Easiest way to create sparse eg 20 GB assuming test.img doesn't exist
already
No no no. Easiest way to do what you want to do:
mdconfig -a -t malloc -s 3t -u 0
mdconfig -a -t malloc -s 3t -u 1
Just make sure to offline and delete mds ASAP, unless you have 6TB of
RAM waiting to be filled ;) -
On 7/24/2010 7:56 AM, Pawel Tyll wrote:
Easiest way to create sparse eg 20 GB assuming test.img doesn't exist
already
You trim posts too much... there is no way to compare without opening
another email.
Adam wrote:
truncate -s 20g test.img
ls -sk test.img
1 test.img
No no no. Easiest
On 7/22/2010 4:11 AM, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 4:03 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 3:30 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 12:12:54PM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 4:11 AM, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 4:03 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 3:30 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On
On 7/23/2010 7:42 AM, John Hawkes-Reed wrote:
Dan Langille wrote:
Thank you to all the helpful discussion. It's been very helpful and
educational. Based on the advice and suggestions, I'm going to adjust
my original plan as follows.
[ ... ]
Since I still have the medium-sized ZFS array on
On 24/07/2010 21:35, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/23/2010 7:42 AM, John Hawkes-Reed wrote:
Dan Langille wrote:
Thank you to all the helpful discussion. It's been very helpful and
educational. Based on the advice and suggestions, I'm going to adjust
my original plan as follows.
[ ... ]
Since I
On 7/22/2010 9:51 PM, Pawel Tyll wrote:
So... the smaller size won't mess things up...
If by smaller size you mean smaller size of existing
drives/partitions, then growing zpools by replacing smaller vdevs
with larger ones is supported and works. What isn't supported is
basically everything
Dan Langille wrote:
Thank you to all the helpful discussion. It's been very helpful and
educational. Based on the advice and suggestions, I'm going to adjust
my original plan as follows.
[ ... ]
Since I still have the medium-sized ZFS array on the bench, testing this
GPT setup seemed like
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Pawel Tyll pt...@nitronet.pl wrote:
I do not think I can adjust the existing zpool on the fly. I think I
need to copy everything elsewhere (i.e the 2 empty drives). Then start
the new zpool from scratch.
You can, and you should (for educational purposes if
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010, John Hawkes-Reed wrote:
JH Since I still have the medium-sized ZFS array on the bench, testing this GPT
JH setup seemed like a good idea.
JH
JH The hardware's a Supermicro X8DTL-iF m/b + 12Gb memory, 2x 5502 Xeons, 3x
JH Supermicro USASLP-L8I 3G SAS controllers and 24x
On 23/07/2010 19:04, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010, John Hawkes-Reed wrote:
JH Since I still have the medium-sized ZFS array on the bench, testing this
GPT
JH setup seemed like a good idea.
JH
JH The hardware's a Supermicro X8DTL-iF m/b + 12Gb memory, 2x 5502 Xeons, 3x
JH
On 7/22/2010 8:47 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
Thank you to all the helpful discussion. It's been very helpful and
educational. Based on the advice and suggestions, I'm going to adjust my
original plan as follows.
NOTE: glabel will not be used.
First, create a new GUID Partition Table partition
On 7/22/2010 9:22 PM, Pawel Tyll wrote:
I do not think I can adjust the existing zpool on the fly. I think I
need to copy everything elsewhere (i.e the 2 empty drives). Then start
the new zpool from scratch.
You can, and you should (for educational purposes if not for fun :),
unless you
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Dan Langille d...@langille.org wrote:
Pawell and I had an online chat about part of my strategy. To be clear:
I have a 5x2TB raidz1 array.
I have 2x2TB empty HDD
My goal was to go to raidz2 by:
- copy data to empty HDD
- redo the zpool to be raidz2
-
On 7/23/2010 10:25 PM, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Dan Langilled...@langille.org wrote:
Pawell and I had an online chat about part of my strategy. To be clear:
I have a 5x2TB raidz1 array.
