I've recently re-installed an X4500 running Nevada b109 and have been
experiencing ZFS lock ups regularly (perhaps once every 2-3 days).
The machine is a backup server and receives hourly ZFS snapshots from
another thumper - as such, the amount of zfs activity tends to be
reasonably high. After
River Tarnell wrote:
Matthew Ahrens:
ZFS user quotas (like other zfs properties) will not be accessible over NFS;
you must be on the machine running zfs to manipulate them.
does this mean that without an account on the NFS server, a user cannot see
his
current disk use / quota?
That's
casper@sun.com wrote:
River Tarnell wrote:
Matthew Ahrens:
ZFS user quotas (like other zfs properties) will not be accessible over NFS;
you must be on the machine running zfs to manipulate them.
does this mean that without an account on the NFS server, a user cannot see his
current disk
I'm going to try to move one of my disks off my rpool tomorrow (since
it's a mirror) to a different controller.
According to what I've heard before, ZFS should automagically
recognize this new location and have no problem, right?
Or do I need to do some sort of detach/etc. process first?
Michael Shadle wrote:
I'm going to try to move one of my disks off my rpool tomorrow (since
it's a mirror) to a different controller.
According to what I've heard before, ZFS should automagically
recognize this new location and have no problem, right?
Or do I need to do some sort of
Hello Matthew,
Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 9:16:42 PM, you wrote:
MA Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Matthew,
Excellent news.
Wouldn't it be better if logical disk usage would be accounted and not
physical - I mean when compression is enabled should quota be
accounted based by a logical file
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Matthew,
Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 9:16:42 PM, you wrote:
MA Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Matthew,
Excellent news.
Wouldn't it be better if logical disk usage would be accounted and not
physical - I mean when compression is enabled should quota be
accounted
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 12:41:25AM +, A Darren Dunham wrote:
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 01:41:06AM +0300, Dimitar Vasilev wrote:
Hi all,
Could someone give a hint if it's possible to create rpool/tmp, mount
it as /tmp so that tmpfs has some disk-based back-end instead of
memory-based
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Matthew,
Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 9:16:42 PM, you wrote:
MA Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Matthew,
Excellent news.
Wouldn't it be better if logical disk usage would be accounted and not
physical - I mean when compression is enabled should quota be
accounted
Hello Richard,
Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 5:32:25 PM, you wrote:
RE Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Matthew,
Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 9:16:42 PM, you wrote:
MA Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Matthew,
Excellent news.
Wouldn't it be better if logical disk usage would be accounted and not
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 10:58:34AM +0200, casper@sun.com wrote:
I know that this is one of the additional protocols developed for NFSv2
and NFSv3; does NFSv4 has a similar mechanism to get the quota?
Yes, NFSv4.0 and 4.1 both provide the same quota information retrieval
interface, three
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 10:04:47AM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
If we had the .zfs/props/propname RFE implemented that would allow
users to see this regardless of what file sharing protocol they use.
As well as lots of other very interesting info about the filesystem.
Indeed!
Mike Gerdts wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Matthew Ahrens matthew.ahr...@sun.com wrote:
River Tarnell wrote:
Matthew Ahrens:
ZFS user quotas (like other zfs properties) will not be accessible over
NFS;
you must be on the machine running zfs to manipulate them.
does this mean that
On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
So from a user perspective isn't it a little bit confusing as he
managed to write more data than he thinks he is allowed to.
Pleasant surprises tend to be tolerated :-)
Until it comes time to back that data up. It is conceivable for users
to
Hello Bob,
Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 7:14:46 PM, you wrote:
BF On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
So from a user perspective isn't it a little bit confusing as he
managed to write more data than he thinks he is allowed to.
Pleasant surprises tend to be tolerated :-)
BF Until it
[ re-sending to the list address - stupid thunderbird still doesn't have
reply-to-list :-( ]
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Bob,
Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 7:14:46 PM, you wrote:
...
BF Until it comes time to back that data up. It is conceivable for users
BF to create a DOS for the backup
Hi Harry,
I was on vacation so am late to this discussion.
For this part of your question:
The zpool export/import feature is a pool-level operation for moving
the pool, disks, and data to another system.
For moving data from one pool to another pool, you would want to use
zfs send/recv,
17 matches
Mail list logo
