Do you use any form of compression?
I changed compression from none to gzip-9, got some message about changing
properties of boot pool (or fs), copied and moved all files under /usr and /etc
to enforce compression, rebooted, and - guess what message did I get.
--
This message posted from
Off the lists, someone suggested to me that the Inconsistent
filesystem may be the boot archive and not the ZFS filesystem (though I
still don't know what's wrong with booting b99).
Regardless, I tried rebuilding the boot_archive with bootadm
update-archive -vf and verified it by mounting it
Hi,
After a recent pkg image-update to OpenSolaris build 100, my system
booted once and now will no longer boot. After exhausting other
options, I am left wondering if there is some kind of ZFS issue a scrub
won't find.
The current behavior is that it will load GRUB, but trying to boot the
Raw Device Mapping is a feature of ESX 2.5 and above which allows a guest OS to
have access to a LUN on fibre or ISCSI SAN.
See http://www.vmware.com/pdf/esx25_rawdevicemapping.pdf for more details.
You may be able to do something similar with the raw disks under workstation
see
I am seeing the same problem using a seperate virtual disk for the pool.
This is happening with Solaris 10 U3, U4 and U5
SCSI reservations is know to be an issue with clustered solaris
http://blogs.sun.com/SC/entry/clustering_solaris_guests_that_run
I wonder if this is the same problem. Maybe
Added an vdev using rdm and that seems to be stable over reboots
however the pools based on a virtual disk now also seems to be stable after
doing an export and import -f
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
Hi Ricardo,
I'll try that.
Thanks (Obrigado)
Paulo Soeiro
On 6/5/08, Ricardo M. Correia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Ter, 2008-06-03 at 23:33 +0100, Paulo Soeiro wrote:
6)Remove and attached the usb sticks:
zpool status
pool: myPool
state: UNAVAIL
status: One or more devices could not
On Ter, 2008-06-03 at 23:33 +0100, Paulo Soeiro wrote:
6)Remove and attached the usb sticks:
zpool status
pool: myPool
state: UNAVAIL
status: One or more devices could not be used because the label is
missing
or invalid. There are insufficient replicas for the pool to continue
Did the same test again and here is the result:
1)
zpool create myPool mirror c6t0d0p0 c7t0d0p0
2)
-bash-3.2# zfs create myPool/myfs
-bash-3.2# zpool status
pool: myPool
state: ONLINE
scrub: none requested
config:
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
myPool ONLINE 0 0 0
mirror ONLINE 0 0 0
This test was done without the hub:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Paulo Soeiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did the same test again and here is the result:
1)
zpool create myPool mirror c6t0d0p0 c7t0d0p0
2)
-bash-3.2# zfs create myPool/myfs
-bash-3.2# zpool status
pool: myPool
On Jun 3, 2008, at 18:34, Paulo Soeiro wrote:
This test was done without the hub:
FWIW, I bought 9 microSD's and 9 USB controller units for them from
NewEgg to replicate the famous ZFS demo video, and I had problems
getting them working with OpenSolaris (on VMWare on OSX, in this case).
Paulo Soeiro wrote:
Greetings,
I was experimenting with zfs, and i made the following test, i shutdown
the computer during a write operation
in a mirrored usb storage filesystem.
Here is my configuration
NGS USB 2.0 Minihub 4
3 USB Silicom Power Storage Pens 1 GB each
These are the
June 2008 13:19
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS problems with USB Storage devices
Paulo Soeiro wrote:
Greetings,
I was experimenting with zfs, and i made the following test, i shutdown
the computer during a write operation
in a mirrored usb storage filesystem
Justin Vassallo wrote:
Thommy,
If I read correctly your post stated that the pools did not automount on
startup, not that they would go corrupt. It seems to me that Paulo is
actually experiencing a corrupt fs
Nah, I also had indications of corrupted data if you read my posts.
But the data
Greetings,
I was experimenting with zfs, and i made the following test, i shutdown the
computer during a write operation
in a mirrored usb storage filesystem.
Here is my configuration
NGS USB 2.0 Minihub 4
3 USB Silicom Power Storage Pens 1 GB each
These are the ports:
hub devices
Hello, I'm having the same exact situation on one VM, and not on another VM on
the same infrastructure.
The only difference is that on the failing VM I initially created the pool with
a name and then changed the mountpoint to another name.
Did you found a solution to the issue?
Should I consider
I have a test bed S10U5 system running under vmware ESX that has a weird
problem.
I have a single virtual disk, with some slices allocated as UFS filesystem
for the operating system, and s7 as a ZFS pool.
