As part of looking into a minor issue with the group listed when using
runat(1) on a UFS filesystem for Johannes (my Google Summer of Code
student work on new basic file privs), I discovered an even bigger issue
with UFS and extended attributes.
I've cc'd ZFS discuss because I used ZFS as the
I've tried to use dmake lint on on-src-20060731, and was running out of swap
on my
Tecra S1 laptop, 32-bit x86, 768MB main memory, with a 512MB swap slice.
The FULL KERNEL: global crosschecks: lint run consumes lots (~800MB) of space
in /tmp, so the system was running out of swap space.
To fix
I performed a SPEC SFS97 benchmark on Solaris 10u2/Sparc with 4 64GB
LUNs, connected via FC SAN.
The filesystems that were created on LUNS: UFS,VxFS,ZFS.
Unfortunately the ZFS test couldn't complete bacuase the box was hung
under very moderate load (3000 IOPs).
Additional tests were done using
If this is reproducible, can you force a panic so it can be analyzed?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On 8/7/06, William D. Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If this is reproducible, can you force a panic so it can be analyzed?
The core files and explorer output are here:
http://napobo3.lk.net/vinc/
The core files were created after the box was hungbreak to OBP...sync
Jürgen Keil wrote:
I've tried to use dmake lint on on-src-20060731, and was running out of swap
on my
Tecra S1 laptop, 32-bit x86, 768MB main memory, with a 512MB swap slice.
The FULL KERNEL: global crosschecks: lint run consumes lots (~800MB) of space
in /tmp, so the system was running out of
Lets have another root owned file but this time one that is
world writable:
islay:pts/4$ ls -l
total 0
-rw-r--r-- 1 darrenm staff 0 Aug 7 15:34 test1
-rw-r--r-- 1 darrenm root 0 Aug 7 15:35 test2
-rw-rw-rw- 1 root root 0 Aug 7 15:35 test3
Leon,
Looking at the corefile doesn't really show much from the zfs side. It
looks like you were having problems with your san though:
/scsi_vhci/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ssd5) offline
/scsi_vhci/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ssd5) multipath status: failed, path
/[EMAIL PROTECTED],70/SUNW,[EMAIL
Hi.
3510 with two HW controllers, configured on LUN in RAID-10 using 12 disks in
head unit (FC-AL 73GB 15K disks). Optimization set to random, stripe size 32KB.
Connected to v440 using two links, however in tests only one link was used (no
MPxIO).
I used filebench and varmail test with
On 8/7/06, George Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leon,
Looking at the corefile doesn't really show much from the zfs side. It
looks like you were having problems with your san though:
/scsi_vhci/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ssd5) offline
/scsi_vhci/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ssd5) multipath status: failed,
Cool stuff, Robert. It'd be interesting to see some RAID-Z (single- and
double-parity) benchmarks as well, but understandably this takes time
;-)
The first thing to note is that the current Nevada bits have a number of
performance fixes not in S10u2, so there's going to be a natural bias
when
Hello zfs-discuss,
Just a note to everyone experimenting with this - if you change it
online it has only effect when pools are exported and then imported.
ps. I didn't use for my last posted benchmarks - with it I get about
35,000IOPS and 0.2ms latency - but it's meaningless.
--
Hello Eric,
Monday, August 7, 2006, 5:53:38 PM, you wrote:
ES Cool stuff, Robert. It'd be interesting to see some RAID-Z (single- and
ES double-parity) benchmarks as well, but understandably this takes time
ES ;-)
I intend to test raid-z. Not sure there'll be enough time for raidz2.
ES The
Nce! Hooray ZFS!
- Luke
Sent from my GoodLink synchronized handheld (www.good.com)
-Original Message-
From: Robert Milkowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 11:25 AM Eastern Standard Time
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject:
Robert -
This isn't surprising (either the switch or the results). Our long term
fix for tweaking this knob is:
6280630 zil synchronicity
Which would add 'zfs set sync' as a per-dataset option. A cut from the
comments (which aren't visible on opensolaris):
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 06:16:12PM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
ES Second, you may be able to get more performance from the ZFS filesystem
ES on the HW lun by tweaking the max pending # of reqeusts. One thing
ES we've found is that ZFS currently has a hardcoded limit of how many
ES
Not quite, zil_disable is inspected on file system mounts.
