Hello Eric,
Wednesday, July 18, 2007, 7:18:44 PM, you wrote:
ES> Robert -
ES> This is covered by PSARC 2007/342 and is currently in development.
ES> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2007/342/
Great! Thanks for info.
--
Best regards,
Robertmail
Hello Joel,
Tuesday, June 26, 2007, 10:13:54 PM, you wrote:
JM> Hi folks,
JM> So the expansion unit for the 2500 series is the 2501.
JM> The back-end drive channels are SAS.
JM> Currently it is not "supported" to connect a 2501 directly to a SAS HBA.
But does it work? Has anyone actually teste
Hello David,
Saturday, July 14, 2007, 2:01:23 AM, you wrote:
DS> Well, the zfs receive process finally died, and now my zfs list works just
fine.
DS> If there is a better way to capture what is going on, please let
DS> me know and I can duplicate the hang.
I can observer similar things from t
.
Eventually just run 'savecore path_to_dir' where path_to_dir is a
path to a directory with enough free space.
Of course assuming you haven't touch swap device up-to this time.
--
Best regards,
Robert Milkowski mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
think?
--
Best regards,
Robert Milkowskimailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://milek.blogspot.com
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinf
Hello Louwtjie,
Tuesday, July 17, 2007, 10:20:03 AM, you wrote:
LB> Hi
LB> What is the general feeling for production readiness when it comes to:
LB> ZFS
LB> Oracle 10G R2
LB> 6140-type storage
LB> OLTP workloads
LB> 1-3TB sizes
LB> Running UFS with directio is stable, fast and one can sleep a
Hello zfs-discuss,
root@ # uname -a
SunOS XXX 5.10 Generic_125100-07 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-880 Solaris
root@ #
root@ # zpool status
pool: zones
state: ONLINE
status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data
corruption. Applications may be affected.
action:
Hello Magesh,
Monday, July 2, 2007, 4:12:11 PM, you wrote:
MR> We are looking at the alternatives to VXVM/VXFS. One of the
MR> feature which we liked in Veritas, apart from the obvious ones is
MR> the ability to call the disks by name and group them in to a disk group.
MR> Especially in SAN base
Hello James,
Friday, June 15, 2007, 3:40:29 PM, you wrote:
JL> Customer asks:
JL> Will SunCluster 3.2 support ZFS zpool created with MPxIO devices instead
JL> of the corresponding DID devices?
Works perfectly.
btw: you don't have to use DID devices with ZFS.
JL> Will it cause any support issu
Hello Bruno,
Wednesday, June 13, 2007, 3:45:07 PM, you wrote:
BB> Hello,
BB> as the president of the french OSUG [1], I'll give a talk about
BB> ZFS and zones at RMLL [2] (libre software meeting) and I have few
BB> questions about Jeff Bonwick's slides [3], especially for slide 11.
BB> I just w
Hello James,
Wednesday, June 13, 2007, 1:06:22 PM, you wrote:
JCM> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello Louwtjie,
>>
>> Monday, June 4, 2007, 9:14:26 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> LB> On 5/30/07, James C. McPherson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> Louwt
Hello Louwtjie,
Monday, June 4, 2007, 9:14:26 AM, you wrote:
LB> On 5/30/07, James C. McPherson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Louwtjie Burger wrote:
>> > I know the above mentioned kit (2530) is new, but has anybody tried a
>> > direct attached SAS setup using zfs? (and the Sun SG-XPCIESAS-E-Z
>>
Hello Jürgen,
Monday, June 4, 2007, 7:09:59 PM, you wrote:
>> > Patching zfs_prefetch_disable = 1 has helped
>> It's my belief this mainly aids scanning metadata. my
>> testing with rsync and yours with find (and seen with
>> du & ; zpool iostat -v 1 ) pans this out..
>> mainly tracked in bug 643
Hello Richard,
Thursday, May 31, 2007, 10:59:04 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> Having 2 cards would certainly make the "unlikely replacement" of a card
>> a LOT more straight-forward than a single-card failure... Much of this
>> would depend on the quality of these CF-cards and how they put up under
>> loa
Hello Richard,
RE> But I am curious as to why you believe 2x CF are necessary?
RE> I presume this is so that you can mirror. But the remaining memory
RE> in such systems is not mirrored. Comments and experiences are welcome.
