On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:17 AM, Richard Elling [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Cesare wrote:
Hi all,
I've recently started down to put on production use for zfs and I'm
looking to how doing a backup of filesystem. I've more than one server to
migrate to ZFS and not so more server where there is a
Hi,
I installed a zpool containing of
zpool
__mirror
disk1 500gb
disk2 500gb
__raidz
disk3 1tb
disk4 1tb
disk5 1tb
It works fine, but it displays the wrong size (terminal - zpool list). It
should be 500gb (mirrored) + 2TB (3TB raidz) = 2,5 TB, right? But it displays
it has
Hello Darren,
Monday, November 3, 2008, 12:44:29 PM, you wrote:
DJM Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello zfs-discuss,
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable-standalone.git;a=commit;h=eecfe5255c533fefd38072a04e4afb56c40d9719
If compression for a given set of pages fails to
Ross wrote:
Ok, I see where you're coming from now, but what you're talking about isn't
zfs send / receive. If I'm interpreting correctly, you're talking about a
couple of features, neither of which is in ZFS yet, and I'd need the input of
more technical people to know if they are
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 11:47:19AM +0100, Luca Morettoni wrote:
I have a little question about user properties, I have two filesystems:
rpool/export/home/luca
and
rpool/export/home/luca/src
in this two I have one user property, setted with:
zfs set net.morettoni:test=xyz
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello zfs-discuss,
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable-standalone.git;a=commit;h=eecfe5255c533fefd38072a04e4afb56c40d9719
If compression for a given set of pages fails to make them smaller, the
file is flagged to avoid future compression
Ross Smith wrote:
Hi Darren,
That's storing a dump of a snapshot on external media, but files
within it are not directly accessible. The work Tim et all are doing
is actually putting a live ZFS filesystem on external media and
sending snapshots to it.
Cognitive disconnect, again.
Snapshots are not replacements for traditional backup/restore features.
If you need the latter, use what is currently available on the market.
-- richard
I'd actually say snapshots do a better job in some circumstances.
Certainly they're being used that way by the desktop team:
On 11/03/08 14:35, Mark J Musante wrote:
There currently is no way to do it. I looked for an existing CR and
couldn't find one, so I submitted 6766756 want 'zfs unset'.
I found a little workaround about that:
zfs inherit net.morettoni:test rpool/export/home/luca
zfs inherit
Hello zfs-discuss,
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable-standalone.git;a=commit;h=eecfe5255c533fefd38072a04e4afb56c40d9719
If compression for a given set of pages fails to make them smaller, the
file is flagged to avoid future compression attempts later.
Maybe that's a
Ross Smith wrote:
Snapshots are not replacements for traditional backup/restore features.
If you need the latter, use what is currently available on the market.
-- richard
I'd actually say snapshots do a better job in some circumstances.
Certainly they're being used that way by the
If the file still existed, would this be a case of redirecting the
file's top level block (dnode?) to the one from the snapshot? If the
file had been deleted, could you just copy that one block?
Is it that simple, or is there a level of interaction between files
and snapshots that I've
Ian Collins wrote:
On Mon 03/11/08 08:11 , dick hoogendijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent:
Live Upgrade does -NOT- do this on my system.
Did you follow the instructions at
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/ggpdm?a=view
I read the instructions again, but to no avail. never mind though. the
This doesn't make much sense. All user properties are inheritable, so
you control them just like you do any other property. For example,
there is no way to unset sharenfs on a child filesystem once it's
inherited - you need to explicitly set it to some value other than its
parent. For user
Laurent Blume wrote:
Hi all,
It seems a user managed to create files dated Oct 16, 2057, from a Linux
distro that mounted by NFS the volumes on an x2100 server running S10U5, with
ZFS volumes.
The problem is, those files are completely unreachable on the S10 server:
# ls -l
If
I'm interpreting correctly, you're talking about a
couple of features, neither of which is in ZFS yet,
...
1. The ability to restore individual files from a
snapshot, in the same way an entire snapshot is
restored - simply using the blocks that are already
stored.
2. The ability
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, Robert Milkowski wrote:
Now, the good filter could be to use MAGIC numbers within files or
approach btrfs come up with, or maybe even both combined.
You are suggesting that ZFS should detect a GIF or JPEG image stored
in a database BLOB. That is pretty fancy functionality.
