Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> Is it possible to create a ZFS pool using a backing file created in
> xattr space?
Why would you want to do that ?
I tried but could get it to work with the CLI. However it may be
possible via the (private) libzfs function call interface.
da64-x4500b-gmp03# cd /tmp
da
Is it possible to create a ZFS pool using a backing file created in
xattr space?
Bob
==
Bob Friesenhahn
[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
___
Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
>
> Doing the same as an alternate "view" on snapshot space would be a
> simple matter of programming within ZFS, though the magic token/suffix
> to get you into version/snapshot space would likely not be POSIX
> compliant..
>
>
We already have a POSIX compliant file syst
Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
> Kyle McDonald wrote:
>> Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 13:43 -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
>>>
How was it MVFS could do this without any changes to the shells or
any other programs?
I ClearCase could 'grep FOO /dir1/dir2/file@@/main/
Kyle McDonald wrote:
> Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
>> On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 13:43 -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
>>
>>> How was it MVFS could do this without any changes to the shells or any
>>> other programs?
>>>
>>> I ClearCase could 'grep FOO /dir1/dir2/file@@/main/*' to see which
>>> version of
>I suspected it should be 'possible' to code it into ZFS.
>
>The reason it's been left to runat instead seems to be POSIX compliance
>then?
It could still have used "//" pathnames (those have a POSIX reserved
special meaning though that somewhat complicates pathname composition).
E.g., a pathna
Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 13:43 -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
>
>> How was it MVFS could do this without any changes to the shells or any
>> other programs?
>>
>> I ClearCase could 'grep FOO /dir1/dir2/file@@/main/*' to see which
>> version of 'file' added FOO.
>> (I think
On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 13:43 -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
> How was it MVFS could do this without any changes to the shells or any
> other programs?
>
> I ClearCase could 'grep FOO /dir1/dir2/file@@/main/*' to see which
> version of 'file' added FOO.
> (I think @@ was the special hidden key. It
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 07:55:45AM -0800, Joe Blount wrote:
> * Application aware/driven CDP solves the file sanity challenge by
> being explicitly told by the app. But this will have an inherently
> limited market because it relies on application support. Basically:
> it works, but requires coor
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 04:05:50AM -0800, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> Again, there's nothing that I "wanted". I was only thinking. And I am
> a server person. Now, if I switch from the
> /export/home/userfoo/Documents (for Richard, who might be happier with
> UZFS-CDP than with the shots of TimeMachine), t
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Uwe Dippel wrote:
>
> 1. The application (NFS - sftp) does not know about the state of writing?
Sometimes applications know about the state of writing and sometimes
they do not. Sometimes they don't even know they are writing.
> 2. Obviously nobody sees anything in having a
> A good handful of people approached me later, being
> curious and fascinated by the idea to replace the
> backup scheduler with an event-driven creation of the
> versions.
Uwe,
I'm still struggling to decide if ADM is what you're looking for. When you
make comments like the one quoted above,
[i]Consider this to be your life's mission.[/i]
Bob, I can do without this.
Richard,
[i]Actually I use several browsers every day. Each
browser has a cache located somewhere in my home
directory and the cache is managed so that it won't
grow very large. With CDP, I would fill my disk in
a week o
"Wee Yeh Tan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Marcus Sundman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Marcus Sundman wrote:
> > > > Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:54:29AM +020
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Marcus Sundman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Marcus Sundman wrote:
> > > Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:54:29AM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
> > >>> Nathan Kroenert <[E
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 9:36 PM, Uwe Dippel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was hoping to be clear with my examples.
> Within that 1 minute the user has easily received the mail alert that 5
> mails have arrived, has seen the sender and deleted them. Without any trigger
> of some snapshot, or st
>Via interposers, most likely.
It's in the kernel so it didn't need to interpose; it just has that
functionality in the kernel modules.
Not POSIX compliant, but that's how it is.
