Re: [zfs-discuss] liveupgrade ufs root - zfs ?
Hi, I think LU 94-96 would be fine, if there's no zone in your system, just simply do # cd cdrom/Solaris_11/Tools/Installers # liveupgrade20 --nodisplay # lucreate -c BE94 -n BE96 -p newpool (The newpool must be SMI lable) # luupgrade -u -n BE96 -s cdrom # luactivate BE96 # init 6 During snv_90~96, quite a lot LU bugs are solved, so I think you could complete the process successfully, if no special case.. Paul Floyd wrote: Hi On my opensolaris machine I currently have SXCEs 95 and 94 in two BEs. The same fdisk partition contains /export/home and swap. In a separate fdisk partition on another disk I have a ZFS pool. Does anyone have a pointer to a howto for doing a liveupgrade such that I can convert the SXCE 94 UFS BE to ZFS (and liveupgrade to SXCE 96 while I'm at it) if this is possible? Searching with google shows a lot of blogs that describe the early problems that existed when ZFS was first available (ON 90 or so). A+ Paul 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 promote and ENOSPC
Hi, Mike, It's like 6452872, it need enough space for 'zfs promote' - Regards, Mike Gerdts wrote: I needed to free up some space to be able to create and populate a new upgrade. I was caught off guard by the amount of free space required by zfs promote. bash-3.2# uname -a SunOS indy2 5.11 snv_86 i86pc i386 i86pc bash-3.2# zfs list NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT rpool 5.49G 1.83G55K /rpool [EMAIL PROTECTED] 46.5K - 49.5K - rpool/ROOT5.39G 1.83G18K none rpool/ROOT/2008.052.68G 1.83G 3.38G legacy rpool/ROOT/2008.05/opt 814M 1.83G 22.3M legacy rpool/ROOT/2008.05/[EMAIL PROTECTED]43K - 22.3M - rpool/ROOT/2008.05/opt/SUNWspro739M 1.83G 739M legacy rpool/ROOT/2008.05/opt/netbeans 52.9M 1.83G 52.9M legacy rpool/ROOT/preview2 2.71G 1.83G 2.71G /mnt rpool/ROOT/[EMAIL PROTECTED] 6.13M - 2.71G - rpool/ROOT/preview2/opt 27K 1.83G 22.3M legacy rpool/export 89.8M 1.83G19K /export rpool/export/home 89.8M 1.83G 89.8M /export/home bash-3.2# zfs promote rpool/ROOT/2008.05 cannot promote 'rpool/ROOT/2008.05': out of space Notice that I have 1.83 GB of free space and the snapshot from which the clone was created (rpool/ROOT/[EMAIL PROTECTED]) is 2.71 GB. It was not until I had more than 2.71 GB of free space that I could promote rpool/ROOT/2008.05. This behavior does not seem to be documented. Is it a bug in the documentation or zfs? -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] help with a BIG problem,
Hi, Herman You may not use '-n' to Makefile, that'll lead swap comlain. Hernan Freschi wrote: I forgot to post arcstat.pl's output: Time read miss miss% dmis dm% pmis pm% mmis mm% arcsz c 22:32:37 556K 525K 94 515K 949K 98 515K 97 1G1G 22:32:38636310063 100 0063 100 1G1G 22:32:39747410074 100 0074 100 1G1G 22:32:40767610076 100 0076 100 1G1G State Changed 22:32:41757510075 100 0075 100 1G1G 22:32:42777710077 100 0077 100 1G1G 22:32:43727210072 100 0072 100 1G1G 22:32:44808010080 100 0080 100 1G1G State Changed 22:32:45989810098 100 0098 100 1G1G sometimes c is 2G. I tried the mkfile and swap, but I get: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/]# mkfile -n 4g /export/swap [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/]# swap -a /export/swap /export/swap may contain holes - can't swap on it. /export is the only place where I have enough free space. I could add another drive if needed. 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 in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08
Hi, Brian You mean stripe type with multiple-disks or raidz type? I'm afraid it's still single disk or mirrors only. If opensolaris start new project of this kind of feature, it'll be backport to s10u* eventually, but that's need some time to go, sounds no possibility in U6, I think. Brian Hechinger wrote: On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 09:30:27AM +0800, Robin Guo wrote: Hi, Paul At least, s10u6 will contain L2ARC cache, ZFS as root filesystem, etc.. As far as root zfs goes, are there any plans to support more than just single disks or mirrors in U6, or will that be for a later date? -brian ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] how to upgrade kernel by my own on root-zfs platform
