142910-17 i86pc i386 i86pc bash-3.00# zpool upgrade -v This system is currently running ZFS pool version 22. The following versions are supported: VER DESCRIPTION --- 1 Initial ZFS version 2 Ditto blocks (replicated metadata) 3 Hot spares and double parity RAID-Z 4 zpool history 5 Compression using the gzip algorithm 6 bootfs pool property 7 Separate intent log devices 8 Delegated administration 9 refquota and refreservation properties 10 Cache devices 11 Improved scrub performance 12 Snapshot properties 13 snapused property 14 passthrough-x aclinherit 15 user/group space accounting 16 stmf property support 17 Triple-parity RAID-Z 18 Snapshot user holds 19 Log device removal 20 Compression using zle (zero-length encoding) 21 Reserved 22 Received properties For more information on a particular version, including supported releases, see the ZFS Administration Guide. this is an interesting condition.. What, if you will use Zpools created with OSOL and Dedup on Solaris 10u9 Hans Foertsch -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zfs improvements to compression in Solaris 10?
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 09:48:39AM +0100, Ga?tan Lehmann wrote: Le 4 ao?t 09 ? 20:25, Prabahar Jeyaram a ?crit : On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 01:01:40PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Prabahar Jeyaram wrote: You seem to be hitting : http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6586537 The fix is available in OpenSolaris build 115 and later not for Solaris 10 yet. It is interesting that this is a simple thread priority issue. The system has a ton of available CPU but the higher priority compression thread seems to cause scheduling lockout. The Perfmeter tool shows that compression is a very short-term spike in CPU. Of course since Perfmeter and other apps stop running, it might be missing some sample data. I could put the X11 server into the real-time scheduling class but hate to think about what would happen as soon as Firefox visits a web site. :-) Compression is only used for the intermittently-used backup pool so it would be a shame to reduce overall system performance for the rest of the time. Do you know if this fix is planned to be integrated into a future Solaris 10 update? Yes. It is planned for S10U9. In the mean time, is there a patch available for Solaris 10? NO. Not yet. I can't find it on sunsolve. -- Prabahar. Thanks, Ga?tan -- Ga?tan Lehmann Biologie du D?veloppement et de la Reproduction INRA de Jouy-en-Josas (France) tel: +33 1 34 65 29 66fax: 01 34 65 29 09 http://voxel.jouy.inra.fr http://www.itk.org http://www.mandriva.org http://www.bepo.fr ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zfs improvements to compression in Solaris 10?
You seem to be hitting : http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6586537 The fix is available in OpenSolaris build 115 and later not for Solaris 10 yet. -- Prabahar. On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 10:08:37AM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: Are there any improvements in the Solaris 10 pipeline for how compression is implemented? I changed my USB-based backup pool to use gzip compression (with default level 6) rather than the lzjb compression which was used before. When lzjb compression was used, it would case the X11 session to become jerky and unresponsive while data was copied to the backup pool. With gzip compression, the system just goes away for as long as eight seconds at a time. It goes away for so long that the Perfmeter tool pops up a window saying that it can't contact localhost. I have done some simple testing to verify that the issue is not specific to the X11 server since this little test loop shows the (up to) 8 second delays in execution: while true do date sleep 1 done times.txt Does current OpenSolaris do better in this area? 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 mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zfs improvements to compression in Solaris 10?