I was thinking about mirroring - it's not clear from the comment abov
Hello Richard,
Thursday, May 24, 2007, 6:10:34 PM, you wrote:
RE> Incidentally, thumper field reliability is better than we expected. This
is causing
RE> me to do extra work, because I have to explain why.
I've got some thumpers and there're very reliable.
Even disks aren't failing that much
Hello Grant,
Friday, May 25, 2007, 6:54:04 PM, you wrote:
>> It would also be worthwhile doing something like the
>> following to
>> determine the max throughput the H/W RAID is giving
>> you:
>> # time dd of= if=/dev/zero bs=1048576
>> count=1000
>> or a 2Gbps 6140 with 300GB/10K drives, we get
Hello Michael,
Sunday, May 27, 2007, 5:13:39 AM, you wrote:
MB> Does ZFS handle a file system full situation any better than UFS? I had
MB> a ZFS file system run at 100% full for a few days, deleted out the
MB> offending files to bring it back down to 75% full, and now in certain
MB> directorie
Hello Phillip,
Monday, May 21, 2007, 10:50:01 PM, you wrote:
PF> When will Sun have "global hot spare" capability?
There's - I mean you can add the same hot spares to different zpools.
--
Best regards,
Robertmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Henk,
Friday, May 18, 2007, 12:09:40 AM, you wrote:
>> If I understand correctly, then the parity block for RAID-Z are also
>> written in two different atomic operations. As per RAID-5. (the only
>> difference being each can be of a different stripe size).
HL> As with Raid-5 on a four
) to be used by the server in a multi-disk zfs pool?
see above
Personally I would go with ZFS entirely in most cases.
--
Best regards,
Robert Milkowski mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://milek.blogspot.com
_
Hello Bart,
Wednesday, May 16, 2007, 6:07:36 PM, you wrote:
BS> Bill Moloney wrote:
>> for example, doing sequential 1MB writes to a
>> previously written) zvol (simple catenation of 5
>> FC drives in a JBOD) and writing 2GB of data induced
>> more than 4GB of IO to the drives (with smaller w
Hello Pal,
Friday, May 11, 2007, 6:41:41 PM, you wrote:
PB> Note! You can't even regret what you have added to a pool. Being
PB> able to evacuate a vdev and replace it by a bigger one would have
PB> helped. But this isn't possible either (currently).
Actually you can. See 'zpool replace'.
So yo
Hello James,
Thursday, May 10, 2007, 11:12:57 PM, you wrote:
>
zfs will interpret zero'd sectors as holes, so wont really write them to disk, they just adjust the file size accordingly.
It does that only with compression turned on.
--
Best regards,
Robert
Hello Gino,
Monday, May 14, 2007, 4:07:31 PM, you wrote:
G> We are using a lot of EMC DAE2. Works well with ZFS.
Without head units?
Dual-pathed connections to hosts + MPxIO?
--
Best regards,
Robertmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
h
Hello Matthew,
Friday, May 11, 2007, 7:04:06 AM, you wrote:
Check in your script (df -h?) if s6 isn't mounted anyway...
--
Best regards,
Robertmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://milek.blogspot.com
___
Hello Victor,
Thursday, May 10, 2007, 11:26:35 AM, you wrote:
VL> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello Leon,
>>
>> Thursday, May 10, 2007, 10:43:27 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> LM> Hello,
>>
>> LM> I've got some weird problem: ZFS does not seem t
Hello Leon,
Thursday, May 10, 2007, 10:43:27 AM, you wrote:
LM> Hello,
LM> I've got some weird problem: ZFS does not seem to be utilizing
LM> all disks in my pool properly. For some reason, it's only using 2 of the 3
disks in my pool:
LM>capacity operationsbandwidth
LM>
Hello Michael,
Tuesday, May 8, 2007, 9:20:56 PM, you wrote:
>> Probably RAID-Z as you don't have enough disks to be interesting for doing
>> 1+0.
>> Paul
MC> How do you configure ZFS RAID 1+0 ?
