Hi Guys
I have a SunFire X4200M2 and the Xyratex RS1600 JBOD which I try to
run the ZFS on it.But I found a problem:
I set mpxio-disable=yes in the /kernel/drv/fp.conf to enable the MPxIO,
and set load-balance=round-robin in the /kernel/drv/scsi_vhci.conf enable
the round-robin.The ZFS performance
On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 23:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
lf yang no-re...@opensolaris.org wrote:
Hi Guys
I have a SunFire X4200M2 and the Xyratex RS1600 JBOD which I try to
run the ZFS on it.But I found a problem:
I set mpxio-disable=yes in the /kernel/drv/fp.conf to enable the MPxIO,
and set
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 7:39 PM, Russelno-re...@opensolaris.org wrote:
Yes you'll find my name all over VB at the moment, but I have found it to be
stable
(don't install the addons disk for solaris!!, use 3.0.2, and for me
winXP32bit and
OpenSolaris 2009.6 has been rock solid, it was
To enable mpxio, you need to have
mpxio-disable=no;
in your fp.conf file. You should run /usr/sbin/stmsboot -e to make
this happen. If you *must* edit that file by hand, always run
/usr/sbin/stmsboot -u afterwards to ensure that your system's MPxIO
config is correctly updated.
I thought
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 02:56:47 -0400 (EDT)
Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org wrote:
To enable mpxio, you need to have
mpxio-disable=no;
in your fp.conf file. You should run /usr/sbin/stmsboot -e to make
this happen. If you *must* edit that file by hand, always run
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 08:25, lf yangno-re...@opensolaris.org wrote:
Hi Guys
I have a SunFire X4200M2 and the Xyratex RS1600 JBOD which I try to
run the ZFS on it.But I found a problem:
I set mpxio-disable=yes in the /kernel/drv/fp.conf to enable the MPxIO,
I assume you mean mpxio-disable=no
I would be intrested in how to roll-back to certain txg-points in case of
disaster, that was what Russel was after anyway.
Yours
Markus Kovero
-Original Message-
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org
[mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Miles Nordin
Sent: 19.
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 00:00:06 -0700
Brent Jones br...@servuhome.net wrote:
No offense, but you trusted 10TB of important data, running in
OpenSolaris from inside Virtualbox (not stable) on top of Windows XP
(arguably not stable, especially for production) on probably consumer
grade hardware
While I agree with Brent, I think this is something that should be stressed in
the ZFS documentation. Those of us with long term experience of ZFS know that
it's really designed to work with hardware meeting quite specific requirements.
Unfortunately, that isn't documented anywhere, and more
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 01:48:40 PDT
Ross no-re...@opensolaris.org wrote:
As far as I can see, the ZFS Administrator Guide is sorely lacking in
any warning that you are risking data loss if you run on consumer
grade hardware.
And yet, ZFS is not only for NON-consumer grade hardware is it? the
Guys guys please chill...
First thanks to the info about virtualbox option to bypass the
cache (I don't suppose you can give me a reference for that info?
(I'll search the VB site :-)) As this was not clear to me. I use VB
like others use vmware etc to run solaris because its the ONLY
way I can,
From the experience myself and others have had, and Sun's approach with their
Amber Road storage (FISHWORKS - fully integrated *hardware* and software), my
feeling is very much that ZFS was designed by Sun to run on Sun's own
hardware, and as such, they were able to make certain assumptions
Heh, yes, I assumed similar things Russel. I also assumed that a faulty disk
in a raid-z set wouldn't hang my entire pool indefinitely, that hot plugging a
drive wouldn't reboot Solaris, and that my pool would continue working after I
disconnected one half of an iscsi mirror.
I also like
On Sat, 18 Jul 2009, Martin wrote:
In fact, get rid of mirroring, because it clearly is a variant of
raidz with two devices. Want three way mirroring? Call that raidz2
I don't see much similarity between mirroring and raidz other than
that they both support redundancy.
Let's not stop
It's clear from some threads on this list that it IS possible to roll
back a zpool to a previous state, and I seem to even remember reading
someone was working on a tool or tools in that direction.
Is that correct, is it possible to manually roll back a zpool for crash
recovery purposes, if
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Ross wrote:
The success of any ZFS implementation is *very* dependent on the
hardware you choose to run it on.
To clarify:
The success of any filesystem implementation is *very* dependent on
the hardware you choose to run it on.
ZFS requires that the hardware cache
On 19-Jul-09, at 7:12 AM, Russel wrote:
Guys guys please chill...
First thanks to the info about virtualbox option to bypass the
cache (I don't suppose you can give me a reference for that info?
(I'll search the VB site :-))
I posted about that insane default, six months ago. Obviously ZFS
That's only one element of it Bob. ZFS also needs devices to fail quickly and
in a predictable manner.
