Can anyone help explain what does out-of-order issue mean in the
following segment?
ZFS has a pipelined I/O engine, similar in concept to CPU pipelines. The
pipeline operates on I/O dependency graphs and provides scoreboarding,
priority, deadline scheduling, out-of-order issue and I/O
Annie Li writes:
Can anyone help explain what does out-of-order issue mean in the
following segment?
ZFS has a pipelined I/O engine, similar in concept to CPU pipelines. The
pipeline operates on I/O dependency graphs and provides scoreboarding,
priority, deadline scheduling,
6322646 ZFS should gracefully handle all devices
failing (when writing)
Which is being worked on. Using a redundant
configuration prevents this
from happening.
What do you mean with redundant? All our servers has 2 or 4 HBAs, 2 or 4 fc
switches and storage arrays with redundant
1) ZFS must stop to force kernel panics!
As you know ZFS takes to a kernel panic when a
corrupted zpool is found or if it's unable to reach
a device and so on...
We need to have it just fail with an error message
but please stop crashing the kernel.
This is:
6322646 ZFS should
Hi,
sorry, I needed to be more clear:
Here's what I did:
1. Connect USB storage device (a disk) to machine
2. Find USB device through rmformat
3. Try zpool create on that device. It fails with:
can't open /dev/rdsk/cNt0d0p0, device busy
4. svcadm disable rmvolmgr
5. Now zpool create works
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 09:43:39PM -0700, Anton B.
Rang wrote:
That's only one cause of panics.
At least two of gino's panics appear due to
corrupted space maps, for
instance. I think there may also still be a case
where a failure to
read metadata during a transaction commit
Gino writes:
6322646 ZFS should gracefully handle all devices
failing (when writing)
Which is being worked on. Using a redundant
configuration prevents this
from happening.
What do you mean with redundant? All our servers has 2 or 4 HBAs, 2 or 4
fc switches and
Hi Mark,
Mark J Musante wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Constantin Gonzalez wrote:
Has anybody tried it yet with a striped mirror? What if the pool is
composed out of two mirrors? Can I attach devices to both mirrors, let
them resilver, then detach them and import the pool from those?
You'd
Erblichs wrote:
My two cents,
...
Secondly, if I can add an additional item, would anyone
want to be able to encrypt the data vs compress or to
be able to combine encryption with compression?
Yes, I might want to encrypt all of my laptop's hard drive contents and
I
Mark Maybee wrote:
Anton B. Rang wrote:
This sounds a lot like:
6417779 ZFS: I/O failure (write on ...) -- need to
reallocate writes
Which would allow us to retry write failures on
alternate vdevs.
Of course, if there's only one vdev, the write should be retried to a
different block on the
Hi,
How would you access the data on that device?
Presumably, zpool import.
yes.
This is basically what everyone does today with mirrors, isn't it? :-)
sure. This may not be pretty, but it's what customers are doing all the time
with regular mirrors, 'cause it's quick, easy and reliable.
Hello zfs-discuss,
In order to get IDR126199-01 I need to install 120473-05 first.
I can get 120473-07 but everything more than -05 is marked as
incompatible with IDR126199-01 so I do not want to force it.
Local Sun's support has problems with getting 120473-05 also so I'm
stuck for
On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 05:05:18PM -0500, in a galaxy far far away, Chris
Csanady said:
In a recent message, I detailed the excessive checksum errors that
occurred after replacing a disk. It seems that after a resilver
completes, it leaves a large number of blocks in the pool which fail
to
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello zfs-discuss,
In order to get IDR126199-01 I need to install 120473-05 first.
I can get 120473-07 but everything more than -05 is marked as
incompatible with IDR126199-01 so I do not want to force it.
Local Sun's support has problems with getting 120473-05
Anton B. Rang wrote:
This might be impractical for a large file system, of course. It might be
easier to have a 'zscavenge' that would recover data, where possible, from a
corrupted file system. But there should be at least one of these. Losing a
whole pool due to the corruption of a couple
On April 11, 2007 11:54:38 AM +0200 Constantin Gonzalez Schmitz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Mark,
Mark J Musante wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Constantin Gonzalez wrote:
Has anybody tried it yet with a striped mirror? What if the pool is
composed out of two mirrors? Can I attach devices to
1. Connect USB storage device (a disk) to machine
2. Find USB device through rmformat
3. Try zpool create on that device. It fails with:
can't open /dev/rdsk/cNt0d0p0, device busy
If your disk was originally formatted with pcfs or ufs, it would be
automounted when connected. If you didn't
How would you access the data on that device?
Presumably, zpool import.
This is basically what everyone does today with mirrors, isn't it? :-)
But that's not possible here because we can't deport (or import) a
subset of a pool, correct?
So I could detach a disk, but that disk is no
ugh, thanks for exploring this and isolating the problem. We will look
into what is going on (wrong) here. I have filed bug:
6545015 RAID-Z resilver broken
to track this problem.
-Mark
Marco van Lienen wrote:
On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 05:05:18PM -0500, in a galaxy far far away, Chris
On 4/11/07, Marco van Lienen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A colleague at work and I have followed the same steps, included
running a digest on the /test/file, on a SXCE:61 build today and
can confirm the exact same, and disturbing?, result. My colleague
mentioned to me he has witnessed the same
Hello Darren,
Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 7:39:18 PM, you wrote:
How would you access the data on that device?
Presumably, zpool import.