I have 2x2TB empty HDD
My goal was to go to raidz2 by:
- copy data to empty
On 24/07/2010, at 11:55, Freddie Cash wrote:
It's theoretical as I have not investigated how to create sparse files
on FreeBSD, nor have I done this. It's based on several posts to the
zfs-discuss mailing list where several people have done this on
OpenSolaris.
FYI you would do..
truncate
On 7/23/2010 10:42 PM, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On 24/07/2010, at 11:55, Freddie Cash wrote:
It's theoretical as I have not investigated how to create sparse files
on FreeBSD, nor have I done this. It's based on several posts to the
zfs-discuss mailing list where several people have done this
On 7/23/2010 10:51 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/23/2010 10:42 PM, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On 24/07/2010, at 11:55, Freddie Cash wrote:
It's theoretical as I have not investigated how to create sparse
files on FreeBSD, nor have I done this. It's based on several
posts to the zfs-discuss mailing
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
It's theoretical as I have not investigated how to create sparse files
on FreeBSD, nor have I done this. It's based on several posts to the
zfs-discuss mailing list where several people have done this on
OpenSolaris.
On 7/21/2010 11:39 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com
mailto:amvandem...@gmail.com wrote:
Also if you have an applicable SATA controller, running the ahci module
with give you more speed. Only change one thing a time though.
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the criteria, but this is what I'm running:
atapci0: SiI 3124 SATA300 controller port 0xdc00-0xdc0f mem
0xfbeffc00-0xfbeffc7f,0xfbef-0xfbef7fff irq 17 at device 4.0 on pci7
atapci1: SiI 3124 SATA300 controller port 0xac00-0xac0f
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 02:32:48AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/21/2010 11:39 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com
mailto:amvandem...@gmail.com wrote:
Also if you have an applicable SATA controller, running the ahci module
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the criteria, but this is what I'm running:
atapci0:SiI 3124 SATA300 controller port 0xdc00-0xdc0f mem
0xfbeffc00-0xfbeffc7f,0xfbef-0xfbef7fff irq 17 at device 4.0 on pci7
atapci1:SiI
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:02:33AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the criteria, but this is what I'm running:
atapci0:SiI 3124 SATA300 controller port 0xdc00-0xdc0f mem
On 7/22/2010 3:08 AM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 03:02:33AM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the criteria, but this is what I'm running:
atapci0:SiI 3124 SATA300 controller
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the criteria, but this is what I'm running:
atapci0:SiI 3124 SATA300 controller port 0xdc00-0xdc0f mem
0xfbeffc00-0xfbeffc7f,0xfbef-0xfbef7fff
On 7/22/2010 3:30 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the criteria, but this is what I'm running:
atapci0:SiI 3124 SATA300 controller port 0xdc00-0xdc0f
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 3:30 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the criteria, but this is what I'm running:
atapci0:SiI
On 7/22/2010 4:03 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 3:30 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the
On 7/22/2010 4:03 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 3:30 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the
On 7/22/2010 4:03 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 3:30 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/22/2010 2:59 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 22.07.2010 10:32, Dan Langille wrote:
I'm not sure of the
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 04:03:05AM -0400, Charles Sprickman wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Dan Langille wrote:
Well, I don't have anything to support hotplug. All my stuff is internal.
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 23:15:41 -0400 Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/21/2010 11:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote (something close to this):
First, create a new GUID Partition Table partition scheme on the HDD:
gpart create -s GPT ad0
Let's see how much space we have. This output will be used to
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Boris Samorodov wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 23:15:41 -0400 Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/21/2010 11:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote (something close to this):
First, create a new GUID Partition Table partition scheme on the HDD:
gpart create -s GPT ad0
Let's see how much space we
Charles Sprickman sp...@bway.net writes:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Boris Samorodov wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 23:15:41 -0400 Dan Langille wrote:
On 7/21/2010 11:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote (something close to this):
First, create a new GUID Partition Table partition scheme on the HDD:
gpart create
On 22/07/2010, at 12:35, Dan Langille wrote:
Why use glabel?
* So ZFS can find and use the correct HDD should the HDD device ever
get renumbered for whatever reason. e.g. /dev/da0 becomes /dev/da6
when you move it to another controller.
Why use partitions?