Casper
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http:/
>On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:31:09PM -0600, Chris Kirby wrote:
>> >Er, good question! I think the shells would have to support it. A good
>> >question for Roland :)
>>
>> The shells don't actually have to care:
>>
>> $ cd /tmp
>> $ touch f1
>> $ runat f1 sh
>
>I know that works. But why start
Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:31:09PM -0600, Chris Kirby wrote:
>
>>>Er, good question! I think the shells would have to support it. A good
>>>question for Roland :)
>>
>>The shells don't actually have to care:
>>
>>$ cd /tmp
>>$ touch f1
>>$ runat f1 sh
>
>
> I know tha
Kyle McDonald wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:31:09PM -0600, Chris Kirby wrote:
>>> The shells don't actually have to care:
>>>
>>> $ cd /tmp
>>> $ touch f1
>>> $ runat f1 sh
>>>
>>
>> I know that works. But why start a new process when the shell could
>> have a
Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:31:09PM -0600, Chris Kirby wrote:
>
>>> Er, good question! I think the shells would have to support it. A good
>>> question for Roland :)
>>>
>> The shells don't actually have to care:
>>
>> $ cd /tmp
>> $ touch f1
>> $ runat f1 sh
>>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:31:09PM -0600, Chris Kirby wrote:
> >Er, good question! I think the shells would have to support it. A good
> >question for Roland :)
>
> The shells don't actually have to care:
>
> $ cd /tmp
> $ touch f1
> $ runat f1 sh
I know that works. But why start a new proces
Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 01:13:06PM -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
>
>>Nicolas Williams wrote:
>>
>>>man runat
>>>
>>
>>Oh! Cool!
>>
>>Is that the only way to access those attributes? or just the one that's
>>most likely to work?
>
>
> man fsattr
>
> :)
>
>
>>I can see
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> (Again, I disliked the "file;X"
> notation and the fact that a manual purge was required).
You could set the number of revisions to keep; VMS would delete older ones.
Michael
--
Michael Schusterhttp://blogs.sun.com/recursion
Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion'
__
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 01:13:06PM -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
> >man runat
> >
> Oh! Cool!
>
> Is that the only way to access those attributes? or just the one that's
> most likely to work?
man fsattr
:)
> I can see how for running commands it'd be useful, but for
Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:57:12PM -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
>
>> Nicolas Williams wrote:
>>
>>> Make it an extended attribute called .zfs/snapshot/.
>>>
>>>
>> Maybe I'm not up on how extended attributes work, but I don't see how
>> that would let you
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:49:56PM +1100, Nathan Kroenert wrote:
> It occurred to me that we are likely missing the point here because Uwe
> is thinking of this as a One User on a System sort of perspective,
> whereas most of the rest of us are thinking of it from a 'Solaris'
> perspective, wher
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:57:12PM -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
> >Make it an extended attribute called .zfs/snapshot/.
> >
> Maybe I'm not up on how extended attributes work, but I don't see how
> that would let you review all the versions that file might have had. Use
Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:33:13AM -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
>
>> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>>
>>> Kyle McDonald wrote:
>>>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How would such snapshots appear and where? (Again, I disliked the
> "file;X"
>>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:33:13AM -0500, Kyle McDonald wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
> > Kyle McDonald wrote:
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>> How would such snapshots appear and where? (Again, I disliked the
> >>> "file;X"
> >>> notation and the fact that a manual purge was required).
> >>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 03:57:29PM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
> Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:54:29AM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
> > > Nathan Kroenert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Are you indicating that the filesystem know's or should know wha
> UFS == Ultimate File System
> ZFS == Zettabyte File System
it's a nit, but..
UFS != Ultimate File System
ZFS != Zettabyte File System
cheers,
--justin
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/list
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Uwe Dippel wrote:
>
> As much as ZFS is revolutionary, it is far away from being the
> 'ultimate file system', if it doesn't know how to handle
> event-driven snapshots
UFS == Ultimate File System
ZFS == Zettabyte File System
Perhaps you have these two confused? ZFS does
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Nicolas Williams wrote:
>>
>> Maybe "snapshot file whenever a write-filedescriptor is closed" or
>> somesuch?
>
> Again. Not enough. Some apps (many!) deal with multiple files.
Or more significantly, with multiple pages. When using memory mapping
the application may close
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> Kyle McDonald wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> How would such snapshots appear and where? (Again, I disliked the
>>> "file;X"
>>> notation and the fact that a manual purge was required).
>>>
>>>
>> I agree about the ';x'
>>
>> However (and I don't know what the p
On Feb 27, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> As much as ZFS is revolutionary, it is far away from being the
> 'ultimate file system', if it doesn't know how to handle event-
> driven snapshots (I don't like the word), backups, versioning. As
> long as a high-level system utility needs to
Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marcus Sundman wrote:
> > Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:54:29AM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
> >>> Nathan Kroenert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you indicating that the filesystem know's or should kno
Kyle McDonald wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> How would such snapshots appear and where? (Again, I disliked the "file;X"
>> notation and the fact that a manual purge was required).
