Hello Nobel,
On Apr 23, 2009, at 1:53 AM, Nobel Shelby wrote:
Folks,
Perplexing question about load average display with prstat -Z
Solaris 10 OS U4 (08/07)
We have 4 zones with very different processes and workloads..
The prstat -Z command issued within each of the zones, correctly
displays
Hail, caesar.
I've got a 10-disk RAID-Z2 backed by the 1.5 TB Seagate drives
everyone's so fond of. They've all received a firmware upgrade (the
sane one, not the one that caused your drives to brick if the internal
event log hit the wrong number on boot).
They're attached to an ARC-1280ML, a
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Rince wrote:
I presume I'm missing something, but I have no idea what. Halp?
The main thing to be aware of with raidz and raidz2 is that the
devices in a vdev are basically chained together so that you get an
effective one disk's worth of IOPS per vdev. They are very
Ed,
zfs destroy [-r] -p sounds great.
I'm not a big fan of the -t template. Do you have conflicting snapshot
names due to the way your (zones) software works, or are you concerned about
sysadmins creating these conflicting snapshots? If it's the former, would
it be possible to change the
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:59:33AM -0600, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
zfs destroy [-r] -p sounds great.
I'm not a big fan of the -t template. Do you have conflicting snapshot
names due to the way your (zones) software works, or are you concerned
about sysadmins creating these conflicting
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:31:07AM -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:59:33AM -0600, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
zfs destroy [-r] -p sounds great.
I'm not a big fan of the -t template. Do you have conflicting snapshot
names due to the way your (zones) software works, or
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:59:33AM -0600, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
Ed,
zfs destroy [-r] -p sounds great.
I'm not a big fan of the -t template. Do you have conflicting snapshot
names due to the way your (zones) software works, or are you concerned
about sysadmins creating these conflicting
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:25:54AM -0700, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
an interesting idea. i can file an RFE on this as well, but there are a
couple side effects to consider with this approach.
setting this property would break zfs snapshot -r if there are
multiple snapshots and clones of a