* Primarily: two HDD of
On 22/07/2010, at 13:59, Adam Vande More wrote:
To be clear, we are talking about data partitions, not the boot one.
Difficult for me to explain concisely, but basically it has to do with seek
time. A mis-aligned partition will almost always have an extra seek for
each standard seek you'd
On Jul 21, 2010, at 11:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
I hope my terminology is correct
I have a ZFS array which uses raw devices. I'd rather it use glabel and
supply the GEOM devices to ZFS instead. In addition, I'll also partition the
HDD to avoid using the entire HDD: leave a little
22.07.2010 06:05, Dan Langille wrote:
Create a new partition within that scheme:
gpart add -b 34 -s SOMEVALUE -t freebsd-zfs ad0
Why '-b 34'? Randi pointed me to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table where it explains what
the first 33 LBA are used for. It's not for us to use here.
Thank you to all the helpful discussion. It's been very helpful and
educational. Based on the advice and suggestions, I'm going to adjust
my original plan as follows.
NOTE: glabel will not be used.
First, create a new GUID Partition Table partition scheme on the HDD:
gpart create -s GPT
I do not think I can adjust the existing zpool on the fly. I think I
need to copy everything elsewhere (i.e the 2 empty drives). Then start
the new zpool from scratch.
You can, and you should (for educational purposes if not for fun :),
unless you wish to change raidz1 to raidz2. Replace,
On 7/22/2010 9:22 PM, Pawel Tyll wrote:
I do not think I can adjust the existing zpool on the fly. I think I
need to copy everything elsewhere (i.e the 2 empty drives). Then start
the new zpool from scratch.
You can, and you should (for educational purposes if not for fun :),
unless you
So... the smaller size won't mess things up...
If by smaller size you mean smaller size of existing
drives/partitions, then growing zpools by replacing smaller vdevs
with larger ones is supported and works. What isn't supported is
basically everything else:
- you can't change number of raid
On 23/07/2010, at 24:56, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
22.07.2010 06:05, Dan Langille wrote:
Create a new partition within that scheme:
gpart add -b 34 -s SOMEVALUE -t freebsd-zfs ad0
Why '-b 34'? Randi pointed me to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table where it explains what
I hope my terminology is correct
I have a ZFS array which uses raw devices. I'd rather it use glabel and
supply the GEOM devices to ZFS instead. In addition, I'll also
partition the HDD to avoid using the entire HDD: leave a little bit of
space at the start and end.
Why use glabel?
On 7/21/2010 11:05 PM, Dan Langille wrote (something close to this):
First, create a new GUID Partition Table partition scheme on the HDD:
gpart create -s GPT ad0
Let's see how much space we have. This output will be used to determine
SOMEVALUE in the next command.
gpart show
Create a new
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Dan Langille d...@langille.org wrote:
glabel label -v disk00 /dev/ad0
Or, is this more appropriate?
glabel label -v disk00 /dev/ad0s1
actually it's /dev/ad0p1.
GPT scheme uses p, not s. And yes, that's more appropriate - if you
create zpool on disk00
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Dan Langille d...@langille.org wrote:
Why '-b 34'? Randi pointed me to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table where it explains what
the first 33 LBA are used for. It's not for us to use here.
Where SOMEVALUE is the number of blocks to use. I
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Dan Langille d...@langille.org wrote:
Why '-b 34'? Randi pointed me to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table where it explains what
the first 33 LBA are used for.
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Adam Vande More wrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Dan Langille d...@langille.org wrote:
Why '-b 34'? Randi pointed me to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table where it explains what
the first 33 LBA are used for. It's not for us to use here.
Where
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Charles Sprickman sp...@bway.net wrote:
-Does it only affect the new drives with 4K blocks?
No, although blocksize does effect these symptoms
-If it does not, is it generally good to start your first partition at 1MB
in? How exactly does doing this fix
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Dan Langille d...@langille.org wrote:
I hope my terminology is correct
I have a ZFS array which uses raw devices. I'd rather it use glabel and
supply the GEOM devices to ZFS instead. In addition, I'll also partition
the HDD to avoid using the entire
52 matches
Mail list logo