Hi, Aubrey Could you point the entry you added into menu.lst? I think it might be the issue that syntax not correct. Thanks. Aubrey Li wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Aubrey Li [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I'm new to zfs. Recently I compiled ON successfully on OpenSolaris 200805 release. So I want to upgrade kernel by my own image. Following the cap-eye-install, I got a tar ball and extract it under "/". I also added a entry in /rpool/boot/grub/menu.lst to boot my own kernel. After I selected the new enty on the grub menu, I was told kernel want to mount ufs, not zfs. Am I on the right way? Is there any guide doc about this issue? Here is the error on my side: SunOS Release 5.11 Version cpupm-gate 64-bit Copyright 1983-2008 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved. Use is subject to license terms. DEBUG enabled NOTICE: mount: not a UFS magic number (0x0) panic[cpu0]/thread=fbc250e0: cannot mount root path /ramdisk:a fbc44f80 genunix:rootconf+113 () fbc44fd0 genunix:vfs_mountroot+65 () fbc45010 genunix:main+128 () fbc45020 unix:_locore_start+92 () skipping system dump - no dump device configured I really appreciate any suggestions! Thanks, -Aubrey ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] how to upgrade kernel by my own on root-zfs platform
Hi, Aubrey, Do you ever do installgrub to the slice, and boot up from the disk/slice where ZFS resides on? It should be # mount -F zfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris /mnt # installgrub /mnt/boot/grub/stage1 /mnt/boot/grub/stage2 /dev/rdsk/slice I think if not do installgrub, the grub is still boot from UFS slice. Aubrey Li wrote: Robin Guo wrote: Hi, Aubrey Could you point the entry you added into menu.lst? I think it might be the issue that syntax not correct. Here is my menu.lst: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/work/cpupm-gate$ cat /rpool/boot/grub/menu.lst splashimage /boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz timeout 30 default 0 #-- ADDED BY BOOTADM - DO NOT EDIT -- title OpenSolaris 2008.05 snv_86_rc3 X86 bootfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS module$ /platform/i86pc/$ISADIR/boot_archive #-END BOOTADM #-- ADDED BY BOOTADM - DO NOT EDIT -- title OpenSolaris 2008.05 snv_86_rc3 X86 bootfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel.mine/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS module$ /platform/i86pc/$ISADIR/boot_archive #-END BOOTADM # End of LIBBE entry = ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] how to upgrade kernel by my own on root-zfs platform
Yes, you may need to check if following steps are also done. mount -F zfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris /mnt bootadm update-archive -R /mnt zpool set bootfs=rpool/ROOT/opensolaris rpool Aubrey Li wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aubrey Li wrote: Robin Guo wrote: Hi, Aubrey Could you point the entry you added into menu.lst? I think it might be the issue that syntax not correct. Here is my menu.lst: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/work/cpupm-gate$ cat /rpool/boot/grub/menu.lst splashimage /boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz timeout 30 default 0 #-- ADDED BY BOOTADM - DO NOT EDIT -- title OpenSolaris 2008.05 snv_86_rc3 X86 bootfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS module$ /platform/i86pc/$ISADIR/boot_archive #-END BOOTADM #-- ADDED BY BOOTADM - DO NOT EDIT -- title OpenSolaris 2008.05 snv_86_rc3 X86 bootfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel.mine/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS module$ /platform/i86pc/$ISADIR/boot_archive #-END BOOTADM # End of LIBBE entry = You are loading your kernel but using the boot_archive from the already existing one, you need to fix the module$ path to the boot_archive. Also I think you should probably choose a different title so you actually know which entry is booting each kernel. After build ON, I use cap-eye-install to install my own kernel image. # Install -G kernel.mine -k i86pc # tar xf /tmp/Install.aubrey/Install.i86pc.tar I have no idea how to create another boot_archive, Isn't the existing boot_archive fit for zfs-rootfs boot? Thanks, -Aubrey ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08
Hi, Paul The most feature and bugfix so far towards Navada 87 (or 88? ) will backport into s10u6. It's about the same (I mean from outside viewer, not inside) with openSolaris 05/08, but certainly, some other features as CIFS has no plan to backport to s10u6 yet, so ZFS will has fully ready but no effect on these kind of area. That depend on how they co-operate. At least, s10u6 will contain L2ARC cache, ZFS as root filesystem, etc.. Paul B. Henson wrote: We've been working on a prototype of a ZFS file server for a while now, based on Solaris 10. Now that official support is available for openSolaris, we are looking into that as a possible option as well. openSolaris definitely has a greater feature set, but is still a bit rough around the edges for production use. I've heard that a considerable amount of ZFS improvements are slated to show up in S10U6. I was wondering if anybody could give an unofficial list of what will probably be deployed in S10U6, and how that will compare feature wise to openSolaris 05/08. Some rough guess at an ETA would also be nice :). Thanks... ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08
