On 02/28/12 12:53 PM, Ulrich Graef wrote:
Hi Ian,
On 26.02.12 23:42, Ian Collins wrote:
I had high hopes of significant performance gains using zfs diff in
Solaris 11 compared to my home-brew stat based version in Solaris 10.
However the results I have seen so far have been disappointing.
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Ulrich Graef
Do you use de-duplication? (does not directly harm the performance, but
needs memory
and slows down zfs diff through that)?
Yikes. That couldn't be more wrong. Yes, dedup
Hi Ian,
On 26.02.12 23:42, Ian Collins wrote:
I had high hopes of significant performance gains using zfs diff in
Solaris 11 compared to my home-brew stat based version in Solaris 10.
However the results I have seen so far have been disappointing.
Testing on a reasonably sized filesystem
I had high hopes of significant performance gains using zfs diff in
Solaris 11 compared to my home-brew stat based version in Solaris 10.
However the results I have seen so far have been disappointing.
Testing on a reasonably sized filesystem (4TB), a diff that listed 41k
changes took 77
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I just upgraded to Solaris 10 Update 10, and one of the improvements
is zfs diff.
Using the birthtime of the sectors, I would expect very high
performance. The actual performance doesn't seems better that an
standard rdiff, though. Quite
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Jesus Cea j...@jcea.es wrote:
I just upgraded to Solaris 10 Update 10, and one of the improvements
is zfs diff.
Using the birthtime of the sectors, I would expect very high
performance. The actual performance doesn't seems better that an
standard rdiff,
On Mon, September 26, 2011 14:55, Jesus Cea wrote:
[...]
real10m0.272s
user0m0.809s
sys 2m6.693s
10 minutes to diff 7.55 GB is... disappointing.
This machine uses a 2-mirror configurations, and there is no more
activity going on in the machine. ZPOOL version 29, ZFS version
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 26/09/11 22:29, David Magda wrote:
Talking about 7.55 GB is mostly useless as well. If it's a dozen
video files then stat()ing them all with be done very quickly by
just running find(1). If however the 7.55 GB is made up of
7,550,000 files then
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 26/09/11 21:31, Nico Williams wrote:
atime has nothing to do with it.
How much work zfs diff has to do depends on how much has changed
between snapshots.
That is what I thought, but look at my example: less than 20 changes
and more than 10
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 26/09/11 22:54, Jesus Cea wrote:
On 26/09/11 22:29, David Magda wrote:
Talking about 7.55 GB is mostly useless as well. If it's a
dozen video files then stat()ing them all with be done very
quickly by just running find(1). If however the 7.55
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011, Jesus Cea wrote:
rsync takes a bit less than 7 minutes. So zfs diff is actually
slower!.
It is important to define what is meant by rsync. For example, a
common rsync operating mode is to simply compare whole-file timestamps
and file size in order to determine that a
On 09/26/11 12:31, Nico Williams wrote:
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Jesus Cea j...@jcea.es wrote:
Should I disable atime to improve zfs diff performance? (most data
doesn't change, but atime of most files would change).
atime has nothing to do with it.
based on my experiences with
Ah yes, of course. I'd misread your original post. Yes, disabling
atime updates will reduce the number of superfluous transactions.
It's *all* transactions that count, not just the ones the app
explicitly caused, and atime implies lots of transactions.
Nico
--
On 09/27/11 07:55 AM, Jesus Cea wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I just upgraded to Solaris 10 Update 10, and one of the improvements
is zfs diff.
Using the birthtime of the sectors, I would expect very high
performance. The actual performance doesn't seems better that an
On 27 September, 2011 - Ian Collins sent me these 0,8K bytes:
On 09/27/11 07:55 AM, Jesus Cea wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I just upgraded to Solaris 10 Update 10, and one of the improvements
is zfs diff.
Using the birthtime of the sectors, I would expect very
On 09/27/11 10:59 AM, Tomas Forsman wrote:
On 27 September, 2011 - Ian Collins sent me these 0,8K bytes:
On 09/27/11 07:55 AM, Jesus Cea wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I just upgraded to Solaris 10 Update 10, and one of the improvements
is zfs diff.
