Hi
I have one usb hard drive that shows in zpool import as zpool that does not
exist in disk anymore
# zpool import
pool: usb1
id: 8159001826765429865
state: FAULTED
status: The pool metadata is corrupted.
action: The pool cannot be imported due to damaged devices or data.
The
Hi
I am looking for guidance on the following zfs setup and error:
- opensolaris 2008.05 running as guest in vmware server - ubuntu host
- system has run flawlessly as an NFS file server for some months now. Single
zpool (called 'tank'), 2 vdevs each as raid-Z, about 10 filesystems (one of
them
Reading through the post the error message didn't come through properly. It is
tank/mail:0x0 (with lesser than and greater than on either sides of the 0's).
Also, the 4 disks (2 vdevs x 2 for raid-z) are physical sata disks dedicated to
the vmware image.
Thanks.
--
This message posted from
zpool destroy -f usb1
--ron
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
/usr/openwin/bin/xterm returns 'Could not set destroy callback to IM' but does
open an xterm. I have never seen this one before. Any ideas?
--ron
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Erik:
(2) a SAS drive has better throughput and IOPs than a SATA drive
Richard:
Disagree. We proved that the transport layer protocol has no bearing
on throughput or iops. Several vendors offer drives which are
identical in all respects except for transport layer protocol: SAS or
SATA.
On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 10:37:26PM -0700, Chris Greer wrote:
So I tried this experiment this week...
On each host (OpenSolaris 2008.05), I created an 8GB ramdisk with ramdiskadm.
I shared this ramdisk on each host via the iscsi target and initiator over a
1GB crossconnect cable (jumbo
It would be trivial to make the threshold a tunable,
but we're
trying to avoid this sort of thing. I don't want
there to be a
ZFS tuning guide, ever. That would mean we failed.
Jeff
harumph... http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide
:-)
Well now that that
So what are the downsides to this? If both nodes were to crash and
I used the same technique to recreate the ramdisk I would lose any
transactions in the slog at the time of the crash, but the physical
disk image is still in a consistent state right (just not from my
apps point of
On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 09:07:31PM -0400, Brian Hechinger wrote:
On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 10:37:26PM -0700, Chris Greer wrote:
I'm not sure I could survive a crash of both nodes, going to try and
test some more.
Ok, so taking my idea above, maybe a pair of 15K SAS disks in those
boxes so
10 matches
Mail list logo
