Do an automatic pool snapshot (using the recursive atomic snapshot feature that
Matt Ahrens implemented recently, taking time proportional to the number of
filesystems in the pool) upon every txg commit.
Management of the trashcan snapshots could be done by some user-configurable
policy such
For a synchronous write to a pool with mirrored disks, does the write
unblock after just one of the disks' write caches is flushed,
or only after all of the disks' caches are flushed?
The latter. We don't consider a write to be committed until
the data is on stable storage at full
Richard Elling wrote:
Craig Morgan wrote:
Spare a thought also for the remote serviceability aspects of these
systems, if customers raise calls/escalations against such systems
then our remote support/solution centre staff would find such an
output useful in identifying and verifying the
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 03:54:22PM -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
If you give zpool(1M) 'whole disks' (i.e. no 's0' slice number) and let
it label and use the disks, it will automatically turn on the write
cache for you.
What if you can't give ZFS whole disks? I run snv_38 on the Optiplex
GX620
Brian Hechinger wrote On 07/26/06 06:49,:
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 03:54:22PM -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
If you give zpool(1M) 'whole disks' (i.e. no 's0' slice number) and let
it label and use the disks, it will automatically turn on the write
cache for you.
What if you can't give ZFS
Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Background / configuration **
zpool will not create a storage pool on fibre channel storage. I'm
attached to an IBM SVC using the IBMsdd driver. I have no problem using
SVM metadevices and UFS on these devices.
List steps to reproduce
This suggests that there is some kind of bug in the layered storage
software. ZFS doesn't do anything special to the underlying storage
device; it merely relies on a few ldi_*() routines. I would try running
the following dtrace script:
#!/usr/sbin/dtrace -s
vdev_disk_open:return,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil Perrin wrote:
I suppose if you know
the disk only contains zfs slices then write caching could be
manually enabled using format -e - cache - write_cache - enable
When will we have write cache control over ATA/SATA drives? :-).
- --
Jesus Cea
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 08:38:16AM -0600, Neil Perrin wrote:
GX620 on my desk at work and I run snv_40 on the Latitude D610 that I
carry with me. In both cases the machines only have one disk, so I need
to split it up for UFS for the OS and ZFS for my data. How do I turn on
write cache
zfs should work fine with disks under the control of solaris mpxio.
i don't know about any of the other multipathing solutions.
if you're trying to use a device that's controlled by another
multipathing solution, you might want to try specifying the full
path to the device, ex:
zpool
Jesus Cea wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil Perrin wrote:
I suppose if you know
the disk only contains zfs slices then write caching could be
manually enabled using format -e - cache - write_cache - enable
When will we have write cache control over ATA/SATA drives?
Customer created a pool with 2 disks that were mirrored.
He then wanted to see what would happen if he destroyed the mirror.
He offlined the disk c1t5d0 then destroy it.
Hi ZFS question.
He then added back to the pool with the intention of it replacing itself
as the mirror. However the pool
You want 'zpool attach' instead of 'zpool add'. What the customer did
was add it back, but as a dynamic stripe instead of a second half of a
mirror.
And no, there is currently no way to remove a dynamically striped disk
from a pool. We're working on it.
- Eric
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at
Eric,
Here is what the customer gets trying to create the pool using the
software alias: (I added all the ldi_open's to the script)
# zpool create -f extdisk vpath1c
# ./dtrace.script
dtrace: script './dtrace.script' matched 6 probes
CPU IDFUNCTION:NAME
0 7233
So it does look like something's messed up here. Before we pin this
down as a driver bug, we should double check that we are indeed opening
what we think we're opening, and try to track down why ldi_get_size is
failing. Try this:
#!/usr/sbin/dtrace -s
ldi_open_by_name:entry
{
Eric,
Here is the output:
# ./dtrace2.dtr
dtrace: script './dtrace2.dtr' matched 4 probes
CPU IDFUNCTION:NAME
0 17816 ldi_open_by_name:entry /dev/dsk/vpath1c
0 16197 ldi_get_otyp:return 0
0 15546
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 02:11:44PM -0600, David Curtis wrote:
Eric,
Here is the output:
# ./dtrace2.dtr
dtrace: script './dtrace2.dtr' matched 4 probes
CPU IDFUNCTION:NAME
0 17816 ldi_open_by_name:entry /dev/dsk/vpath1c
0 16197
Does format show these drives to be available and containing a non-zero
size?
Eric Schrock wrote:
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 02:11:44PM -0600, David Curtis wrote:
Eric,
Here is the output:
# ./dtrace2.dtr
dtrace: script './dtrace2.dtr' matched 4 probes
CPU ID
Hello Eric,
Wednesday, July 26, 2006, 8:44:55 PM, you wrote:
ES And no, there is currently no way to remove a dynamically striped disk
ES from a pool. We're working on it.
That's interesting (I mean that's something is actually being done
about it).
Can you give us some specifics (features,
zfs depends on ldi_get_size(), which depends on the device being
accessed exporting one of the properties below. i guess the
the devices generated by IBMsdd and/or EMCpower/or don't
generate these properties.
ed
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 01:53:31PM -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
On Wed, Jul 26,
Hello zfs-discuss,
Is someone working on a backport (patch) to S10? Any timeframe?
--
Best regards,
Robert mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://milek.blogspot.com
___
zfs-discuss mailing
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello George,
Wednesday, July 26, 2006, 7:27:04 AM, you wrote:
GW Additionally, I've just putback the latest feature set and bugfixes
GW which will be part of s10u3_03. There were some additional performance
GW fixes which may really benefit plus it will provide hot
22 matches
Mail list logo