MC> Will next lines do that right? :
MC> [b]zpool create -f zfs_raid1 mirror c0t1d0 c1t1d0
MC> zpool
Hello Richard,
Wednesday, May 9, 2007, 9:10:22 PM, you wrote:
RE> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello Mario,
>>
>> Wednesday, May 9, 2007, 5:56:18 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> MG> I've read that it's supposed to go at full speed, i.e. as fast as
>> M
Hello Anantha,
Wednesday, May 9, 2007, 4:45:10 PM, you wrote:
ANS> For whatever reason EMC notes (on PowerLink) suggest that ZFS is
ANS> not supported on their arrays. If one is going to use a ZFS
ANS> filesystem on top of a EMC array be warned about support issues.
Nope. For a couple of months
Hello Mario,
Wednesday, May 9, 2007, 5:56:18 PM, you wrote:
MG> I've read that it's supposed to go at full speed, i.e. as fast as
MG> possible. I'm doing a disk replace and what zpool reports kind of
MG> surprises me. The resilver goes on at 1.6MB/s. Did resilvering get
MG> throttled at some poin
Hi.
bash-3.00# uname -a
SunOS 5.10 Generic_125101-04 i86pc i386 i86pc
Server is x4100.
NFS server under Sun Cluster with ZFS.
I issued 'zpool import' to see other pool available to import on one node and
then I got very slow nfs access to that node, nfsd go upto ~3500 threads (from
~500)
Hello Claus,
Saturday, April 28, 2007, 4:27:58 PM, you wrote:
CG> Speaking of backup-software. I heard that legato supports zfs but is
CG> anyone using zfs and legato or some other backup-software that can
CG> handle multi-TB-file systems (in production)?
Legato+ZFS works here in production.
-
Hello Ian,
Thursday, May 3, 2007, 10:20:20 PM, you wrote:
IC> Roch Bourbonnais wrote:
>>
>> with recent bits ZFS compression is now handled concurrently with many
>> CPUs working on different records.
>> So this load will burn more CPUs and acheive it's results
>> (compression) faster.
>>
IC> Wou
Hello Matthew,
Tuesday, May 8, 2007, 1:04:56 AM, you wrote:
MA> Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>> This is what I see on Solaris (hole is 4GB):
>>
>> # /usr/bin/time dd if=/ufs/hole of=/dev/null bs=128k
>> real 23.7
>> # /usr/bin/time dd if=/zfs/hole of=/dev/null bs=128k
>>
Hello Darren,
Saturday, April 28, 2007, 1:03:00 AM, you wrote:
DD> Also, in-pool metadata should be redundant (via ditto blocks). Errors
DD> in such data can be detected and repaired during a scrub.
DD> Because of ditto blocks, the in-pool metadata is duplicated (or
DD> triplicated). Since y
Hello Cindy,
Friday, April 27, 2007, 1:28:05 AM, you wrote:
CSSC> Hi Robert,
CSSC> I just want to be clear that you can't just remove a disk from an
CSSC> exported pool without penalty upon import:
CSSC> - If the underlying redundancy of the original pool doesn't support
CSSC> it and you lose d
Hello Cindy,
Thursday, April 26, 2007, 8:57:54 PM, you wrote:
CSSC> Nenad,
CSSC> I've seen this solution offered before, but I would not recommend this
CSSC> except as a last resort, unless you didn't care about the health of
CSSC> the original pool.
CSSC> Removing a device from an exported poo
Hello Wee,
Thursday, April 26, 2007, 4:21:00 PM, you wrote:
WYT> On 4/26/07, cedric briner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> okay let'say that it is not. :)
>> Imagine that I setup a box:
>> - with Solaris
>> - with many HDs (directly attached).
>> - use ZFS as the FS
>> - export the Data wit
Hello Roch,
Thursday, April 26, 2007, 12:33:00 PM, you wrote:
RP> Robert Milkowski writes:
>> Hello Brian,
>>
>> Thursday, April 26, 2007, 3:55:16 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> BG> If I recall, the dump partition needed to be at least as large as RAM.
>>
Hello Ron,
Tuesday, April 24, 2007, 4:54:52 PM, you wrote:
RH> Thanks Robert. This will be put to use.
Please let us know about the results.
--
Best regards,
Robertmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://milek.blogspot.com
__
Hello Brian,
Thursday, April 26, 2007, 3:55:16 AM, you wrote:
BG> If I recall, the dump partition needed to be at least as large as RAM.
