On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk r...@karlsbakk.net wrote:
so as not to exceed the channel bandwidth. When they need to get higher disk
capacity, they add more platters.
May this mean those drives are more robust in terms of reliability, since the
leaks between sectors is
On 6 Feb 2011, at 03:14, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
I'm thinking either Solaris' appalling mess of device files is somehow scrod,
or else ZFS is confused in its reporting (perhaps because of cache file
contents?). Is there anything I can do about either of these? Does devfsadm
really
Yes, you create three groups as you described and insert them into your zpool
(the zfs raid). So you have only one ZFS raid, consisting of three groups. You
dont have three different ZFS raids (unless you configure that).
You can also later, swap one disk to a larger and repair the group. Then
Ok, so can we say that the conclusion for a home user is:
1) Using SSD without TRIM is acceptable. The only drawback is that without
TRIM, the SSD will write much more, which effects life time. Because when the
SSD has written enough, it will break.
I dont have high demands for my OS disk, so
Will this not ruin the zpool? If you overwrite one of discs in the zpool won't
the zpool go broke, so you need to repair it?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Will this not ruin the zpool? If you overwrite one of discs in the
zpool won't the zpool go broke, so you need to repair it?
As suggested, dd if=/dev/rdsk/c8t3d0s0 of=/dev/null bs=4k count=10, that
will do its best to overwrite /dev/null, which the system is likely to allow :P
Vennlige
On 2011-02-06 05:58, Orvar Korvar wrote:
Will this not ruin the zpool? If you overwrite one of discs in the zpool won't
the zpool go broke, so you need to repair it?
Without quoting I can't tell what you think you're responding to, but
from my memory of this thread, I THINK you're forgetting
Hi!
I have a zpool biult up from two vdrives (one mirror and one raidz). The
raidz is built up from 4x1TB HDs. When I successively replace each 1TB
drive with a 2TB drive will the capacity of the raidz double after the
last block device is replaced?
Achim
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP
If autoexpand = on, then yes.
zpool get autoexpand pool
zpool set autoexpand=on pool
The expansion is vdev specific, so if you replaced the mirror first, you'd
get that much (the extra 2TB) without touching the raidz.
Cheers,
On 7 February 2011 01:41, Achim Wolpers achim...@googlemail.com
2) And later, when Solaris gets TRIM support, should I reformat or is
there no need to reformat? I mean, maybe I must format and reinstall
to get TRIM all over the disk. Or will TRIM immediately start to do
it's magic?
Trim works on the device level, so a reformat won't be necessary
Vennlige
Following up to myself, I think I've got things sorted, mostly.
1. The thing I was most sure of, I was wrong about. Some years back, I
must have split the mirrors so that they used different brand disks. I
probably did this, maybe even accidentally, when I had to restore from
backups at
On 2/6/2011 3:51 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote:
Ok, so can we say that the conclusion for a home user is:
1) Using SSD without TRIM is acceptable. The only drawback is that without
TRIM, the SSD will write much more, which effects life time. Because when the
SSD has written enough, it will break.
I
On 2/6/2011 3:51 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote:
Ok, so can we say that the conclusion for a home user is:
1) Using SSD without TRIM is acceptable. The only drawback is that without
TRIM, the SSD will write much more, which effects life time. Because when the
SSD has written enough, it will break.
I
Additionally, the way I do it is to draw a diagram of the drives in the system,
labelled with the drive serial numbers. Then when a drive fails, I can find out
from smartctl which drive it is and remove/replace without trial and error.
On 5 Feb 2011, at 21:54,
Heh. My bad. Didnt read the command. Yes, that should be safe.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Roy, I read your question on OpenIndiana mail lists: how can you rebalance your
huge raid, without implementing block pointer rewrite? You have an old vdev
full of data, and now you have added a new vdev - and you want the data to be
evenly spread out to all vdevs.
I answer here beceause it is
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk r...@karlsbakk.net wrote:
Hi
I keep getting these messages on this one box. There are issues with at least
one of the drives in it, but since there are some 80 drives in it, that's not
really an issue. I just want to know, if anyone
I require a new high capacity 8 disk zpool. The disks I will be
purchasing (Samsung or Hitachi) have an Error Rate (non-recoverable,
bits read) of 1 in 10^14 and will be 2TB. I'm staying clear of WD
because they have the new 2048b sectors which don't play nice with ZFS
at the moment.
My
Chris,
I might be able to help you recover the pool but will need access to your
system. If you think this is possible just ping me off list and let me know.
Thanks,
George
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Chris Forgeron cforge...@acsi.ca wrote:
Hello all,
Long time reader, first time
On 02/ 7/11 03:45 PM, Matthew Angelo wrote:
I require a new high capacity 8 disk zpool. The disks I will be
purchasing (Samsung or Hitachi) have an Error Rate (non-recoverable,
bits read) of 1 in 10^14 and will be 2TB. I'm staying clear of WD
because they have the new 2048b sectors which
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Angelo
My question is, how do I determine which of the following zpool and
vdev configuration I should run to maximize space whilst mitigating
rebuild failure risk?
1. 2x
On Feb 5, 2011, at 8:10 AM, Yi Zhang wrote:
Hi all,
I'm trying to achieve the same effect of UFS directio on ZFS and here
is what I did:
Solaris UFS directio has three functions:
1. improved async code path
2. multiple concurrent writers
3. no buffering
Of the
On Feb 5, 2011, at 2:44 PM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
Hi
I keep getting these messages on this one box. There are issues with at least
one of the drives in it, but since there are some 80 drives in it, that's not
really an issue. I just want to know, if anyone knows, what this kernel
Yes I did mean 6+2, Thank you for fixing the typo.
I'm actually more leaning towards running a simple 7+1 RAIDZ1.
Running this with 1TB is not a problem but I just wanted to
investigate at what TB size the scales would tip. I understand
RAIDZ2 protects against failures during a rebuild process.
On Feb 6, 2011, at 6:45 PM, Matthew Angelo wrote:
I require a new high capacity 8 disk zpool. The disks I will be
purchasing (Samsung or Hitachi) have an Error Rate (non-recoverable,
bits read) of 1 in 10^14 and will be 2TB. I'm staying clear of WD
because they have the new 2048b sectors
25 matches
Mail list logo