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 01:01:40PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Prabahar Jeyaram wrote: You seem to be hitting : http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6586537 The fix is available in OpenSolaris build 115 and later not for Solaris 10 yet. It is interesting that this is a simple thread priority issue. The system has a ton of available CPU but the higher priority compression thread seems to cause scheduling lockout. The Perfmeter tool shows that compression is a very short-term spike in CPU. Of course since Perfmeter and other apps stop running, it might be missing some sample data. I could put the X11 server into the real-time scheduling class but hate to think about what would happen as soon as Firefox visits a web site. :-) Compression is only used for the intermittently-used backup pool so it would be a shame to reduce overall system performance for the rest of the time. Do you know if this fix is planned to be integrated into a future Solaris 10 update? Yes. It is planned for S10U9. -- Prabahar. 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] zfs source documentation
There is ZFS source tour : URL : http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/source/ -- Prabahar. On Dec 14, 2008, at 10:25 PM, kavita wrote: Is there a documentation available for zfs source code? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] Long delays in txg_wait_open() - Waiting for transaction group to open
The reason rfs3_{write|create} waiting longer in txg_wait_open is because
there is a syncing txg taking longer to complete.
You may want to trace and track the syncing txg to get the reason for the
delay.
--
Prabahar.
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 05:51:44PM -0800, Amer Ather wrote:
IHAC who is seeing very slow NFS transactions over ZFS. rfs3_write(),
rfs3_create() and others are taking in the order of 17-20 seconds to
complete. Profiling these transactions showing most of the time is spent
in txg_wait_open() - waiting for transaction group to open.
We tried zfs_nocacheflush: but it did n't help. iostat showing good
service time (10ms).
System is running Solaris 10 - 137137-09
0301b616ec00 3000813e168 3017b9e3798 2 59 6002296f966
PC: cv_wait+0x38CMD:
mv camshot_081118_29.jpg camshot_081118_59.jpg
camshot_081118_000129.j
p
stack pointer for thread 301b616ec00: 2a104a9ceb1
[ 02a104a9ceb1 cv_wait+0x38() ]
txg_wait_open+0x54()
zfs_write+0x34c()
fop_write+0x20()
write+0x268()
syscall_trap32+0xcc()
Timing txg_wait_open() shows:
txg_wait_open delay
DELAY
value - Distribution - count
4294967296 | 0
8589934592 |@1
17179869184 |@@@ 33
34359738368 | 0
txg_wait_open delay
DELAY
value - Distribution - count
134217728 | 0
268435456 |@@ 2
536870912 | 0
1073741824 | 0
2147483648 |@1
4294967296 | 0
8589934592 |@@@ 7
17179869184 |@@ 29
34359738368 | 0
DTrace script:
#!/usr/sbin/dtrace -qs
fbt::txg_wait_open:entry
{
self-t = timestamp;
}
fbt::txg_wait_open:return
/self-t/
{
@a[DELAY] = quantize(timestamp - self-t);
}
tick-5sec {
printf(\ntxg_wait_open delay);
printa(@a);
trunc(@a);
}
I have also profiled rfs3_write(), rfs3_create() and other using DTrace
and taken time delta and stack at each frame on all functions called by
rfs3_* and see txg_wait_open() is the one taking majority of the time.
Thanks,
Amer.
___
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] `zfs list` doesn't show my snapshot
'zfs list' by default does not list the snapshots. You need to use '-t snapshot' option with zfs list to view the snapshots. -- Prabahar. On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 12:14:47AM +0100, Pawel Tecza wrote: Hello All, This is my zfs list: # zfs list NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT rpool 10,5G 3,85G61K /rpool rpool/ROOT9,04G 3,85G18K legacy rpool/ROOT/opensolaris89,7M 3,85G 5,44G legacy rpool/ROOT/opensolaris-1 8,95G 3,85G 5,52G legacy rpool/dump 256M 3,85G 256M - rpool/export 747M 3,85G19K /export rpool/export/home 747M 3,85G 747M /export/home rpool/swap 524M 3,85G 524M - Today I've created one snapshot as below: # zfs snapshot rpool/ROOT/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Ufortunately I can't see it, because `zfs list` command doesn't show it: # zfs list NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT rpool 10,5G 3,85G61K /rpool rpool/ROOT9,04G 3,85G18K legacy rpool/ROOT/opensolaris89,7M 3,85G 5,44G legacy rpool/ROOT/opensolaris-1 8,95G 3,85G 5,52G legacy rpool/dump 256M 3,85G 256M - rpool/export 747M 3,85G19K /export rpool/export/home 747M 3,85G 747M /export/home rpool/swap 524M 3,85G 524M - I know the snapshot exists, because I can't create the same again: # zfs snapshot rpool/ROOT/[EMAIL PROTECTED] cannot create snapshot 'rpool/ROOT/[EMAIL PROTECTED]': dataset already exists Is it a strange? How can you explain that? I use OpenSolaris 2008.11 snv_101a: # uname -a SunOS oklahoma 5.11 snv_101a i86pc i386 i86pc Solaris My best regards, Pawel ___ 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] Q: ZFS Boot Install / LU support ETA?