A consumer grade hard disk could lock up your entire pool as it fails. The kit
Sun supply is more likely to fail in a manner ZFS can cope with.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
On 07/19/09 05:00 AM, dick hoogendijk wrote:
(i.e. non ECC memory should work fine!) / mirroring is a -must- !
Yes, mirroring is a must, although it doesn't help much if you
have memory errors (see several other threads on this topic):
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Frank Middleton wrote:
Yes, mirroring is a must, although it doesn't help much if you
have memory errors (see several other threads on this topic):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_random_access_memory#Errors_and_error_correction
Tests[ecc]give widely varying error
r == Ross no-re...@opensolaris.org writes:
tt == Toby Thain t...@telegraphics.com.au writes:
r ZFS was never designed to run on consumer hardware,
this is markedroid garbage, as well as post-facto apologetics.
Don't lower the bar. Don't blame the victim.
tt I posted about that
Frank Middleton wrote:
On 07/19/09 05:00 AM, dick hoogendijk wrote:
(i.e. non ECC memory should work fine!) / mirroring is a -must- !
Yes, mirroring is a must, although it doesn't help much if you
have memory errors (see several other threads on this topic):
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Miles Nordin wrote:
r == Ross no-re...@opensolaris.org writes:
tt == Toby Thain t...@telegraphics.com.au writes:
r ZFS was never designed to run on consumer hardware,
this is markedroid garbage, as well as post-facto apologetics.
Don't lower the bar. Don't blame
I don't see much similarity between mirroring and raidz other than
that they both support redundancy.
A single parity device against a single data device is, in essence, mirroring.
For all intents and purposes, raid and mirroring with this configuration are
one and the same.
A RAID system
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Martin wrote:
I don't see much similarity between mirroring and raidz other than
that they both support redundancy.
A single parity device against a single data device is, in essence,
mirroring. For all intents and purposes, raid and mirroring with
this configuration
dick hoogendijk wrote:
true. Furthermore, much so-called consumer hardware is very good these
days. My guess is ZFS should work quite reliably on that hardware.
(i.e. non ECC memory should work fine!) / mirroring is a -must- !
No, ECC memory is a must too. ZFS checksumming verifies and
On Jul 19, 2009, at 20:13, Gavin Maltby wrote:
No, ECC memory is a must too. ZFS checksumming verifies and corrects
data read back from a disk, but once it is read from disk it is
stashed
in memory for your application to use - without ECC you erode
confidence that
what you read from
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, David Magda wrote:
Right, because once (say) Apple incorporates ZFS into Mac OS X
they'll also start shipping MacBooks and iMacs with ECC. If it's so
necessary we might as well have any kernel that has ZFS in it only
allow 'zpool create' to be run if the kernel detects
Pardon me but I had to change subject lines just to get out of that other
thread.
In that other thread .. you were saying :
dick hoogendijk uttered:
true. Furthermore, much so-called consumer hardware is very good these
days. My guess is ZFS should work quite reliably on that hardware.
self replies are so degrading ( pun intended )
I see this patch :
Document Audience: PUBLIC
Document ID:139555-08
Title: SunOS 5.10: Kernel Patch
Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2009 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
Update Date:Fri Jul 10 04:29:40 MDT 2009
I have a
In response to:
I don't see much similarity between mirroring and raidz other than
that they both support redundancy.
Martin wrote:
A single parity device against a single data device is, in essence, mirroring.
For all intents and purposes, raid and mirroring with this configuration are
one
Hi,
David Magda wrote:
On Jul 19, 2009, at 20:13, Gavin Maltby wrote:
No, ECC memory is a must too. ZFS checksumming verifies and corrects
data read back from a disk, but once it is read from disk it is stashed
in memory for your application to use - without ECC you erode
confidence that
i'm pretty sure you're just looking for the zfs rollback command.
a quick google brings up a lot of information and also man zfs
check out this page
http://docs.huihoo.com/opensolaris/solaris-zfs-administration-guide/html/ch06.html
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Brian Wilson
Gavin Maltby wrote:
Hi,
David Magda wrote:
On Jul 19, 2009, at 20:13, Gavin Maltby wrote:
No, ECC memory is a must too. ZFS checksumming verifies and corrects
data read back from a disk, but once it is read from disk it is stashed
in memory for your application to use - without ECC you
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Richard Elling wrote:
I do, even though I have a small business. Neither InDesign nor
Illustrator will be ported to Linux or OpenSolaris in my lifetime...
besides, iTunes rocks and it is the best iPhone developer's environment
on the planet.
Richard,
I think the point
Thomas Burgess wrote:
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Brian Wilson bfwil...@doit.wisc.edu
mailto:bfwil...@doit.wisc.edu wrote:
It's clear from some threads on this list that it IS possible to
roll back a zpool to a previous state, and I seem to even remember
reading someone was
I don't know the details Brian, so I was waiting to see if anybody remembered
more, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
There is a way to roll back pools, Victor has been very helpful to several
people, and in one of the threads where he managed to recover the pool, he
posted a writeup of
37 matches
Mail list logo