BG> In Solaris 8(?) this changed, in that crashdumps streans were
BG> compressed as they were written out to disk. Although I've never read
BG> this anywhere,
Hello eric,
Tuesday, April 24, 2007, 1:29:32 AM, you wrote:
ek> On Apr 20, 2007, at 7:54 AM, Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello eric,
>>
>> Friday, April 20, 2007, 4:01:46 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> ek> On Apr 18, 2007, at 9:33 PM, Robert Milkowski wrote:
>>
&g
Hello zfs-discuss,
http://milek.blogspot.com/2007/04/hw-raid-vs-zfs-software-raid-part-iii.html
--
Best regards,
Robert Milkowskimailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://milek.blogspot.com
___
zfs
Hello Robert,
Tuesday, April 24, 2007, 4:59:31 PM, you wrote:
RM> Hello Darren,
RM> Tuesday, April 24, 2007, 3:33:47 PM, you wrote:
DJM>> With reference to Lori's blog posting[1] I'd like to throw out a few of
DJM>> my thoughts on spliting up the namespace.
DJM>> This is quite timely because o
Hello Darren,
Tuesday, April 24, 2007, 3:33:47 PM, you wrote:
DJM> With reference to Lori's blog posting[1] I'd like to throw out a few of
DJM> my thoughts on spliting up the namespace.
DJM> This is quite timely because only yesterday when I was updating the ZFS
DJM> crypto document I was thinki
Hello Ron,
Tuesday, April 24, 2007, 4:20:41 PM, you wrote:
RH> Robert,
RH> How do you set bshift to ^13 (8K)? Is there a document describing the
procedure?
In latest nevada you can set it via /etc/system like:
set zfs:zfs_vdev_cache_bshift=13
(2^13 is 8K).
In older releases or in S10U2/U
Hello Robert,
Monday, April 23, 2007, 11:12:39 PM, you wrote:
RM> Hello Robert,
RM> Monday, April 23, 2007, 10:44:00 PM, you wrote:
RM>> Hello Peter,
RM>> Monday, April 23, 2007, 9:27:56 PM, you wrote:
PT>>> On 4/23/07, Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello Robert,
Monday, April 23, 2007, 10:44:00 PM, you wrote:
RM> Hello Peter,
RM> Monday, April 23, 2007, 9:27:56 PM, you wrote:
PT>> On 4/23/07, Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Relatively low traffic to the pool but sync takes too long
Hello Eric,
Monday, April 23, 2007, 7:13:26 PM, you wrote:
ES> On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 10:10:23AM -0700, Ron Halstead wrote:
>> What is the status of bug 6437054? The bug tracker still shows it open.
>>
>> Ron
ES> Do you mean:
ES> 6437054 vdev_cache: wise up or die
ES> This bug is still under
Hello Darren,
Monday, April 23, 2007, 9:14:35 PM, you wrote:
DRSC> The environment that it is running in has less memory than I've used
DRSC> it on with Solaris before, so I went to look at how to tune the ARC,
DRSC> only to discover that it had already been capped to roughly half the
DRSC> size
Hello Robert,
Monday, April 23, 2007, 1:20:28 AM, you wrote:
RM> Hello zfs-discuss,
RM> bash-3.00# uname -a
RM> SunOS nfs-10-1.srv 5.10 Generic_125100-04 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-V440
RM> zil_disable set to 1
RM> Disks are over FCAL from 3510.
RM> bash-3.00# dtrace -n
RM> fbt::*SYNCHRONIZE*:e
Hello Peter,
Monday, April 23, 2007, 9:27:56 PM, you wrote:
PT> On 4/23/07, Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Relatively low traffic to the pool but sync takes too long to complete
>> and other operations are also not that fast.
>>
>>
Hello shay,
Monday, April 23, 2007, 10:14:31 AM, you wrote:
s> I want to configure my zfs like this :
s> concatination_stripe_pool :
s>concatination
s> lun0_controller0
s> lun1_controller0
s> concatination
s> lun2_controller1
s> lun3_controller1
s> 1. There is any
Hello Manoj,
Monday, April 23, 2007, 5:58:43 AM, you wrote:
MJ> Wee Yeh Tan wrote:
>> On 4/23/07, Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> bash-3.00# mdb -k
>>> Loading modules: [ unix krtld genunix dtrace specfs ufs sd pcisch md
>>> ip sctp us
Hello zfs-discuss,
Relatively low traffic to the pool but sync takes too long to complete
and other operations are also not that fast.