The write throttling improvement is in build 87. -- Prabahar. Lori Alt wrote: Actually, I only meant that zfs boot was integrated into build 90. I don't know about the improved write throttling. I will check into why there was no mention of this on the heads up page. Lori Andrew Pattison wrote: Were both of these items (ZFS boot install support and improved write throttling) integrated into build 90? I don't see any mention of this on the Nevada head up page. Thanks Andrew. On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Lori Alt [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It has been integrated into Nevada build 90. Lori andrew wrote: What is the current estimated ETA on the integration of install support for ZFS boot/root support to Nevada? Also, do you have an idea when we can expect the improved ZFS write throttling to integrate? Thanks Andrew. This message posted from opensolaris.org http://opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org mailto:zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Andrew Pattison andrum04 at gmail dot com ___ 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] ZFS panics solaris while switching a volume to read-only
The fix is already in Solaris 10 U6. A patch for S10U5 will only be available when S10U6 is released. -- Prabahar. Veltror wrote: Is there any possibility that the psarc 2007/567 can be made as a patch to Soalris 10 U5. We are planning to dispose of Veritas as quickly as possible but since all storage on production machines is on EMC Symmetrix with back-end mirroring, this panic is a showstopper for us. Or is it so intertwined that a back port of this PSARC to U5 is out of the question. Thanks Roman This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] ZFS commands sudden slow down, cpu spiked
Hi Max, You might be hitting the BUG 6513209 (Contributer to the 'zpool import' delay). There is going to be an official patch soon. Currently it is in T-Patch state. You should be able to get the T-Patch through your support channel. -- Prabahar. Max Holm wrote: Hi, I have a 3-node(SunFire V890) VCS cluster running Solaris 10 u4 with LUNs from some Sun 6130,6140 and IBM 8100 arrays. It has been working well. But one of the nodes started to have troubles in running ZFS commands this Tue, 2/19. Any ZFS command, e.g., 'zpool import' can take hours to complete. Sometimes it took 4-5 minutes, and run it again, it can take 60 minutes. On the other 2 nodes that share the same set of LUNs are still normal so far - take some 5-10 seconds or less for the same commands. I haven't noticed any error messages from the arrays or SAN switches and other than the HBAs and switch ports, they are virtually identical. (other commands like cfgadm, format,... seems normal, so I suspect the culprit might be related to ZFS. I open a case with Sun, this route seems take forever for this kind of issue and I haven't got any answer yet.) The host is not down or crashed. I rebooted it once today, not sure if it's fixed by reboot, 'zpool import' can still take minutes rather than seconds to complete). I still need to create some test LUNs and pools for more tests. It seems everything is still normal except the ZFS. Most zfs commands also cause cpu loads well up till completed, as seen in vmstast,mpstat, or top. This has been causing us troubles as our home grown VCS ZFS agent would consider the zpool is dead after some consecutive failures in probing the pool (zpool status takes forever to complete). Does anyone has same problem or know what might be the cause/fix? Thanks. Max Holm This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] Kernel panic on arc_buf_remove_ref() assertion