Whenever I reboot, the pool fails to open:
May 8 17:32:30 niblet fmd: [ID 441519
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 09:49:26AM -0700, Sergey Chechelnitskiy wrote:
Hi Sergey,
I have a flat directory with a lot of small files inside. And I have a java
application that reads all these files when it starts. If this directory is
located on ZFS the application starts fast (15 mins) when
We have the same issue (using dCache on Thumpers, data on ZFS).
A workaround has been to move the directory on a local UFS filesystem using a
low nbpi parameter.
However, this is not a solution.
Doesn't look like a threading problem, thanks anyway Jens !
This message posted from
I think I am having the same problem using a different application (Windchill).
zfs is consuming hugh amounts of memory and system (T2000) is performing
poorly. Occasionally it will take a long time (several hours) to do a snapshot.
Normally a snapshot will take a second or two. The
Boyd Adamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or alternatively, are you comparing ZFS(Fuse) on Linux with XFS on
Linux? That doesn't seem to make sense since the userspace
implementation will always suffer.
Someone has just mentioned that all of UFS, ZFS and XFS are available on
FreeBSD. Are you
On 01/08/2007, at 7:50 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Boyd Adamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or alternatively, are you comparing ZFS(Fuse) on Linux with XFS on
Linux? That doesn't seem to make sense since the userspace
implementation will always suffer.
Someone has just mentioned that all of
On 01/08/2007, at 7:50 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Boyd Adamson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or alternatively, are you comparing ZFS(Fuse) on Linux with XFS on
Linux? That doesn't seem to make sense since the userspace
implementation will always suffer.
Someone has just mentioned
Hi All,
Thank you for answers.
I am not really comparing anything.
I have a flat directory with a lot of small files inside. And I have a java
application that reads all these files when it starts. If this directory is
located on ZFS the application starts fast (15 mins) when the number of
Hi All,
We have a problem running a scientific application dCache on ZFS.
dCache is a java based software that allows to store huge datasets in pools.
One dCache pool consists of two directories pool/data and pool/control. The
real data goes into pool/data/
For each file in pool/data/ the
Sergey Chechelnitskiy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi All,
We have a problem running a scientific application dCache on ZFS.
dCache is a java based software that allows to store huge datasets in
pools. One dCache pool consists of two directories pool/data and
pool/control. The real data goes
Hello James,
Saturday, November 18, 2006, 11:34:52 AM, you wrote:
JM as far as I can see, your setup does not mee the minimum
JM redundancy requirements for a Raid-Z, which is 3 devices.
JM Since you only have 2 devices you are out on a limb.
Actually only two disks for raid-z is fine and you
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
On 11/26/06, Al Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[4] I proposed this solution to a user on the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
list - and it resolved his problem. His problem - the system would reset
after getting about 1/2 way through a Solaris install. The installer was
simply
First thing is I would like to thank everyone for their replies/help. This
machine has been running for two years under Linux, but for last two or three
months has had Nexenta Solaris on it. This machine has never once crashed. I
rebooted with a Knoppix disk in and ran memtest86. Within 30
I'm new to this group, so hello everyone! I am having some issues with my
Nexenta system I set up about two months ago as a zfs/zraid server. I have two
new Maxtor 500GB Sata drives and an Adaptec controller which I believe has a
Silicon Image chipset. Also I have a Seasonic 80+ power supply,
On 11/18/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
scrub: scrub completed with 0 errors on Mon Nov 13 04:49:35 2006
config:
NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
amber ONLINE 0 0 0
raidz1ONLINE 0 0 0
c4d0
Hi Michael. Based on the output, there should be no user-visible file
corruption. ZFS saw a bunch of checksum errors on the disk, but was
able to recover in every instance.
While 2-disk RAID-Z is really a fancy (and slightly more expensive,
CPU-wise) way of doing mirroring, at no point should
On 18-Nov-06, at 2:01 PM, Bill Moore wrote:
Hi Michael. Based on the output, there should be no user-visible file
corruption. ZFS saw a bunch of checksum errors on the disk, but was
able to recover in every instance.
While 2-disk RAID-Z is really a fancy (and slightly more expensive,
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm new to this group, so hello everyone! I am having some issues with
Welcome!
my Nexenta system I set up about two months ago as a zfs/zraid server. I
have two new Maxtor 500GB Sata drives and an Adaptec controller which I
believe has a Silicon
[ I've seen the response where one astute list participate noticed you're
running a 2-way raidz device, when the documentation clearly states that
the mimimum raidz volume consists of 3 devices ]
Not very astute. The documentation clearly states that the minimum is
2 devices.
zpool(1M):
35 matches
Mail list logo