Hi, Krzys, Definitely, s10u6_01 ZFS's version is 10 already, I never expect it'll downgrade :) U5 only inlcude bugfix but without great ZFS feature included, that's a pity, but anyway, s10u6 will come, sooner or later. Krzys wrote: I was hoping that in U5 at least ZFS version 5 would be included but it was not, do you think that will be in U6? On Fri, 16 May 2008, Robin Guo wrote: Hi, Paul The most feature and bugfix so far towards Navada 87 (or 88? ) will backport into s10u6. It's about the same (I mean from outside viewer, not inside) with openSolaris 05/08, but certainly, some other features as CIFS has no plan to backport to s10u6 yet, so ZFS will has fully ready but no effect on these kind of area. That depend on how they co-operate. At least, s10u6 will contain L2ARC cache, ZFS as root filesystem, etc.. Paul B. Henson wrote: We've been working on a prototype of a ZFS file server for a while now, based on Solaris 10. Now that official support is available for openSolaris, we are looking into that as a possible option as well. openSolaris definitely has a greater feature set, but is still a bit rough around the edges for production use. I've heard that a considerable amount of ZFS improvements are slated to show up in S10U6. I was wondering if anybody could give an unofficial list of what will probably be deployed in S10U6, and how that will compare feature wise to openSolaris 05/08. Some rough guess at an ETA would also be nice :). Thanks... ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss !DSPAM:122,482ce24518355742411484! -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] question regarding gzip compression in S10
Hi, Chris, The version 5 (Actually, will be v10, same as Opensolaris) will in s10u6. S10u5 not include much features of ZFS , so the SPA version still keep v4. Krzys wrote: I just upgraded to Sol 10 U5 and I was hoping that gzip compression will be there, but when I do upgrade it only does show v4 [10:05:36] [EMAIL PROTECTED]: /export/home zpool upgrade This system is currently running ZFS version 4. Do you know when Version 5 will be included in Solaris 10? are there any plans for it or will it be in Sol 11 only? Regards, Chris ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [storage-discuss] ZFS and fibre channel issues
Hi, William, You didn't mention c6t21800080E512C872d0s0 in your command line, maybe typo of c6t21800080E512C872d14s0? # zpool create bottlecap c6t21800080E512C872d14 c6t21800080E512C872d15 The warrning looks like by the remain label info may reside on you disk. Could you see output by 'zdb -l /dev/dsk/c6t21800080E512C872d14s0' ? it should has something related to nalgene. But anyway, if you have re-used that disk to create new pool, I suspect this issue has gone. - Regards, Jeff Cheeney wrote: The ZFS crew might be better to answer this question. (CC'd here) --jc William Yang wrote: I am having issues creating a zpool using entire disks with a fibre channel array. The array is a Dell PowerVault 660F. When I run "zpool create bottlecap c6t21800080E512C872d14 c6t21800080E512C872d15", I get the following error: invalid vdev specification use '-f' to override the following errors: /dev/dsk/c6t21800080E512C872d0s0 is part of active ZFS pool nalgene. Please see zpool(1M). I was able to create pool nalgene by using entire disks, but this was awhile back. I have a feeling one of the patches I applied after creating nalgene broke something. I am currently using Solaris 10 SPARC 8/07 kernel 127111-11. Also, if I append s0 to the disk name (i.e. c6t21800080E512C872d14s0), then I can create the new zpool. Any ideas? William Yang ___ storage-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Weird performance issue with ZFS with lots of simultaneous reads
