Dan,
loose was a typo. I meant lose. Interesting how a typo (write error) can
cause a lot of confusion on what exactly I mean :) Resulting in corrupted
interpretation.
Note that my idea/proposal is targeted for a growing number of home users. To
those, value for money usually is a much more
I have a machine whose purpose is to be a backup server. It has a
pool for holding backups from other machines, using zfs send|recv.
Call the pool dpool. Inside there are datasets for hostname/poolname,
for each of the received pools. All hosts have an rpool, some have
other pools as well. So
Ugh! If you received a direct response to me instead of via the list,
apologies for
that.
Rob:
I'm just reporting the news. The RFE is out there. Just like SLOGs, I
happen to
think it a good idea, personally, but that's my personal opinion. If it
makes dedup
more usable, I don't see the
On 16/02/2010 23:59, Christo Kutrovsky wrote:
Robert,
That would be pretty cool especially if it makes into the 2010.02 release. I
hope there are no weird special cases that pop-up from this improvement.
I'm pretty sure it won't make 2010.03
Regarding workaround.
That's not my
At the moment is just one pool with a plan to add the 500gb drives... What
would be recommend?
-Original Message-
From: Brandon High bh...@freaks.com
Sent: 17 February 2010 01:00
To: Tiernan OToole lsmart...@gmail.com
Cc: Robert Milkowski mi...@task.gda.pl; zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Daniel Carosone wrote:
These small numbers just tell you to be more worried about defending
against the other stuff.
Let's not forget that the most common cause of data loss is human
error!
Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us,
On Wed, February 17, 2010 03:35, Daniel Carosone wrote:
I'd be happy enough if none of these was mounted, but annoyingly in
this case, the canmount property is not inheritable, so I can't just
set this somewhere near the top and be done. My workaround so far:
# zfs list -t filesystem -o
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Marty Scholes wrote:
Bob, the vast majority of your post I agree with. At the same time, I might
disagree with a couple of things.
I don't really care how long a resilver takes (hours, days, months) given a
couple things:
* Sufficient protection exists on the degraded
ck == Christo Kutrovsky kutrov...@pythian.com writes:
ck I could always put copies=2 (or more) to my important
ck datasets and take some risk and tolerate such a failure.
copies=2 has proven to be mostly useless in practice.
If there were a real-world device that tended to randomly
k == Khyron khyron4...@gmail.com writes:
k The RFE is out there. Just like SLOGs, I happen to think it a
k good idea, personally, but that's my personal opinion. If it
k makes dedup more usable, I don't see the harm.
slogs and l2arcs, modulo the current longstanding ``cannot
Is there anyway to assign a unique name or id to a disk part of a zpool?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:31:27AM -0500, Ethan wrote:
And I just realized - yes, labels 2 and 3 are in the wrong place relative to
the end of the drive; I did not take into account the overhead taken up by
truecrypt when dd'ing the data. The raw drive is 1500301910016 bytes; the
truecrypt
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 15:22, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:31:27AM -0500, Ethan wrote:
And I just realized - yes, labels 2 and 3 are in the wrong place relative
to
the end of the drive; I did not take into account the overhead taken up
by
truecrypt
On 02/17/10 02:38 PM, Miles Nordin wrote:
copies=2 has proven to be mostly useless in practice.
Not true. Take an ancient PC with a mirrored root pool, no
bus error checking and non-ECC memory, that flawlessly
passes every known diagnostic (SMC included).
Reboot with copies=1 and the same
hello
look at format - volname
FORMAT MENU:
disk - select a disk
type - select (define) a disk type
partition - select (define) a partition table
current- describe the current disk
format - format and analyze the disk
fdisk - run the fdisk program
repair - repair a
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 03:37:59PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 15:22, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
I have not yet successfully imported. I can see two ways of making progress
forward. One is forcing zpool to attempt to import using slice 2 for each
disk rather than
I find that some servers display a DEGRADED zpool status at boot. More
troubling is that this seems to be silent and no notice is given on the
console or via a snmp message or other notification process.
Let me demonstrate :
{0} ok boot -srv
Sun Blade 2500 (Silver), No Keyboard
Copyright 2005
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 16:14, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 03:37:59PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 15:22, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
I have not yet successfully imported. I can see two ways of making
progress
forward. One is
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 16:25, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 08:14:03AM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
I think
you probably want to make a slice 0 that spans the right disk sectors.
[..]
you could try zdb -l on /dev/dsk/c...p[01234] as well.
Depending on
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Dennis Clarke wrote:
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
mercury_rpool ONLINE 0 0 0
mirror ONLINE 0 0 0
c3t0d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c1t2d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0 14.5M
Hi Dennis,
You might be running into this issue:
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6856341
The workaround is to force load the drivers.
Thanks,
Cindy
On 02/17/10 14:33, Dennis Clarke wrote:
I find that some servers display a DEGRADED zpool status at boot. More
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:48:23PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
It looks like using p0 is exactly what I want, actually. Are s2 and p0 both
the entire disk?
No. s2 depends on there being a solaris partition table (Sun or EFI),
and if there's also an fdisk partition table (disk shared with other
OS), s2
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 05:28:03PM -0500, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Good theory, however, this disk is fully external with its own power.
It can still be commanded to offline state.