Disks are on 3510 array. zil_disable=1.
bash-3.00# ptime sync
real 1:21.569
user0.001
sys 0.027
During sync zpool iostat and vmstat loo
Hello Robert,
Friday, April 13, 2007, 2:07:11 AM, you wrote:
RM> Hello Enda,
RM> Thursday, April 12, 2007, 2:36:39 PM, you wrote:
EOCSMSI>> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>>> Hello Enda,
>>>
>>> Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 4:21:35 PM, you wrote:
>>>
Hello Wee,
Sunday, April 22, 2007, 11:25:23 AM, you wrote:
WYT> On 4/20/07, Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hello Wee,
>>
>> Friday, April 20, 2007, 5:20:00 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> WYT> On 4/20/07, Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello zfs-discuss,
bash-3.00# uname -a
SunOS nfs-10-1.srv 5.10 Generic_125100-04 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-V440
zil_disable set to 1
Disks are over FCAL from 3510.
bash-3.00# dtrace -n fbt::*SYNCHRONIZE*:entry'{printf("%Y",walltimestamp);}'
dtrace: description 'fbt::*SYNCHRONIZE*:entry' matched
Hello Robert,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 4:54:33 PM, you wrote:
RM> Perhaps fsinfo::: could help but it's not on current s10 - I hope it
RM> will be in U4 as it looks that it works with zfs (without manually
RM> looking into vnodes, etc.):
Well, it's already in s10! (122641)
I missed that... :)
-
Hello eric,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 4:01:46 PM, you wrote:
ek> On Apr 18, 2007, at 9:33 PM, Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello Robert,
>>
>> Thursday, April 19, 2007, 1:57:38 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> RM> Hello nfs-discuss,
>>
>> RM> Does
Hello eric,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 3:36:20 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> Has an analysis of most common storage system been done on how they
>> treat SYNC_NV bit and if any additional tweaking is needed? Would such
>> analysis be publicly available?
>>
ek> I am not aware of any analysis and would love t
Hello Anton,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 3:54:52 PM, you wrote:
ABR> To clarify, there are at least two issues with remote
ABR> replication vs. backups in my mind. (Feel free to joke about the state of
my mind! ;-)
ABR> The first, which as you point out can be alleviated with
ABR> snapshots, is th
Hello Anton,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 9:02:12 AM, you wrote:
>> Initially I wanted a way to do a dump to tape like ufsdump. I
>> don't know if this makes sense anymore because the tape market is
>> crashing slowly.
ABR> It makes sense if you need to keep backups for more than a
ABR> handful of
Hello George,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 7:37:52 AM, you wrote:
GW> This is a high priority for us and is actively being worked.
GW> Vague enough for you. :-) Sorry I can't give you anything more exact
GW> that that.
Can you at least give us feature list being developed?
Some answers to question
Hello Wee,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 5:20:00 AM, you wrote:
WYT> On 4/20/07, Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You can limit how much memory zfs can use for its caching.
>>
WYT> Indeed, but that memory will still be locked. How can you tell the
WYT> syste
Hello Wee,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 4:50:08 AM, you wrote:
WYT> Hi Tim,
WYT> I run a setup of SAM-FS for our main file server and we loved the
WYT> backup/restore parts that you described.
WYT> The main concerns I have with SAM fronting the entire conversation is
WYT> data integrity. Unlike ZFS
Hello Frank,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 4:50:07 AM, you wrote:
FC> On April 19, 2007 4:45:20 PM -0700 Marion Hakanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
FC> wrote:
>> - VTrak can take SATA disks; ST-2500 lists only 15k rpm SAS disks.
FC> I'd be surprised (and disappointed) if the 2500 can't accept a SATA disk.
providing
VMware and/or Xen image with guest OS being snv_62 with / as zfs.
This should allow people to just download such image and run snv_62
with zfs as rootfs without all the hassle there's right now to set it
up.
--
Best regards,
Robert Milkowski
Hello James,
Friday, April 20, 2007, 12:53:04 AM, you wrote:
JCM> Robert Milkowski wrote:
JCM> ...
