Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Hard link space savings

2011-06-13 Thread Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
If anyone has any ideas be it ZFS based or any useful scripts that could help here, I am all ears. Something like this one-liner will show what would be allocated by everything if hardlinks weren't used: # size=0; for i in `find . -type f -exec du {} \; | awk '{ print $1 }'`; do size=$((

Re: [zfs-discuss] optimal layout for 8x 1 TByte SATA (consumer)

2011-06-13 Thread Dimitar Hadjiev
I can lay them out as 4*3-disk raidz1, 3*4-disk-raidz1 or a 1*12-disk raidz3 with nearly the same capacity (8-9 data disks plus parity). I see that with more vdevs the IOPS will grow - does this translate to better resilver and scrub times as well? Yes it would translate in better resilver times

[zfs-discuss] Pool error in a hex file name

2011-06-13 Thread James Sutherland
Anyone know what this means? After a scrub I apparently have an error in a file name that I don't understand: zpool status -v pumbaa1 pool: pumbaa1 state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data corruption. Applications may

Re: [zfs-discuss] Pool error in a hex file name

2011-06-13 Thread James Sutherland
A reboot and then another scrub fixed this. Reboot made no difference. So after the reboot I started another scrub and now the pool shows clean. So the sequence was like this: 1. zpool reported ioerrors after a scrub with an error on a file in a snapshot 2. destroyed the snapshot with the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Pool error in a hex file name

2011-06-13 Thread Richard Elling
On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:53 PM, James Sutherland wrote: A reboot and then another scrub fixed this. Reboot made no difference. So after the reboot I started another scrub and now the pool shows clean. So the sequence was like this: 1. zpool reported ioerrors after a scrub with an error on

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Hard link space savings

2011-06-13 Thread Nico Williams
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 5:50 AM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk r...@karlsbakk.net wrote: If anyone has any ideas be it ZFS based or any useful scripts that could help here, I am all ears. Something like this one-liner will show what would be allocated by everything if hardlinks weren't used: #

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Hard link space savings

2011-06-13 Thread Nico Williams
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote: Try this instead: (echo 0; find . -type f \! -links 1 | xargs stat -c %b %B *+ $p; echo p) | dc s/\$p// ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Hard link space savings

2011-06-13 Thread Nico Williams
And, without a sub-shell: find . -type f \! -links 1 | xargs stat -c %b %B *+p /dev/null | dc 2/dev/null | tail -1 (The stderr redirection is because otherwise dc whines once that the stack is empty, and the tail is because we print interim totals as we go.) Also, this doesn't quit work, since

Re: [zfs-discuss] optimal layout for 8x 1 TByte SATA (consumer)

2011-06-13 Thread Erik Trimble
On 6/12/2011 5:08 AM, Dimitar Hadjiev wrote: I can lay them out as 4*3-disk raidz1, 3*4-disk-raidz1 or a 1*12-disk raidz3 with nearly the same capacity (8-9 data disks plus parity). I see that with more vdevs the IOPS will grow - does this translate to better resilver and scrub times as well?