--
Dan.
pgpzmziAIXUx3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
zfs-discuss
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:44:19PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
There was no partitioning on the truecrypt disks. The truecrypt volumes
occupied the whole raw disks (1500301910016 bytes each). The devices that I
gave to the zpool on linux were the whole raw devices that truecrypt exposed
(1500301647872
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 17:44, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:48:23PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
It looks like using p0 is exactly what I want, actually. Are s2 and p0
both
the entire disk?
No. s2 depends on there being a solaris partition table (Sun or EFI),
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:15:25PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
Success!
Awesome. Let that scrub finish before celebrating completely, but
this looks like a good place to stop and consider what you want for an
end state.
--
Dan.
pgph6ALkJoiw6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Feb 17, 2010, at 12:34, Richard Elling wrote:
I'm not sure how to connect those into the system (USB 3?), but when
you build it, let us
know how it works out.
FireWire 3200 preferably. Anyone know if USB 3 sucks as much CPU as
previous versions?
If I'm burning CPU on I/O I'd rather
If there were a real-world device that tended to randomly flip bits,
or randomly replace swaths of LBA's with zeroes, but otherwise behave
normally (not return any errors, not slow down retrying reads, not
fail to attach), then copies=2 would be really valuable, but so far it
seems no such
If there were a real-world device that tended to randomly flip bits,
or randomly replace swaths of LBA's with zeroes, but otherwise behave
normally (not return any errors, not slow down retrying reads, not
fail to attach), then copies=2 would be really valuable, but so far it
seems no such
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:38:04PM -0500, Miles Nordin wrote:
copies=2 has proven to be mostly useless in practice.
I disagree. Perhaps my cases fit under the weasel-word mostly, but
single-disk laptops are a pretty common use-case.
If there were a real-world device that tended to randomly
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 18:24, Daniel Carosone d...@geek.com.au wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 06:15:25PM -0500, Ethan wrote:
Success!
Awesome. Let that scrub finish before celebrating completely, but
this looks like a good place to stop and consider what you want for an
end state.
--
I have another very weird one, looks like a reoccurance of the same issue but
with the new firmware.
We have the following disks:
AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS:
0. c7t1d0 DEFAULT cyl 60797 alt 2 hd 255 sec 126
/p...@0,0/pci8086,3...@3/pci17d3,1...@0/d...@1,0
1. c7t1d1
On 2/17/2010 9:59 PM, Moshe Vainer wrote:
I have another very weird one, looks like a reoccurance of the same issue but
with the new firmware.
We have the following disks:
AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS:
0. c7t1d0DEFAULT cyl 60797 alt 2 hd 255 sec 126
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Ethan wrote:
I should have a partition table, for one thing, I suppose. The partition table
is EFI GUID Partition
Table, looking at the relevant documentation. So, I'll need to somehow shift my
zfs data down by 17408
bytes (34 512-byte LBA's, the size of the GPT's stuff
Since this seems to be a ubiquitous problem for people running ZFS, even
though it's really a general Solaris admin issue, I'm guessing the
expertise is actually here, so I'm asking here.
I found lots of online pages telling how to do it.
None of them were correct or complete. I think. I
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 23:21, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us
wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Ethan wrote:
I should have a partition table, for one thing, I suppose. The partition
table is EFI GUID Partition
Table, looking at the relevant documentation. So, I'll need to somehow
The links look fine, and i am pretty sure (though not 100%) that this is
related to the vdev id assignment. What i am not sure is whether this is still
an areca firmware issue or opensolaris issue.
ls -l /dev/dsk/c7t1d?p0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 62 2010-02-08 17:43 /dev/dsk/c7t1d0p0 -
Create a new empty pool on the solaris system, let it format the disks etc
ie used the disk names cXtXd0 This should put the EFI label on the disks and
then setup the partitions for you. Just encase here is an example.
Go back to the Linux box, and see if you can use tools to see the same
Dan,
Exactly what I meant. An allocation policy, that will help in distributing the
data in a way that when one disk is lost (entire mirror) than some data remains
fully accessible as opposed to not been able to access pieces all over the
storage pool.
--
This message posted from
Just wanted to add that I'm in the exact same boat - I'm connecting from a
Windows system and getting just horrid iSCSI transfer speeds.
I've tried updating to COMSTAR (although I'm not certain that I'm actually
using it) to no avail, and I tried updating to the latest DEV version of
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Matt registrat...@flash.shanje.com wrote:
I've got a very similar rig to the OP showing up next week (plus an
infiniband card) I'd love to get this performing up to GB Ethernet speeds,
otherwise I may have to abandon the iSCSI project if I can't get it to
...
URL:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20100217/de30929b/attachment-0001.html
--
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:59:28 PST
From: Moshe Vainer mvai...@doyenz.com
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool
No SSD Log device yet. I also tried disabling the ZIL, with no effect on
performance.
Also - what's the best way to test local performance? I'm _somewhat_ dumb as
far as opensolaris goes, so if you could provide me with an exact command line
for testing my current setup (exactly as it
Just out of curiosity - what Supermicro chassis did you get? I've got the
following items shipping to me right now, with SSD drives and 2TB main drives
coming as soon as the system boots and performs normally (using 8 extra 500GB
Barracuda ES.2 drives as test drives).
44 matches
Mail list logo