The patches (127728-06 : sparc, 127729-07 : x86) which has the fix for this panic is in temporary state and will be released via SunSolve soon. Please contact your support channel to get these patches. -- Prabahar. Stuart Anderson wrote: On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 06:28:31PM -0800, Stuart Anderson wrote: Is this kernel panic a known ZFS bug, or should I open a new ticket? Feb 18 17:55:18 thumper1 genunix: [ID 403854 kern.notice] assertion failed: arc_buf_remove_ref(db-db_buf, db) == 0, file: ../../common/fs/zfs/dbuf.c, line: 1692 It looks like this might be bug 6523336, http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-66-201229-1 Does anyone know when the Binary relief for this and other Sol10 ZFS kernel panics will be released as normal kernel patches? Thanks. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Kernel panic on arc_buf_remove_ref() assertion
Any IDRXX (Released immediately) is the interim relief (Will also contains the fix) provided to the customers till the official patch (Usually takes longer to be released) is available. Patch is supposed to be consider as the permanent solution. -- Prabahar. Stuart Anderson wrote: Thanks for the information. How does the temporary patch 127729-07 relate to the IDR127787 (x86) which I believe also claims to fix this panic? Thanks. On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 08:32:03PM -0800, Prabahar Jeyaram wrote: The patches (127728-06 : sparc, 127729-07 : x86) which has the fix for this panic is in temporary state and will be released via SunSolve soon. Please contact your support channel to get these patches. -- Prabahar. Stuart Anderson wrote: On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 06:28:31PM -0800, Stuart Anderson wrote: Is this kernel panic a known ZFS bug, or should I open a new ticket? Feb 18 17:55:18 thumper1 genunix: [ID 403854 kern.notice] assertion failed: arc_buf_remove_ref(db-db_buf, db) == 0, file: ../../common/fs/zfs/dbuf.c, line: 1692 It looks like this might be bug 6523336, http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-66-201229-1 Does anyone know when the Binary relief for this and other Sol10 ZFS kernel panics will be released as normal kernel patches? Thanks. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Panic on Zpool Import (Urgent)
Your system seems to have hit the BUG 6458218 : http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6458218 It is fixed in snv_60. As far ZFS, snv_43 is quite old. -- Prabahar. On Jan 12, 2008, at 11:15 PM, Ben Rockwood wrote: Today, suddenly, without any apparent reason that I can find, I'm getting panic's during zpool import. The system paniced earlier today and has been suffering since. This is snv_43 on a thumper. Here's the stack: panic[cpu0]/thread=99adbac0: assertion failed: ss != NULL, file: ../../common/fs/zfs/space_map.c, line: 145 fe8000a240a0 genunix:assfail+83 () fe8000a24130 