It's also looked at dynamically on every write for zvols.
Neil.
Robert Milkowski wrote On 08/07/06 10:07,:
Hello zfs-discuss,
Just a note to everyone experimenting with this - if you change it
online it has only effect when pools
Hello,
Is a ZFS filesystem visible in Single-user mode ? I would like to have /var/log
as an example under ZFS control and /export/home may be another candidate.
Regards,
Pierre
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing
Hi Robert, thanks for the data.
Please clarify one thing for me.
In the case of the HW raid, was there just one LUN? Or was it 12 LUNs?
-- richard
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hi.
3510 with two HW controllers, configured on LUN in RAID-10 using 12 disks in
head unit (FC-AL 73GB 15K disks).
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 09:47:17AM -0700, Pierre Klovsjo wrote:
Is a ZFS filesystem visible in Single-user mode ? I would like to have
/var/log as an example under ZFS control and /export/home may be
another candidate.
Depends on whether you want to use legacy mountpoints or not. The
ES Second, you may be able to get more performance from the ZFS filesystem
ES on the HW lun by tweaking the max pending # of reqeusts. One thing
ES we've found is that ZFS currently has a hardcoded limit of how many
ES outstanding requests to send to the underlying vdev (35). This works
ES
I am reading the live coverage of WWDC keynote here:http://www.macrumorslive.com/web/They talked about a new feature in OS X/Leopard: Time Machine.
Does it sound like instant snapshot and rollback to you?I don't know how else this can be implemented.10:37 am with time machine, you can get those
Reading that site, it sounds EXACTLY like snapshots. It doesn't sound to
require a second disk, it just gives you the option of backing up to one.
Sounds like it snapshots once a day (configurable) and then sends the
snapshot to another drive/server if you request it to do so. Looks like they
Well, its hard to tell from the description whether the Time Machine
browser is the only way you can get at previous versions of files
before you restore them. If so, this is somewhat different than snapshots.
--joe
David J. Orman wrote:
Reading that site, it sounds EXACTLY like snapshots.
Yeah, we need more information.
However, time machine browser might very well just be a fancy browser for a
.zfs type setup, much like Solaris has. Just with GUI splash all over it. I'm
just curious about the underlying implementation. I wonder if they did all this
sticking with HFS+ or if
Yeah, I just noticed this line:
Backup Time: Time Machine will back up every night at midnight, unless
you select a different time from this menu.
So this is just standard backups, with a (very) slick GUI layered on
top. From the impression of the text-only rumor feed, it sounded more
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 12:08:17PM -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
Yeah, I just noticed this line:
Backup Time: Time Machine will back up every night at midnight, unless
you select a different time from this menu.
So this is just standard backups, with a (very) slick GUI layered on
top. From
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 02:36:27PM -0500, Ed Plese wrote:
A quick Google search turned up the following URL which has some
screenshots to illustrate what the Shadow Copy Client looks like.
Oops.. forgot the URL:
http://www.petri.co.il/how_to_use_the_shadow_copy_client.htm
Ed Plese
Eric Schrock wrote:
So this is just standard backups, with a (very) slick GUI layered on
top.
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/timf?entry=zfs_on_your_desktop
vs.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/timemachine.html
Hey!! Their idea looks *awfully* familiar :-/
(Steve, does this mean you'll
On Mon, Leon Koll wrote:
I performed a SPEC SFS97 benchmark on Solaris 10u2/Sparc with 4 64GB
LUNs, connected via FC SAN.
The filesystems that were created on LUNS: UFS,VxFS,ZFS.
Unfortunately the ZFS test couldn't complete bacuase the box was hung
under very moderate load (3000 IOPs).
Leon Koll wrote:
I performed a SPEC SFS97 benchmark on Solaris 10u2/Sparc with 4 64GB
LUNs, connected via FC SAN.