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, Robert Milkowski wrote:
Maybe that's a good one - so if couple of blocks do not compress then
flag it in file metadata and do not try to compress any blocks within
the file anymore. Of course for some files it will be suboptimal so
maybe a dataset
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, Robert Milkowski wrote:
Maybe that's a good one - so if couple of blocks do not compress then
flag it in file metadata and do not try to compress any blocks within
the file anymore. Of course for some files it will be suboptimal so
maybe a dataset option?
This is
Laurent Blume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
It seems a user managed to create files dated Oct 16, 2057, from a Linux
distro that mounted by NFS the volumes on an x2100 server running S10U5, with
ZFS volumes.
The problem is, those files are completely unreachable on the S10 server:
Hi Darren,
That's storing a dump of a snapshot on external media, but files
within it are not directly accessible. The work Tim et all are doing
is actually putting a live ZFS filesystem on external media and
sending snapshots to it.
A live ZFS filesystem is far more useful (and reliable) than
I see, thanks.
And as Jörg said, I only need a 64 bit binary. I didn't know, but there is one
for ls, and it does work as expected:
$ /usr/bin/amd64/ls -l .gtk-bookmarks
-rw-r--r-- 1 user opc0 oct. 16 2057 .gtk-bookmarks
This is a bit absurd. I thought Solaris was fully 64 bit.
Ok, I think I understand. You're going to be told that ZFS send isn't a backup
(and for these purposes I definately agree), but if we ignore that this sounds
like you're talking about restoring a snapshot from an external media, and then
running a clone off that.
Clone's are already
On 11/03/08 13:18, Philip Brown wrote:
Ok, I think I understand. You're going to be told
that ZFS send isn't a backup (and for these purposes
I definately agree), ...
Hmph. well, even for 'replication' type purposes, what I'm talking about is
quite useful.
Picture two remote systems,
Okay, I found out what the problem was:
As I expected in my last post ZFS didn't like the idea of having another disk
containing a running zpool on a location that was previously occupied by a disk
that died. Last weekend I created a few snapshots to be moved to another disk,
so today I was
Ok, I think I understand. You're going to be told
that ZFS send isn't a backup (and for these purposes
I definately agree), ...
Hmph. well, even for 'replication' type purposes, what I'm talking about is
quite useful.
Picture two remote systems, which happen to have mostly identical data.
Hi,
The attached project has been proposed to the OpenSolaris PM community.
thanks,
-jane
--
This message posted from opensolaris.orgStorage PM Project
==
Currently, the main challenges in power managing disks on server
platforms are the issues of latency and
ZFS experts!
cu is looking for _documentation_ about putting zone paths on zfs. cu
is running 5.10 KP 137111-06. he needs to make sure u5 kp is ok with
zone roots. Also has FSs mounted via legacy.
So...anybody have documentation on which u5 or u6 of Solaris (NOT
OpenSolaris) supports
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 02:54:10PM -0800, Yuan Chu wrote:
Hi,
a disk may take seconds or
even tens of seconds to come on line if it needs to be powered up
and spin up.
Yes - I really hate this on my U40 and tried to disable PM for HDD[s]
completely. However, haven't found a way to do
On Tue 04/11/08 12:29 , Brian Henchey [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent:
ZFS experts!
cu is looking for _documentation_ about putting zone paths on zfs.
cu is running 5.10 KP 137111-06. he needs to make sure u5 kp is ok
with zone roots. Also has FSs mounted via legacy.
So...anybody have
I'm looking for any pointers or advice on what might have happened
to cause the following problem...
Setup:
Two X4500 / Sol 10 U5 iSCSI servers, four T1000 S10 U4 - U5 Oracle RAC
DB heads iSCSI clients.
iSCSI set up using zfs volumes, set shareiscsi=on,
(slightly wierd thing) partitioned
I was able to install os0805 into a USB stick and
boot from it. It works really great.
However, after image-updating to build 95, I am only
seeing the GRUB prompt.
I have also installed the 0811_95 LiveDVD into a USB
stick, but the machine just keeps rebooting itself.
Anyone has any
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 12:33:52PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, Robert Milkowski wrote:
Now, the good filter could be to use MAGIC numbers within files or
approach btrfs come up with, or maybe even both combined.
You are suggesting that ZFS should detect a GIF or JPEG
33 matches
Mail list logo