Hi, Chris, Good topic, I'd like to see comments from expert as well. Firstly, I think it has some punishment from NFS, ZFS/NFS has performance lost, and the L2ARC cache feature is the way to solve it, so far. (Has in opensolaris, but not in s10u4 yet, will target in s10u6 release). And, I also see the performance lost while I try iSCISI from local machine, but I didn't gather the accurate data yet. That might be a problem need evaluate. I'll trace this thread to see if any advance, thanks for bring out the topic. - Regards, Robin Guo Chris Siebenmann wrote: I have a ZFS-based NFS server (Solaris 10 U4 on x86) where I am seeing a weird performance degradation as the number of simultaneous sequential reads increases. Setup: NFS client - Solaris NFS server - iSCSI target machine There are 12 physical disks on the iSCSI target machine. Each of them is sliced up into 11 parts and the parts exported as individual LUNs to the Solaris server. The Solaris server uses each LUN as a separate ZFS pool (giving 132 pools in total) and exports them all to the NFS client. (The NFS client and the iSCSI target machine are both running Linux. The Solaris NFS server has 4 GB of RAM.) When the NFS client starts a sequential read against one filesystem from each physical disk, the iSCSI target machine and the NFS client both use the full network bandwidth and each individual read gets 1/12th of it (about 9.something MBytes/sec). Starting a second set of sequential reads against each disk (to a different pool) behaves the same, as does starting a third set. However, when I add a fourth set of reads thing change; while the NFS server continues to read from the iSCSI target at full speed, the data rate to the NFS client drops significantly. By the time I hit 9 reads per physical disk, the NFS client is getting a *total* of 8 MBytes/sec. In other words, it seems that ZFS on the NFS server is somehow discarding most of what it reads from the iSCSI disks, although I can't see any sign of this in 'vmstat' output on Solaris. Also, this may not be just an NFS issue; in limited testing with local IO on the Solaris machine it seems that I may be seeing the same effect with the same rough magnitude. (It is limited testing because it is harder to accurately measure what aggregate data rate I'm getting and harder to run that many simultaneous reads, as if I run too many of them the Solaris machine locks up due to overload.) Does anyone have any ideas of what might be going on here, and how I might be able to tune things on the Solaris machine so that it performs better in this situation (ideally without harming performance under smaller loads)? Would partitioning the physical disks on Solaris instead of splitting them up on the iSCSI target make a significant difference? Thanks in advance. - cks ___ 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] Spare Won't Remove
Hi, Christ, I just verified this issue could simply reproduce in onnv, I've filed CR #6664649 to trace it. Thanks for report. # zpool create -f tank c3t5d0s1 spare c3t5d0s0 # mkfile 100m /var/tmp/file # zpool add tank sparc /var/tmp/file # zpool export tank # format c3t5d0 ( modify c3t5d0s0 to be unassigned) # rm /var/tmp/file # zpool import tank # zpool status -v tank pool: tank state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM tank ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t5d0s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c3t5d0s0 UNAVAIL cannot open /var/tmp/file UNAVAIL cannot open If the sparce device status as UNAVAIL, it cannot be removed by 'zpool remove', even I tried 'zpool scrub' and get no help. # zpool remove tank c3t5d0s0 # echo $? 0 # zpool remove tank /var/tmp/file # echo $? 0 # zpool status -v tank pool: tank state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM tank ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t5d0s1 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c3t5d0s0 UNAVAIL cannot open /var/tmp/file UNAVAIL cannot open Christopher Gibbs wrote: Oops, I forgot a step. I also upgraded the zpool in snv79b before I tried the remove. It is now version 10. On 2/15/08, Christopher Gibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The pool was exported from snv_73 and the spare was disconnected from the system. The OS was upgraded to snv_79b (SXDE 1/08) and the pool was re-imported. I think this weekend I'll try connecting a different drive to that controller and see if it will remove then. Thanks for your help. On 2/15/08, Robin Guo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Christopher, I tried by using raw files as the spare, remove the file, then 'zpool remove' , looks the raw files could be eliminated from the pool. But since you use the physical device, I suppose it might be a bug there, for the status of spare device has turned to be 'UNAVAIL'. Could you point out the OS you used? I might check with the latest onnv nightly to see if this issue exist. Christopher Gibbs wrote: I have a hot spare that was part of my zpool but is no longer connected to the system. I can run the zpool remove command and it returns fine but doesn't seem to do anything. I have tried adding and removing spares that are connected to the system and works properly. Is zpool remove failing because the disk is no longer connected to the system? # zpool remove tank c1d0s4 # zpool status pool: tank state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM tankONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d1ONLINE 0 0 0 c3d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c3d1ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c1d0s4UNAVAIL cannot open errors: No known data errors -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo -- Chris -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] can't share a zfs