zfs:space_map_remove+1d6 () fe8000a24180 zfs:space_map_claim+49 () fe8000a241e0 zfs:metaslab_claim_dva+130 () fe8000a24240 zfs:metaslab_claim+94 () fe8000a24270 zfs:zio_dva_claim+27 () fe8000a24290 zfs:zio_next_stage+6b () fe8000a242b0 zfs:zio_gang_pipeline+33 () fe8000a242d0 zfs:zio_next_stage+6b () fe8000a24320 zfs:zio_wait_for_children+67 () fe8000a24340 zfs:zio_wait_children_ready+22 () fe8000a24360 zfs:zio_next_stage_async+c9 () fe8000a243a0 zfs:zio_wait+33 () fe8000a243f0 zfs:zil_claim_log_block+69 () fe8000a24520 zfs:zil_parse+ec () fe8000a24570 zfs:zil_claim+9a () fe8000a24750 zfs:dmu_objset_find+2cc () fe8000a24930 zfs:dmu_objset_find+fc () fe8000a24b10 zfs:dmu_objset_find+fc () fe8000a24bb0 zfs:spa_load+67b () fe8000a24c20 zfs:spa_import+a0 () fe8000a24c60 zfs:zfs_ioc_pool_import+79 () fe8000a24ce0 zfs:zfsdev_ioctl+135 () fe8000a24d20 genunix:cdev_ioctl+55 () fe8000a24d60 specfs:spec_ioctl+99 () fe8000a24dc0 genunix:fop_ioctl+3b () fe8000a24ec0 genunix:ioctl+180 () fe8000a24f10 unix:sys_syscall32+101 () syncing file systems... done This is almost identical to a post to this list over a year ago titled ZFS Panic. There was follow up on it but the results didn't make it back to the list. I spent time doing a full sweep for any hardware failures, pulled 2 drives that I suspected as problematic but weren't flagged as such, etc, etc, etc. Nothing helps. Bill suggested a 'zpool import -o ro' on the other post, but thats not working either. I _can_ use 'zpool import' to see the pool, but I have to force the import. A simple 'zpool import' returns output in about a minute. 'zpool import -f poolname' takes almost exactly 10 minutes every single time, like it hits some timeout and then panics. I did notice that while the 'zpool import' is running 'iostat' is useless, just hangs. I still want to believe this is some device misbehaving but I have no evidence to support that theory. Any and all suggestions are greatly appreciated. I've put around 8 hours into this so far and I'm getting absolutely nowhere. Thanks benr. ___ 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] S10u4 in kernel sharetab
Nope. It is not there in S10U4. -- Prabahar. On Oct 24, 2007, at 9:11 AM, Matthew C Aycock wrote: There was a log of talk about ZFS and NFS shares being a problem when there was a large number of filesystems. There was a fix that in part included an in kernel sharetab (I think :) Does anyone know if this has made it into S10u4? Thanks, BlueUmp This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] ZFS file system is crashing my system
Your system seem to have hit a variant of BUG : 6458218 - http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6458218 This is fixed in Opensolaris Build 60 or S10U4. -- Prabahar. On Oct 8, 2007, at 10:04 PM, dudekula mastan wrote: Hi All, Any one has any chance to look into this issue ? -Masthan D dudekula mastan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, While pumping IO on a zfs file system my ststem is crashing/ panicing. Please find the crash dump below. panic[cpu0]/thread=2a100adfcc0: assertion failed: ss != NULL, file: ../../common/fs/zfs/space_map.c, line: 125 02a100adec40 genunix:assfail+74 (7b652448, 7b652458, 7d, 183d800, 11ed400, 0) %l0-3: 011e7508 03000744ea30 %l4-7: 011ed400 0186fc00 02a100adecf0 zfs:space_map_remove+b8 (3000683e7b8, 2b20, 2, 7b652000, 7b652400, 7b652400) %l0-3: 2b22 2b0ec600 03000744ebc0 %l4-7: 03000744eaf8 2b0ec000 7b652000 2b0ec600 02a100adedd0 zfs:space_map_load+218 (3000683e7b8, 30006f5f160, 1000, 3000683e488, 2b00, 1) %l0-3: 0160 030006f5f000 7b620ad0 %l4-7: 7b62086c 7fff 7fff 030006f5f128 02a100adeea0 zfs:metaslab_activate+3c (3000683e480, 8000, c000, 24a998, 3000683e480, c000) %l0-3: 0008 029ebf9d %l4-7: 704e2000 03000391e940 030005572540 0300060bacd0 02a100adef50 zfs:metaslab_group_alloc+1bc (3fff, 2, 8000, 7e68000, 30006766080, ) %l0-3: 0300060bacd8 0001 03000683e480 %l4-7: 8000 03f34000 4000 02a100adf030 zfs:metaslab_alloc_dva+114 (0, 7e68000, 30006766080, 2, 30005572540, 1e910) %l0-3: 0001 0003 03000380b6e0 %l4-7: 0300060bacd0 0300060bacd0 02a100adf100 zfs:metaslab_alloc+2c (3000391e940, 2, 30006766080, 1, 1e910, 0) %l0-3: 009980001605 0016 1b4d 0214 %l4-7: 03000391e940 0001 02a100adf1b0 zfs:zio_dva_allocate+4c (30005dd8a40, 7b6335a8, 30006766080, 704e2508, 704e2400, 20001) %l0-3: 030005dd8a40 060200ff00ff 060200ff00ff %l4-7: 018a6400 0001 0006 02a100adf260 zfs:zio_write_compress+1ec (30005dd8a40, 23e20b, 23e000, ff00ff, 2, 30006766080) %l0-3: 00ff 0100 0002 %l4-7: 00ff fc00 00ff 02a100adf330 zfs:arc_write+e4 (30005dd8a40, 3000391e940, 6, 2, 1, 1e910) %l0-3: 7b6063c8 030006af2570 0300060c5cf0 %l4-7: 02a100adf538 0004 0004 0300060c7a88 02a100adf440 zfs:dbuf_sync+6c0 (30006af2570, 30005dd9440, 2b3ca, 2, 6, 1e910) %l0-3: 030005dd96c0 030006ae7750 030006af2678 %l4-7: 030006766080 0013 0001 02a100adf560 zfs:dnode_sync+35c (0, 0, 30005dd9440, 30005ac8cc0, 2, 2) %l0-3: 030006af2570 030006ae77a8 030006ae7808 030006ae7808 %l4-7: 030006ae77a8 0001 03000640ace0 02a100adf620 zfs:dmu_objset_sync_dnodes+6c (30005dd96c0, 30005dd97a0, 30005ac8cc0, 30006ae7750, 30006bd3ca0, 0) %l0-3: 704e84c0 704e8000 704e8000 0001 %l4-7: 704e4000 030005dd9440 02a100adf6d0 zfs:dmu_objset_sync+54 (30005dd96c0, 30005ac8cc0, 0, 0, 300060c5318, 1e910) %l0-3: 000f 478d %l4-7: 030005dd97a0 030005dd97a0 030005dd9820 02a100adf7e0 zfs:dsl_dataset_sync+c (30006f36780, 30005ac8cc0, 30006f36810, 300040c7db8, 300040c7db8, 30006f36780) %l0-3: 0001 0007 0300040c7e38 %l4-7: 030006f36808 02a100adf890 zfs:dsl_pool_sync+64 (300040c7d00, 1e910, 30006f36780, 30005ac9640, 30005581a80, 30005581aa8) %l0-3: 03000391ed00 030005ac8cc0 0300040c7e98 %l4-7: 0300040c7e68 0300040c7e38 0300040c7da8 030005dd9440 02a100adf940 zfs:spa_sync+1b0 (3000391e940, 1e910, 0, 0, 2a100adfcc4, 1) %l0-3: 03000391eb00 03000391eb10 03000391ea28 030005ac9640 %l4-7: 03000410f580 0300040c7d00
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS file system is crashing my system
Hi Masthan, There was a race in the block allocation code which allocates a single disk block to two consumers. The system will trip when both the consumers try to free the block. -- Prabahar. On Oct 9, 2007, at 4:20 AM, dudekula mastan wrote: Hi Jeyaram, Thanks for your reply. Can you explain more about this bug ? Regards Masthan D Prabahar Jeyaram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your system seem to have hit a variant of BUG : 6458218 - http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6458218 This is fixed in Opensolaris Build 60 or S10U4. -- Prabahar. On Oct 8, 2007, at 10:04 PM, dudekula mastan wrote: Hi All, Any one has