Ivan Wang wrote:
Hi,
However, this raises another concert that during
recent discussions regarding to disk layout of a zfs
system
(http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=
25679tstart=0) it was said that currently we'd
better give zfs the whole device (rather than
HI !
I have some concerns here, from my experience in the past, touching a
file ( doing some IO ) will cause the ufs filesystem to failover, unlike
zfs where it did not ! Why the behaviour of zfs different than ufs ? is
not this compromising data integrity ?
thanks
Ayaz
From:
Robert
Hello Ivan,
Sunday, March 11, 2007, 12:01:28 PM, you wrote:
IW Got it, thanks, and a more general question, in a single disk
IW root pool scenario, what advantage zfs will provide over ufs w/
IW logging? And when zfs boot integrated in neveda, will live upgrade work
with zfs root?
On 3/11/07, Robert Milkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IW Got it, thanks, and a more general question, in a single disk
IW root pool scenario, what advantage zfs will provide over ufs w/
IW logging? And when zfs boot integrated in neveda, will live upgrade work with
zfs root?
Snapshots/clones
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Ivan,
Sunday, March 11, 2007, 12:01:28 PM, you wrote:
IW Got it, thanks, and a more general question, in a single disk
IW root pool scenario, what advantage zfs will provide over ufs w/
IW logging? And when zfs boot integrated in neveda, will live upgrade work
On March 11, 2007 6:05:13 PM + Tim Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* ability to add disks to mirror the root filesystem at any time,
should they become available
Can't this be done with UFS+SVM as well? A reboot would be required
but you have to do regular reboots anyway just for
On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 11:21:13AM -0700, Frank Cusack wrote:
On March 11, 2007 6:05:13 PM + Tim Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* ability to add disks to mirror the root filesystem at any time,
should they become available
Can't this be done with UFS+SVM as well? A reboot would be
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Ivan,
Sunday, March 11, 2007, 12:01:28 PM, you wrote:
IW Got it, thanks, and a more general question, in a single disk
IW root pool scenario, what advantage zfs will provide over ufs w/
IW logging? And when zfs boot integrated in neveda, will live upgrade
Matty wrote:
I am curious how snapshots and clones will be integrated with grub.
Will it be posible to boot from a snapshot? I think this would be
useful when applying patches, since you could snapshot / ,/var and
/opt, patch the system, and revert back (by choosing a snapshot from
the grub
On 3/11/07, Lin Ling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matty wrote:
I am curious how snapshots and clones will be integrated with grub.
Will it be posible to boot from a snapshot? I think this would be
useful when applying patches, since you could snapshot / ,/var and
/opt, patch the system, and
OK, I tried it with txg_time set to 1 and am seeing less predictable results.
The first time I ran the test it completed in 27 seconds (vs 24s for ufs or 42s
with txg_time=5). Further tests ran from 27s to 43s, about half the time
greater than 40s.
zpool iostat doesn't show the large
Matty wrote:
How will /boot/grub/menu.lst be updated? Will the admin have to run
bootadm after the root clone is created, or will the zfs utility be
enhanced to populate / remove entries from the menu.lst?
The detail of how menu.lst will be updated is still being worked out.
We don't plan on
While the snapshot isn't RW, the clone is and would certainly be helpful
in this case
Isn't the whole idea to:
0) boot into single-user/boot-archive if you're paranoid (or just quiess
and clone if you feel lucky)
1) clone the primary OS instance+relevant-slices boot into the
primary OS
2)
I have some concerns here, from my experience in the past, touching a
file ( doing some IO ) will cause the ufs filesystem to failover, unlike
zfs where it did not ! Why the behaviour of zfs different than ufs ?
UFS always does synchronous metadata updates. So a 'touch' that creates
a file
On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 11:21:13AM -0700, Frank Cusack wrote:
On March 11, 2007 6:05:13 PM + Tim Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* ability to add disks to mirror the root filesystem at any time,
should they become available
Can't this be done with UFS+SVM as well? A reboot
HI !
Well as per my actual post, i created a zfs file as part of Sun cluster
HAStoragePlus, and then disconned the FC cable, since there was no active
IO hence the failure of disk was not detected, then i touched a file in
the zfs filesystem, and it went fine, only after that when i did sync
On 11-Mar-07, at 11:12 PM, Ayaz Anjum wrote:
HI !
Well as per my actual post, i created a zfs file as part of Sun
cluster HAStoragePlus, and then disconned the FC cable, since there
was no active IO hence the failure of disk was not detected, then i
touched a file in the zfs
Heya,
I believe Robert and Darren have offered sufficient explanations: You
cannot be assured of committed data unless you've sync'd it. You are
only risking data loss if your users and/or applications assume data
is committed without seeing a completed sync, which would be a design
error.
18 matches
Mail list logo