>>
>>
> I agree about the ';x'
>
> However (and I don't know what the patents are in this area.) Something
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:20:42AM -0500, Lally Singh wrote:
>
> 1. For anyone interested, didn't VMS do something like this? Perhaps
> a look at its design and implementation would be useful here.
IBM MVS had generations. Each rewrite of a file created a new
generation of that file. Referenti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How would such snapshots appear and where? (Again, I disliked the "file;X"
> notation and the fact that a manual purge was required).
>
>
I agree about the ';x'
However (and I don't know what the patents are in this area.) Something
like what clearcase does (an invi
Marcus Sundman wrote:
> Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:54:29AM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
>>> Nathan Kroenert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are you indicating that the filesystem know's or should know what
an application is doing??
>>> Maybe "snap
Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:54:29AM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
> > Nathan Kroenert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Are you indicating that the filesystem know's or should know what
> > > an application is doing??
> >
> > Maybe "snapshot file whenever
Uwe, I think you are assuming that zfs is cast in stone; features are
added to ZFS almost on a weekly basis.
If there is demand for a certain feature then at some point resources may
be made available.
What form would you want file versioning to take? I immensely disliked
VMS ";X" notation f
[i]Even then, I'm still confused as to how I
would do anything much useful with this over and above, say, 1 minute
snapshots.[/i]
Hi Nathan,
I was hoping to be clear with my examples.
Within that 1 minute the user has easily received the mail alert that 5 mails
have arrived, has seen the sender
Hmm, two thoughts on this:
1. For anyone interested, didn't VMS do something like this? Perhaps
a look at its design and implementation would be useful here.
2. For the per-application issue, there are ways to handle that.
First, make a ZFS api for providing file-level snapshots. Then, a
librar
It occurred to me that we are likely missing the point here because Uwe
is thinking of this as a One User on a System sort of perspective,
whereas most of the rest of us are thinking of it from a 'Solaris'
perspective, where we are typically expecting the system to be running
many applications
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 06:34:04PM -0800, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> > The rub is this: how do you know when a file edit/modify has completed?
>
> Not to me, I'm sorry, this is task of the engineer, the implementer.
> (See 'atomic', as above.) It would be a shame if a file system never
> knew if the oper
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:54:29AM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
> Nathan Kroenert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Are you indicating that the filesystem know's or should know what an
> > application is doing??
>
> Maybe "snapshot file whenever a write-filedescriptor is closed" or
> somesuch?
Agai
Uwe Dippel wrote:
>> atomic view?
>>
>
> Your post was on the gory details on how ZFS writes. "Atomic View" here is,
> that 'save' of a file is an 'atomic' operation: at one moment in time you
> click 'save', and some other moment in time it is done. It means indivisible,
> and from the per
Uwe Dippel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Any completed write needs to be CDP-ed.
And that is the rub, precisely. There is nothing in the app <-> kernel
interface currently that indicates that a write has completed to a state
that is meaningful to the application.
__
Nathan Kroenert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you indicating that the filesystem know's or should know what an
> application is doing??
Maybe "snapshot file whenever a write-filedescriptor is closed" or
somesuch?
- Marcus
___
zfs-discuss mailing li
[i]I think you're just looking for frequent backups, not necessarily capturing
every unique file version.[/i]
Thanks for your reply, Joe, but this is not my intention. I agree, that my
arguments here look like moving targets. They simply developed along the lines
of discussion. I'd still target
Are you indicating that the filesystem know's or should know what an
application is doing??
It seems to me that to achieve what you are suggesting, that's exactly
what it would take.
Or, you are assuming that there are no co-dependent files in
applications that are out there...
Whichever the
> atomic view?
Your post was on the gory details on how ZFS writes. "Atomic View" here is,
that 'save' of a file is an 'atomic' operation: at one moment in time you click
'save', and some other moment in time it is done. It means indivisible, and
from the perspective of the user this is how it
> Can someone please point me to link, or just
> unambiguously say 'yes' or 'no' to my question, if
> ZFS could produce a snapshot of whatever type,
> initiated with a signal that in turn is derived from
> a change (edit) of a file; like inotify in Linux
> 2.6.13 and above.