Using the
a diff to list the file differences between snapshots
http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/PSARC/2010/105/mail
Dave
On 10/13/10 15:48, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of dirk schelfhout
Wanted to test
I had to upgrade zfs
zfs upgrade -a
then
pfexec zfs set sharesmb=off data
pfexec zfs set sharesmb=on data
after this zfs diff failed with the old snapshots.
But with newly created snapshots it worked.
Thanks Tim,
Dirk
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Wanted to test the zfs diff command and ran into this.
I turned off all windows sharing.
the rpool has normal permissions for .zfs/shares
how do I fix this ?
Dirk
r...@osolpro:/data/.zfs# zfs diff d...@10aug2010 d...@13oct2010
Cannot stat /data/.zfs/shares/: unable to generate diffs
pwd
On 10/13/10 10:20 AM, dirk schelfhout wrote:
Wanted to test the zfs diff command and ran into this.
I turned off all windows sharing.
the rpool has normal permissions for .zfs/shares
how do I fix this ?
Dirk
r...@osolpro:/data/.zfs# zfs diff d...@10aug2010 d...@13oct2010
Cannot stat
cd /data/.zfs
sche...@osolpro:/data/.zfs$ ls -alt
ls: cannot access shares: Operation not supported
total 4
drwxr-xr-x 19 schelfd staff 25 2010-10-13 18:57 ..
dr-xr-xr-x 2 rootroot 2 2010-10-13 17:44 snapshot
dr-xr-xr-x 4 rootroot 4 2009-01-28 23:08 .
?? ? ? ? ?
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of dirk schelfhout
Wanted to test the zfs diff command and ran into this.
What's zfs diff? I know it's been requested, but AFAIK, not implemented
yet. Is that new feature being developed now
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Nicolas Williams
nicolas.willi...@sun.com wrote:
One really good use for zfs diff would be: as a way to index zfs send
backups by contents.
Or to generate the list of files for incremental backups via NetBackup
or similar. This is especially important
A new ARC case:
There is a long-standing RFE for zfs to be able to describe what has
changed between the snapshots of a dataset. To provide this
capability, we propose a new 'zfs diff' sub-command. When run with
appropriate privilege the sub-command describes what file system level
changes
One really good use for zfs diff would be: as a way to index zfs send
backups by contents.
Nico
--
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
zfs diff is incredibly cool.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On 30-3-2010 0:39, Nicolas Williams wrote:
One really good use for zfs diff would be: as a way to index zfs send
backups by contents.
Nico
Any prevision about the release target? snv_13x?
Bruno
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Nicolas Williams
nicolas.willi...@sun.com wrote:
One really good use for zfs diff would be: as a way to index zfs send
backups by contents.
Or to generate the list of files for incremental backups via NetBackup
or similar. This is especially important for file
On 03/29/10 16:44, Mike Gerdts wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Nicolas Williams
nicolas.willi...@sun.com wrote:
One really good use for zfs diff would be: as a way to index zfs send
backups by contents.
Or to generate the list of files for incremental backups via NetBackup
or
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 06:38:47PM -0400, David Magda wrote:
A new ARC case:
I read this earlier this morning. Welcome news indeed!
I have some concerns about the output format, having worked with
similar requirements in the past. In particular: as part of the
monotone VCS when reporting
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:37:15PM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
There will also need to be clear rules on output ordering, with
respect to renames, where multiple changes have happened to renamed
files.
Separately, but relevant in particular to the above due to the
potential for races: what
On 3/29/10 8:02 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:37:15PM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:
There will also need to be clear rules on output ordering, with
respect to renames, where multiple changes have happened to renamed
files.
Separately, but relevant in particular to the
Hi
Is it possible to see what changed between two snapshots (efficiently) ?
I tried to take a look what zfs send -i does, and I found that it operates at
very low (dmu) level and basically dumps the blocks.
Any pointers on extracting inode info from this stream or otherwise ?
- mritun
33 matches
Mail list logo
