Re: [zfs-discuss] Suggested RaidZ configuration...

2010-09-07 Thread hatish
Thanks for all the replies :) My mindset is split in two now... Some detail - I'm using 4 1-to-5 Sata Port multipliers connected to a 4-port SATA raid card. I only need reliability and size, as long as my performance is the equivalent of one drive, Im happy. Im assuming all the data used in

Re: [zfs-discuss] onnv_142 - vfs_mountroot: cannot mount root

2010-09-07 Thread Mark J Musante
Did you run installgrub before rebooting? On Tue, 7 Sep 2010, Piotr Jasiukajtis wrote: Hi, After upgrade from snv_138 to snv_142 or snv_145 I'm unable to boot the system. Here is what I get. Any idea why it's not able to import rpool? I saw this issue also on older builds on a different

Re: [zfs-discuss] onnv_142 - vfs_mountroot: cannot mount root

2010-09-07 Thread Victor Latushkin
On 07.09.10 17:26, Piotr Jasiukajtis wrote: Hi, After upgrade from snv_138 to snv_142 or snv_145 I'm unable to boot the system. Here is what I get. Any idea why it's not able to import rpool? Provided output tells that it was able to read device labels, construct configuration and add it

Re: [zfs-discuss] Suggested RaidZ configuration...

2010-09-07 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of hatish I have just read the Best Practices guide, and it says your group shouldnt have 9 disks. I think the value you can take from this is: Why does the BPG say that? What is the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Suggested RaidZ configuration...

2010-09-07 Thread LaoTsao 老曹
may be 5x(3+1) use one disk from each controller, 15TB usable space, 3+1 raidz rebuild time should be reasonable On 9/7/2010 4:40 AM, hatish wrote: Thanks for all the replies :) My mindset is split in two now... Some detail - I'm using 4 1-to-5 Sata Port multipliers connected to a 4-port

[zfs-discuss] zpool create using whole disk - do I add p0? E.g. c4t2d0 or c42d0p0

2010-09-07 Thread Craig Stevenson
I have seen conflicting examples on how to create zpools using full disks. The zpool(1M) page uses c0t0d0 but OpenSolaris Bible and others show c0t0d0p0. E.g.: zpool create tank raidz c0t0d0 c0t1d0 c0t2d0 c0t3d0 c0t4d0 c0t5d0 zpool create tank raidz c0t0d0p0 c0t1d0p0 c0t2d0p0 c0t3d0p0

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool create using whole disk - do I add p0? E.g. c4t2d0 or c42d0p0

2010-09-07 Thread Cindy Swearingen
Hi Craig, D'oh. I kept wondering where those p0 examples were coming from. Don't use the p* devices for your storage pools. They represent the larger fdisk partition. Use the d* devices instead, like this example below: zpool create tank raidz c0t0d0 c0t1d0 c0t2d0 c0t3d0 c0t4d0 c0t5d0

[zfs-discuss] Configuration questions for Home File Server (CPU cores, dedup, checksum)?

2010-09-07 Thread Craig Stevenson
I am working on a home file server. After reading a wide range of blogs and forums, I have a few questions that are still not clear to me 1. Is there a benefit in having quad core CPU (e.g. Athlon II X4 vs X2)? All of the web blogs seem to suggest using lower-wattage dual core CPUs. But;

Re: [zfs-discuss] Configuration questions for Home File Server (CPU cores, dedup, checksum)?

2010-09-07 Thread Cindy Swearingen
Craig, I'm sure the other home file server users will comment on your gear and any possible benefit of a L2ARC or separate log device... Use the default checksum which is fletcher4, I fixed the tuning guide reference, skip dedup for now. Keep things as simple as possible. Thanks, Cindy On

Re: [zfs-discuss] Configuration questions for Home File Server (CPU cores, dedup, checksum)?

2010-09-07 Thread Russ Price
On 09/07/2010 03:58 PM, Craig Stevenson wrote: I am working on a home file server. After reading a wide range of blogs and forums, I have a few questions that are still not clear to me 1. Is there a benefit in having quad core CPU (e.g. Athlon II X4 vs X2)? All of the web blogs seem to

Re: [zfs-discuss] Configuration questions for Home File Server (CPU cores, dedup, checksum)?

2010-09-07 Thread Eric D. Mudama
On Tue, Sep 7 at 17:13, Russ Price wrote: On 09/07/2010 03:58 PM, Craig Stevenson wrote: I am working on a home file server. After reading a wide range of blogs and forums, I have a few questions that are still not clear to me 1. Is there a benefit in having quad core CPU (e.g. Athlon

Re: [zfs-discuss] Configuration questions for Home File Server (CPU cores, dedup, checksum)?

2010-09-07 Thread Scott Meilicke
Craig, 3. I do not think you will get much dedupe on video, music and photos. I would not bother. If you really wanted to know at some later stage, you could create a new file system, enable dedupe, and copy your data (or a subset) into it just to see. In my experience there is a significant

Re: [zfs-discuss] iSCSI targets mapped to a VMWare ESX server

2010-09-07 Thread Alex Fler
check fler.us Solaris 10 iSCSI Target for Vmware ESX -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Configuration questions for Home File Server (CPU cores, dedup, checksum)?

2010-09-07 Thread Russ Price
On 09/07/2010 05:58 PM, Eric D. Mudama wrote: How are you measuring using 60% across all four cores? I kicked off a scrub just to see, and we're scrubbing at 200MB/s (2 vdevs) and the CPU is 94% idle, 6% kernel, 0% IOWAIT. zpool-tank is using 3.2% CPU as shown by 'ps aux | grep tank'

Re: [zfs-discuss] Suggested RaidZ configuration...

2010-09-07 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Edward Ned Harvey sh...@nedharvey.com wrote: I think the value you can take from this is: Why does the BPG say that?  What is the reasoning behind it? Anything that is a rule of thumb either has reasoning behind it (you should know the reasoning) or it