>> RE> multi-path support is coming later (sorry, I don't know the details)
>>
>> MPxIO for SAS went into b63 - see
>> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/c
Hello Richard,
Thursday, April 19, 2007, 10:41:58 PM, you wrote:
RE> Marion Hakanson wrote:
>> In looking for inexpensive JBOD and/or RAID solutions to use with ZFS, I've
>> run across the recent "VTrak" SAS/SATA systems from Promise Technologies,
>> specifically their E-class and J-class series:
Hello Nicolas,
Wednesday, April 18, 2007, 10:12:17 PM, you wrote:
NW> On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 03:47:55PM -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> Maybe with a definition of what a "backup" is and then some way to
>> achieve it. As far as I know the only real backup is one that can be
>> tossed into a vault
e on some of your multi-tera volumes (is 10K a small file? is 100K? 1K?)
I'm afraid I can't :(
But I can say that to me anything below 512KB is a small file (starting from few bytes).
Also a file size distribution is such that I have mostly small files and large files, the res
Hello Tim,
Thursday, April 19, 2007, 10:32:53 AM, you wrote:
TT> Hi
TT> This is a bit off topic...but as Bill mentioned SAM-FS...my job at Sun
TT> is working in a group focused on ISV's in the archiving space (Symantec
TT> Enterprise Vault, Open Text LEA, CA Message Manager, FileNet, Mobius,
T
Hello eric,
Wednesday, April 18, 2007, 10:53:59 PM, you wrote:
ek> On Apr 18, 2007, at 2:35 AM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
>> Well, no; his quote did say "software or hardware". The theory is
>> apparently
>> that ZFS can do better at detecting (and with redundancy,
>> correcting) errors
>>
Hello Spencer,
Thursday, April 19, 2007, 2:28:30 AM, you wrote:
SS> On Apr 18, 2007, at 6:44 PM, Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello Carson,
>>
>> Thursday, April 19, 2007, 1:22:17 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> CG> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>>
>>>> W
Hello Carson,
Thursday, April 19, 2007, 1:22:17 AM, you wrote:
CG> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> We did some tests with Linux (2.4 and 2.6) and it seems there's a
>> problem if you have thousands of nfs file systems - they won't all be
>> mounted automatically, and
s serving another
nfs rg group, keep in mind that nfsd will actually restart which means
service distraction for that other group also. With zfs stopping nfsd
can sometimes take even minutes...
There are more things also to consider (storage layout, network
config,
Hello Simon,
Wednesday, April 18, 2007, 11:26:39 AM, you wrote:
S> It seems that only with the "script",no "dbca" GUI tool,the oracle
S> data file can be kept on the zfs volumes.
S> Any comments on this.
You had the same problems without using zfs so I assume it's not zfs
specific.
--
Best re
and use zfs solely as a file system.
In case when doing raid in HW and using zfs as a file system I would
recommend always exposing 3 luns or more (or at least 2) and then do a
dynamic striping on zfs side. Of course those luns should be on
different physical disks. That way you should have a bette
Hello Dan,
Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 10:59:53 PM, you wrote:
DM> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello Dan,
>>
>> Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 9:44:45 PM, you wrote:
>>
>>>>> How can this work? With compressed data, its hard to predict its
>>>>>
Hello Dan,
Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 9:44:45 PM, you wrote:
>>> How can this work? With compressed data, its hard to predict its
>>> final size before compression.
>>
>> Because you are NOT compressing the file only compressing the blocks as
>> they get written to disk.
DM> I guess this impl
Hello Ricardo,
Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 10:15:33 PM, you wrote:
RC> Hi,
RC> The following FAQ entry seems to be outdated or at least misleading:
RC> http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/faq/#zfspanic
RC> I believe this has been fixed since the introduction of ditto blocks,
RC> which keeps re
Hello Toby,
Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 3:39:39 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> It seems that there are other reasons for the Linux kernel folks
>> for not
>> liking ZFS.
TT> I certainly don't understand why they ignore it.
TT> How can one have a "Storage and File Systems Workshop" in 2007
TT> without ZF
Hello Rayson,
Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 10:50:41 AM, you wrote:
RH> On 4/17/07, David R. Litwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > How about asking Microsoft to change Shared Source first??