Hi, Jason, Could you succeed by these steps? # zpool create tank vdev # zfs set sharenfs=on tank # share [EMAIL PROTECTED] /tank rw The nfs server will be enable automatically while there's any shareable dataset exist, (sharenfs or sharesmb = on) jason wrote: -bash-3.2$ zfs share tank cannot share 'tank': share(1M) failed -bash-3.2$ how do i figure out what's wrong? This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Spare Won't Remove
Hi, Christopher, I tried by using raw files as the spare, remove the file, then 'zpool remove' , looks the raw files could be eliminated from the pool. But since you use the physical device, I suppose it might be a bug there, for the status of spare device has turned to be 'UNAVAIL'. Could you point out the OS you used? I might check with the latest onnv nightly to see if this issue exist. Christopher Gibbs wrote: I have a hot spare that was part of my zpool but is no longer connected to the system. I can run the zpool remove command and it returns fine but doesn't seem to do anything. I have tried adding and removing spares that are connected to the system and works properly. Is zpool remove failing because the disk is no longer connected to the system? # zpool remove tank c1d0s4 # zpool status pool: tank state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM tankONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d1ONLINE 0 0 0 c3d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c3d1ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c1d0s4UNAVAIL cannot open errors: No known data errors -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to get ZFS use the whole disk?
Hi, Roman You can use 'zpool attach' to attach mirror into it. But cannot 'zpool add' new slice into it. rootpool can be a single disk device, or a device slice, or in a mirrored configuration. If you use a whole disk for a rootpool, you must use a slice notation (e.g. c0d0s0) so that it is labeled with an SMI label. Roman Morokutti wrote: Just another thought. After setting up a ZFS root on slice c0d0s4, it should be just possible after starting into it, to add the remaining slices into the created ZFS pool. Is this possible? 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] How to get ZFS use the whole disk?
Hi, Roman If you need to ocupy a disk on rootpool, you need has at least 2 disks in the system on such case. use c[m]t[n]d[p]s0 as the second device, suppose you've SMI labeled it and let s0 take the entire space of that disk. Good luck! Roman Morokutti wrote: Hi, I am new to ZFS and recently managed to get a ZFS root to work. These were the steps I have done: 1. Installed b81 (fresh install) 2. Unmounted /second_root on c0d0s4 3. Removed /etc/vfstab entry of /second_root 4. Executed ./zfs-actual-root-install.sh c0d0s4 5. Rebooted (init 6) After selecting ZFS boot entry in GRUB Solaris went up. Great. Next I looked how the slices were configured. And I saw that the layout hasn´t changed despite slice 4 is now ZFS root. What would I have to do, to get a layout where zpool /tank occupies the whole disk as presentated by Lori Alt? Roman This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Draft one-pager for zfs-auto-snapshots
Excellent News, Tim. That util will be handy and popular under SMF. Looking forward to that. Tim Foster wrote: Hi all, I put together the attached one-pager on the ZFS Automatic Snapshots service which I've been maintaining on my blog to date. I would like to see if this could be integrated into ON and believe that a first step towards this is a project one-pager: so I've attached a draft version. I'm happy to defer judgement to the ZFS team as to whether this would be a suitable addition to OpenSolaris - if the consensus is that it's better for the service to remain in it's current un-integrated state and be discovered through BigAdmin or web searches, that's okay by me. [ just thought I'd ask ] cheers, tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to get ZFS use the whole disk?