Hi Uwe,
As I understan
Can someone please point me to link, or just unambiguously say 'yes'
or 'no' to my question, if ZFS could produce a snapshot of whatever
type, initiated with a signal that in turn is derived from a change
(edit) of a file; like inotify in Linux 2.6.13 and above.
Hi Uwe,
I wasn't previously fa
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 01:45:41AM +0800, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> Sorry, I don't understand any of this. But I never pretended I did.
Well, if you want some feature then you should understand what it is.
Sure "continuous data protection" sounds real good, but you have to
understand that any CDP soluti
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Nicolas Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do you use CDP "backups"? How do you decide at which write(2) (or
> dirty page write, or fsync(2), ...) to restore some file? What if the
> app has many files? Point-in-time? Sure, but since you can't restore
>
How do you use CDP "backups"? How do you decide at which write(2) (or
dirty page write, or fsync(2), ...) to restore some file? What if the
app has many files? Point-in-time? Sure, but since you can't restore
all application state (unless you're checkpointing processes too) then
how can you be
[i]And would drive storage requirements through the roof!![/i]
The interesting part is, Nathan, you're probably wrong.
First, though, some of my contacts in the enterprise gladly spent millions for
third-party applications running on Microsoft to do exactly that.
[But we all know that SUN is fam
Jonathan Loran wrote:
> David Magda wrote:
>
>> On Feb 24, 2008, at 01:49, Jonathan Loran wrote:
>>
>>
>>> In some circles, CDP is big business. It would be a great ZFS offering.
>>>
>> ZFS doesn't have it built-in, but AVS made be an option in some cases:
>>
>> http://opensolaris.or
And would drive storage requirements through the roof!!
I like it!
;)
Nathan.
Jonathan Loran wrote:
>
> David Magda wrote:
>> On Feb 24, 2008, at 01:49, Jonathan Loran wrote:
>>
>>> In some circles, CDP is big business. It would be a great ZFS offering.
>> ZFS doesn't have it built-in, but AVS
David Magda wrote:
> On Feb 24, 2008, at 01:49, Jonathan Loran wrote:
>
>> In some circles, CDP is big business. It would be a great ZFS offering.
>
> ZFS doesn't have it built-in, but AVS made be an option in some cases:
>
> http://opensolaris.org/os/project/avs/
Point in time copy (as AVS offe
On Feb 24, 2008, at 01:49, Jonathan Loran wrote:
> In some circles, CDP is big business. It would be a great ZFS
> offering.
ZFS doesn't have it built-in, but AVS made be an option in some cases:
http://opensolaris.org/os/project/avs/
___
zfs-discuss
Uwe Dippel wrote:
> [i]google found that solaris does have file change notification:
> http://blogs.sun.com/praks/entry/file_events_notification
> [/i]
>
> Didn't see that one, thanks.
>
> [i]Would that do the job?[/i]
>
> It is not supposed to do a job, thanks :), it is for a presentation at a
[i]google found that solaris does have file change notification:
http://blogs.sun.com/praks/entry/file_events_notification
[/i]
Didn't see that one, thanks.
[i]Would that do the job?[/i]
It is not supposed to do a job, thanks :), it is for a presentation at a
conference I will be giving. I was
I'm not answering from experience, but a quick google found that solaris does
not have file change notification:
http://blogs.sun.com/praks/entry/file_events_notification
So I'd have thought you could use that to take a ZFS snapshot. ZFS snapshots
aren't of any one particular file, they are o
On Feb 23, 2008, at 10:57, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> Come on! Nobody?!
> I read through documents for several hours, and obviously done my
> work.
> Can someone please point me to link, or just unambiguously say
> 'yes' or 'no' to my question, if ZFS could produce a snapshot of
> whatever type, i
Come on! Nobody?!
I read through documents for several hours, and obviously done my work.
Can someone please point me to link, or just unambiguously say 'yes' or 'no' to
my question, if ZFS could produce a snapshot of whatever type, initiated with a
signal that in turn is derived from a change (e
Hi, checked all Wiki and documentation here on this site, and still need an
answer for a conference paper I am writing:
Can ZFS produce event-driven snapshots? Of course, I mean snapshots of specific
files/system in the event of a change?
This question has eluded me until now.
Uwe
This messa
70 matches
Mail list logo