any chance to look into this issue ? -Masthan D dudekula mastan wrote: Hi All, While pumping IO on a zfs file system my ststem is crashing/ panicing. Please find the crash dump below. panic[cpu0]/thread=2a100adfcc0: assertion failed: ss != NULL, file: ../../common/fs/zfs/space_map.c, line: 125 02a100adec40 genunix:assfail+74 (7b652448, 7b652458, 7d, 183d800, 11ed400, 0) %l0-3: 011e7508 03000744ea30 %l4-7: 011ed400 0186fc00 02a100adecf0 zfs:space_map_remove+b8 (3000683e7b8, 2b20, 2, 7b652000, 7b652400, 7b652400) %l0-3: 2b22 2b0ec600 03000744ebc0 %l4-7: 03000744eaf8 2b0ec000 7b652000 2b0ec600 02a100adedd0 zfs:space_map_load+218 (3000683e7b8, 30006f5f160, 1000, 3000683e488, 2b00, 1) %l0-3: 0160 030006f5f000 7b620ad0 %l4-7: 7b62086c 7fff 7fff 030006f5f128 02a100adeea0 zfs:metaslab_activate+3c (3000683e480, 8000, c000, 24a998, 3000683e480, c000) %l0-3: 0008 029ebf9d %l4-7: 704e2000 03000391e940 030005572540 0300060bacd0 02a100adef50 zfs:metaslab_group_alloc+1bc (3fff, 2, 8000, 7e68000, 30006766080, ) %l0-3: 0300060bacd8 0001 03000683e480 %l4-7: 8000 03f34000 4000 02a100adf030 zfs:metaslab_alloc_dva+114 (0, 7e68000, 30006766080, 2, 30005572540, 1e910) %l0-3: 0001 0003 03000380b6e0 %l4-7: 0300060bacd0 0300060bacd0 02a100adf100 zfs:metaslab_alloc+2c (3000391e940, 2, 30006766080, 1, 1e910, 0) %l0-3: 009980001605 0016 1b4d 0214 %l4-7: 03000391e940 0001 02a100adf1b0 zfs:zio_dva_allocate+4c (30005dd8a40, 7b6335a8, 30006766080, 704e2508, 704e2400, 20001) %l0-3: 030005dd8a40 060200ff00ff 060200ff00ff %l4-7: 018a6400 0001 0006 02a100adf260 zfs:zio_write_compress+1ec (30005dd8a40, 23e20b, 23e000, ff00ff, 2, 30006766080) %l0-3: 00ff 0100 0002 %l4-7: 00ff fc00 00ff 02a100adf330 zfs:arc_write+e4 (30005dd8a40, 3000391e940, 6, 2, 1, 1e910) %l0-3: 7b6063c8 030006af2570 0300060c5cf0 %l4-7: 02a100adf538 0004 0004 0300060c7a88 02a100adf440 zfs:dbuf_sync+6c0 (30006af2570, 30005dd9440, 2b3ca, 2, 6, 1e910) %l0-3: 030005dd96c0 030006ae7750 030006af2678 %l4-7: 030006766080 0013 0001 02a100adf560 zfs:dnode_sync+35c (0, 0, 30005dd9440, 30005ac8cc0, 2, 2) %l0-3: 030006af2570 030006ae77a8 030006ae7808 030006ae7808 %l4-7: 030006ae77a8 0001 03000640ace0 02a100adf620 zfs:dmu_objset_sync_dnodes+6c (30005dd96c0, 30005dd97a0, 30005ac8cc0, 30006ae7750, 30006bd3ca0, 0) %l0-3: 704e84c0 704e8000 704e8000 0001 %l4-7: 704e4000 030005dd9440 02a100adf6d0 zfs:dmu_objset_sync+54 (30005dd96c0, 30005ac8cc0, 0, 0, 300060c5318, 1e910) %l0-3: 000f 478d %l4-7: 030005dd97a0 030005dd97a0 030005dd9820 02a100adf7e0 zfs:dsl_dataset_sync+c (30006f36780, 30005ac8cc0, 30006f36810, 300040c7db8, 300040c7db8, 30006f36780) %l0-3: 0001 0007 0300040c7e38 %l4-7: 030006f36808 02a100adf890 zfs:dsl_pool_sync+64 (300040c7d00, 1e910, 30006f36780, 30005ac9640, 30005581a80
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS gzip compression
Nope. This feature hasn't made it to S10U4. We are anticipating it to be available in S10U5. -- Prabahar. Scott wrote: Did the ZFS gzip compression feature (i.e. zfs set compression=gzip) make it in to Solaris 10 U4? I was looking forward to being able to use it in a production Solaris release without having to compile my OpenSolaris build, but it doesnt' seem to be there. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] zpool history not found