Hi, Roman, The disable disk cache option is a choice by manual setting, on some particular envionment. ZIL default setting to 'on'. Regardless regular pool or rootpool. There's CR #6648965 might also related to this. It talked about slog/l2cache/spare should able to be supported in a rootpool. Will Murnane wrote: On Feb 4, 2008 4:37 PM, Robin Guo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you use a whole disk for a rootpool, you must use a slice notation (e.g. c0d0s0) so that it is labeled with an SMI label. Will ZFS recognize that it has the whole disk at this point (and thus leave cache enabled on it) or not? Many of the machines I administer provide some service that uses the single (currently SVM mirrored) root partition, so having cache enabled could be helpful. ISTR some talk of ZFS disabling disk cache if it doesn't have the whole disk to itself. Thanks! Will -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/robinguo ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool history not found
Hi, Sunnie, 'zpool history' is only introduced from the ZFS version 4. You could check the update info and pick the bits after Build 62 corresponded # zpool upgrade -v This system is currently running ZFS pool version 8. 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 For more information on a particular version, including supported releases, see: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/version/N Where 'N' is the version number. 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 -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS panic in space_map.c line 125
Hi Matty, From the stack I saw, that is 6454482. But this defect has been marked as 'Not reproducible', I have no idea about how to recover from it, but looks like new update will not hit this issue. Matty wrote: One of our Solaris 10 update 3 servers paniced today with the following error: Sep 18 00:34:53 m2000ef savecore: [ID 570001 auth.error] reboot after panic: assertion failed: ss != NULL, file: ../../common/fs/zfs/space_map.c, line: 125 The server saved a core file, and the resulting backtrace is listed below: $ mdb unix.0 vmcore.0 $c vpanic() 0xfb9b49f3() space_map_remove+0x239() space_map_load+0x17d() metaslab_activate+0x6f() metaslab_group_alloc+0x187() metaslab_alloc_dva+0xab() metaslab_alloc+0x51() zio_dva_allocate+0x3f() zio_next_stage+0x72() zio_checksum_generate+0x5f() zio_next_stage+0x72() zio_write_compress+0x136() zio_next_stage+0x72() zio_wait_for_children+0x49() zio_wait_children_ready+0x15() zio_next_stage_async+0xae() zio_wait+0x2d() arc_write+0xcc() dmu_objset_sync+0x141() dsl_dataset_sync+0x23() dsl_pool_sync+0x7b() spa_sync+0x116() txg_sync_thread+0x115() thread_start+8() It appears ZFS is still able to read the labels from the drive: $ zdb -lv /dev/rdsk/c3t50002AC00039040Bd0p0 LABEL 0 version=3 name='fpool0' state=0 txg=4 pool_guid=10406529929620343615 top_guid=3365726235666077346 guid=3365726235666077346 vdev_tree type='disk' id=0 guid=3365726235666077346 path='/dev/dsk/c3t50002AC00039040Bd0p0' devid='id1,[EMAIL PROTECTED]/q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=13 metaslab_shift=31 ashift=9 asize=322117566464 LABEL 1 version=3 name='fpool0' state=0 txg=4 pool_guid=10406529929620343615 top_guid=3365726235666077346 guid=3365726235666077346 vdev_tree type='disk' id=0 guid=3365726235666077346 path='/dev/dsk/c3t50002AC00039040Bd0p0' devid='id1,[EMAIL PROTECTED]/q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=13 metaslab_shift=31 ashift=9 asize=322117566464 LABEL 2 version=3 name='fpool0' state=0 txg=4 pool_guid=10406529929620343615 top_guid=3365726235666077346 guid=3365726235666077346 vdev_tree type='disk' id=0 guid=3365726235666077346 path='/dev/dsk/c3t50002AC00039040Bd0p0' devid='id1,[EMAIL PROTECTED]/q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=13 metaslab_shift=31 ashift=9 asize=322117566464 LABEL 3 version=3 name='fpool0' state=0 txg=4 pool_guid=10406529929620343615 top_guid=3365726235666077346 guid=3365726235666077346 vdev_tree type='disk' id=0 guid=3365726235666077346 path='/dev/dsk/c3t50002AC00039040Bd0p0' devid='id1,[EMAIL PROTECTED]/q' whole_disk=0 metaslab_array=13 metaslab_shift=31 ashift=9 asize=322117566464 But for some reason it is unable to open the pool: $ zdb -c fpool0 zdb: can't open fpool0: error 2 I saw several bugs related to space_map.c, but the stack traces listed in the bug reports were different than the one listed above. Has anyone seen this bug before? Is there anyway to recover from it? Thanks for any insight, - Ryan -- Regards, Robin Guo, Xue-Bin Guo Solaris Kernel and Data Service QE, Sun China Engineering and Reserch Institute Phone: +86 10 82618200 +82296 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