>>
>> Let's leave ms out of this, eh? :-)
RH> While ZFS is nice, I don't think it is a must for most desktop u
Hello tester,
Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 11:09:34 AM, you wrote:
t> The paragraph below is from ZFS admin guide
t> Traditional Volume Management
t> As described in “ZFS Pooled Storage” on page 18, ZFS eliminates the need for
a separate volume
t> manager. ZFS operates on raw devices, so it is poss
Hello tester,
Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 10:46:52 AM, you wrote:
t> Hi,
t> I would like to know what changes are made to the storage
t> disk/lun/slice when it is added to a zfs pool? I am trying to
t> relate to VxVM where the VTOC is changed. In otherwords, is there
t> way to know if storage is p
Hello Tony,
Monday, April 16, 2007, 7:10:41 PM, you wrote:
>
I had previously undertaken a benchmark that pits “out of box” performance of UFS via SVM, VxFS and ZFS but was waylaid due to some outstanding availability issues in ZFS. These have been taken care of, and I am once again unde
Hello Krzys,
Sunday, April 15, 2007, 4:53:43 AM, you wrote:
K> Strange thing, I did try to do zfs send/receive using zfs.
K> On the from host I did the following:
K> bash-3.00# zfs send mypool/zones/[EMAIL PROTECTED] | ssh 10.0.2.79 zfs
receive
K> mypool/zones/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K> Password:
K
Hello Toby,
Friday, April 13, 2007, 3:06:44 PM, you wrote:
TT> On 13-Apr-07, at 9:51 AM, Al Hopper wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007, Toby Thain wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 12-Apr-07, at 11:51 PM, Rich Teer wrote:
>>>
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Toby Thain wrote:
> Those who promulgate the tag for w
Hello Rich,
Friday, April 13, 2007, 4:39:03 PM, you wrote:
RT> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007, Toby Thain wrote:
>> IMHO, this is a faulty conclusion.
RT> And I disagree. So we'll have to agree to disagree.
>> The interesting use case of "contributing", and I think the one that spurred
>> the creation o
Hello Wade,
Thursday, April 12, 2007, 11:55:49 PM, you wrote:
WSfc> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/12/2007 04:47:06 PM:
>> Management here is worried about performance under ZFS because they had
>> a bad experience with Instant Image a number of years ago. When iiamd
>> was used, server per
Hello Enda,
Thursday, April 12, 2007, 2:36:39 PM, you wrote:
EOCSMSI> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello Enda,
>>
>> Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 4:21:35 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> EOCSMSI> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>>>> Hello zfs-discuss,
>>>>
Hello Ignatich,
Thursday, April 12, 2007, 1:25:57 AM, you wrote:
I> Rich Teer writes:
>> On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Rayson Ho wrote:
>>
>>> Why does everyone need to be compatible with Linux?? Why not Linux
>>> changes its license and be compatible with *BSD and Solaris??
>>
>> I agree with this sen
Hello zfs-discuss,
One of a disk started to behave strangely.
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv sata: [ID 801593 kern.notice] NOTICE: /[EMAIL
PROTECTED],0/pci1022,[EMAIL PROTECTED]/pci11ab,[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv port 6: device reset
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv scsi: [ID
Hello Ignatich,
Thursday, April 12, 2007, 12:32:13 AM, you wrote:
I> Hello,
I> I believe that ZFS and it's concepts is truly revolutionary to the
I> point that I no longer see any OS as modern if it does not have
I> comparable storage functionality. Therefore I think that file
I> system/disk man
Hello Enda,
Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 4:21:35 PM, you wrote:
EOCSMSI> Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello zfs-discuss,
>>
>> In order to get IDR126199-01 I need to install 120473-05 first.
>> I can get 120473-07 but everything more than -05 is marked as
>>
Hello Darren,
Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 7:39:18 PM, you wrote:
>> > How would you access the data on that device?
>>
>> Presumably, zpool import.
>>
>> This is basically what everyone does today with mirrors, isn't it? :-)
DD> But that's not possible here because we can't deport (or import) a
Hello zfs-discuss,
In order to get IDR126199-01 I need to install 120473-05 first.
I can get 120473-07 but everything more than -05 is marked as
incompatible with IDR126199-01 so I do not want to force it.
Local Sun's support has problems with getting 120473-05 also so I'm
stuck for now
501 - 600 of 1144 matches
Mail list logo