The filesystems that were created on LUNS: UFS,VxFS,ZFS.
Unfortunately the ZFS test couldn't complete bacuase the box was hung
under very moderate load (3000 IOPs).
Additional tests
On 8/7/06, Tim Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Magda wrote: Well, they've ported Dtrace: ..now built into Mac OS X Leopard. Xray. Because it's 2006.Uh right and they're actually shipping it in 2007. Apple marketing.
Anyone want to start printing t-shirts:DTrace Time Machine in OpenSolaris.
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:19:14PM -1000, David J. Orman wrote:
(actually did they give OpenSolaris a name check at all when they
mentioned DTrace ?)
Nope, not that I can see. Apple's pretty notorious for that kind of
oversight. I used to work for them, I know first hand how
On 8/7/06, Eric Schrock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:19:14PM -1000, David J. Orman wrote: (actually did they give OpenSolaris a name check at all when they mentioned DTrace ?) Nope, not that I can see. Apple's pretty notorious for that kind of
oversight. I used to work
On Aug 7, 2006, at 7:17 PM, Tao Chen wrote:
In terms of openness, Sun and Apple are going opposite directions
IMHO, interesting situation :)
Tao
Apple just released the Darwin Kernel code xnu-792-10.96
the equivalent of 10.4.7 for intel machines.
-- Robert.
Apple just released the Darwin Kernel code xnu-792-10.96
the equivalent of 10.4.7 for intel machines.
-- Robert.
Really? How odd. Seems to be counter-intuitive with this news:
http://opendarwin.org/en/news/shutdown.html
___
zfs-discuss mailing
Dave Fisk and I spent some time evaluating Thumper and ZFS as part of the beta
program. We collected tons of data and results that we fed back to Sun. I just
blogged a short summary at http://perfcap.blogspot.com and we are waiting for
the final performance fixes, and some spare time to do a
Roland Mainz wrote:
April Chin wrote:
I'm in the process of filing manpage bugs for ksh93 to include
changes to existing pages and new manpages for ksh93(1) and its
builtins (builtin(1), disown(1)).
CR 6457823 New manpages needed for ksh93
However, I do not see any manpages for
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
Lets have another root owned file but this time one that is
world writable:
islay:pts/4$ ls -l
total 0
-rw-r--r-- 1 darrenm staff 0 Aug 7 15:34 test1
-rw-r--r-- 1 darrenm root 0 Aug 7 15:35 test2
-rw-rw-rw- 1 root
Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
Lets have another root owned file but this time one that is
world writable:
islay:pts/4$ ls -l
total 0
-rw-r--r-- 1 darrenm staff 0 Aug 7 15:34 test1
-rw-r--r-- 1 darrenm root 0 Aug 7 15:35
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 04:57:44PM -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:19:14PM -1000, David J. Orman wrote:
(actually did they give OpenSolaris a name check at all when they
mentioned DTrace ?)
Nope, not that I can see. Apple's pretty notorious for that kind of
Needless to say, this was a pretty interesting piece of the keynote from a
technical point of view that had quite a few of us scratching our heads.
After talking to some Apple engineers, it seems like what they're doing is
more or less this:
When a file is modified, the kernel fires off an event
On 8/7/06, Robert Gordon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 7, 2006, at 7:17 PM, Tao Chen wrote: In terms of openness, Sun and Apple are going opposite directions IMHO, interesting situation :) TaoApple just released the Darwin Kernel code
xnu-792-10.96the equivalent of 10.4.7 for intel machines.--
On 8/7/06, Bryan Cantrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We've had a great relationship with Apple at the engineering level -- andindeed, Team DTrace just got back from dinner with the Apple engineersinvolved with the port.More details here:
Adam Leventhal wrote:
Needless to say, this was a pretty interesting piece of the keynote from a
technical point of view that had quite a few of us scratching our heads.
After talking to some Apple engineers, it seems like what they're doing is
more or less this:
When a file is modified, the
45 matches
Mail list logo