'zpool history' is the 4th feature of ZFS in S10. You should get it in S10U4. -- Prabahar. On Sep 17, 2007, at 8:01 PM, sunnie wrote: my system is currently running ZFS versionnn 3. And I just can't find the zpool history command. can anyone help me with the problem? This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] ZFS performance and memory consumption
This system exhibits the symptoms of : http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6495013 Moving to nevada would certainly help as it has many more bug fixes and performance improvements over S10U3. -- Prabahar. ?ukasz wrote: Hello, I'm investigating problem with ZFS over NFS. The problems started about 2 weeks ago, most nfs threads are hanging in txg_wait_open. Sync thread is consuming one processor all the time, Average spa_sync function times from entry to return is 2 minutes. I can't use dtrace to examine problem, because I keep getting: dtrace: processing aborted: Abort due to systemic unresponsiveness Using mdb and examining tx_sync_thread with ::findstack I keep getting this stack: fe8002da1410 _resume_from_idle+0xf8() ] fe8002da1570 avl_walk+0x39() fe8002da15a0 space_map_alloc+0x21() fe8002da1620 metaslab_group_alloc+0x1a2() fe8002da16b0 metaslab_alloc_dva+0xab() fe8002da1700 metaslab_alloc+0x51() fe8002da1720 zio_dva_allocate+0x3f() fe8002da1730 zio_next_stage+0x72() fe8002da1750 zio_checksum_generate+0x5f() fe8002da1760 zio_next_stage+0x72() fe8002da17b0 zio_write_compress+0x136() fe8002da17c0 zio_next_stage+0x72() fe8002da17f0 zio_wait_for_children+0x49() fe8002da1800 zio_wait_children_ready+0x15() fe8002da1810 zio_next_stage_async+0xae() fe8002da1820 zio_nowait+9() fe8002da18b0 arc_write+0xe7() fe8002da19a0 dbuf_sync+0x274() fe8002da1a10 dnode_sync+0x2e3() fe8002da1a60 dmu_objset_sync_dnodes+0x7b() fe8002da1af0 dmu_objset_sync+0x6a() fe8002da1b10 dsl_dataset_sync+0x23() fe8002da1b60 dsl_pool_sync+0x7b() fe8002da1bd0 spa_sync+0x116() I also managed to sum metaslabs space maps: ::walk spa | ::walk metaslab | ::print struct metaslab ms_smo.smo_objsize and I got 1GB. I have a pool 1,3T with 500G avail space. Pool was created about 3 months ago. I'm using solaris 10 u3 Do you think changing system to nevada will help ? I red that there are some changes that can help: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6512391 http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6532056 This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] Solaris 10 6/06 now available for download
Indeed. ZFS is included in Solaris 10 U2. -- Prabahar. Shannon Roddy wrote: Solaris 10u2 was released today. You can now download it from here: http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/get.jsp Does anyone know if ZFS is included in this release? One of my local Sun reps said it did not make it into the u2 release, though I have heard for ages that 6/06 would include it. Thanks! ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved
Yep. ZFS supports the ioctl (_FIOFFS) which 'lockfs -f' issues. -- Prabahar. Darren J Moffat wrote: Bill Sommerfeld wrote: On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 13:01, Roch wrote: Is there a sync command that targets individual FS ? Yes. lockfs -f Does lockfs work with ZFS ? The man page appears to indicate it is very UFS specific. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