This is basically what everyone does today with mirrors, isn't it? :-)
DD But that's not possible here because we can't deport (or import) a
DD subset
rebooting fixed it - before rebooting, i ran the zdb script suggested above -
it created a 114MB file.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Mike,
This RFE is still being worked and I have no ETA on completion...
cs
Mike Seda wrote:
I noticed that there is still an open bug regarding removing devices
from a zpool:
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4852783
Does anyone know if or when this feature will be
Hello Enda,
Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 4:21:35 PM, you wrote:
EOCSMSI Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello zfs-discuss,
In order to get IDR126199-01 I need to install 120473-05 first.
I can get 120473-07 but everything more than -05 is marked as
incompatible with IDR126199-01 so I do not
I'm not sure if this is an nfs/autofs problem or zfs problem... But I'll try
here first...
On our server, I've got a zfs directory called cube/builds/izick/. In this
directory I have a number of mountpoints to other zfs file systems.. The
problem happens when we clone a new zfs file system,
Anthony J. Scarpino wrote:
I'm not sure if this is an nfs/autofs problem or zfs problem... But I'll try
here first...
On our server, I've got a zfs directory called cube/builds/izick/. In this
directory I have a number of mountpoints to other zfs file systems.. The problem
happens when we
Hello Ignatich,
Thursday, April 12, 2007, 12:32:13 AM, you wrote:
I Hello,
I I believe that ZFS and it's concepts is truly revolutionary to the
I point that I no longer see any OS as modern if it does not have
I comparable storage functionality. Therefore I think that file
I system/disk manager
Hello zfs-discuss,
One of a disk started to behave strangely.
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv sata: [ID 801593 kern.notice] NOTICE: /[EMAIL
PROTECTED],0/pci1022,[EMAIL PROTECTED]/pci11ab,[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv port 6: device reset
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv scsi: [ID
On 4/11/07, Robert Milkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking closely to GPLv3 but maybe Linux should change it's
license to actually provide more freedom and problem would disappear
then. See ZFS being ported to FreeBSD.
Agreed.
Why does everyone need to be compatible with Linux?? Why
Frank Cusack wrote:
On April 11, 2007 11:54:38 AM +0200 Constantin Gonzalez Schmitz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Mark,
Mark J Musante wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Constantin Gonzalez wrote:
Has anybody tried it yet with a striped mirror? What if the pool is
composed out of two mirrors? Can I
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Rayson Ho wrote:
Why does everyone need to be compatible with Linux?? Why not Linux
changes its license and be compatible with *BSD and Solaris??
I agree with this sentiment, but the reality is that changing the
Linux kernel's license would require the consent of every
Rich Teer writes:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Rayson Ho wrote:
Why does everyone need to be compatible with Linux?? Why not Linux
changes its license and be compatible with *BSD and Solaris??
I agree with this sentiment, but the reality is that changing the
Linux kernel's license would require the
Robert Milkowski writes:
I'm looking closely to GPLv3 but maybe Linux should change it's
license to actually provide more freedom and problem would disappear
then. See ZFS being ported to FreeBSD.
Will GPLv3 be CDDL compatible? I don't think so, but I'm no lawyer.
Perhaps somebody with more
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Ignatich wrote:
Does Sun have plans to dual license ZFS as GPL so it can be ported to native
Linux?
I don't work for Sun so I can't speak for them. The last I heard was that
Sun was looking at GPLv3, and considering its use for one or more projects,
either dual licensed
Anthony Scarpino wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anthony J. Scarpino wrote:
I'm not sure if this is an nfs/autofs problem or zfs problem... But
I'll try here first...
On our server, I've got a zfs directory called cube/builds/izick/.
In this directory I have a number of mountpoints to
Robert Thurlow wrote:
Anthony J. Scarpino wrote:
I'm not sure if this is an nfs/autofs problem or zfs problem... But I'll try
here first...
On our server, I've got a zfs directory called cube/builds/izick/. In
this directory I have a
number of mountpoints to other zfs file systems..
How have your snapshotting experiments worked out for fault tolerance? One of
the things I was hoping was that a solution could be easily constructed similar
to what we see from some higher-end IP SAN solutions like LeftHand Networks
SAN/iQ and proprietary SANs like Equallogic using just ZFS
On 11-Apr-07, at 8:25 PM, Ignatich wrote:
Rich Teer writes:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Rayson Ho wrote:
Why does everyone need to be compatible with Linux?? Why not Linux
changes its license and be compatible with *BSD and Solaris??
I agree with this sentiment, but the reality is that changing
On 4/11/07, Toby Thain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hope this isn't turning into a License flame war. But why do Linux
contributors not deserve the right to retain their choice of license
as equally as Sun, or any other copyright holder, does?
Hey, then just don't *keep on* asking to relicense
From: Toby Thain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 11-Apr-07, at 8:25 PM, Ignatich wrote:
Rich Teer writes:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Rayson Ho wrote:
Why does everyone need to be compatible with Linux?? Why not Linux
changes its license and be compatible with *BSD and Solaris??
I agree with this sentiment,
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Toby Thain wrote:
I hope this isn't turning into a License flame war. But why do Linux
contributors not deserve the right to retain their choice of license as
equally as Sun, or any other copyright holder, does?
Read what I wrote again, more slowly.
Individually, Linux
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Rayson Ho wrote:
Hey, then just don't *keep on* asking to relicense ZFS (and anything
else) to GPL.
Amen to that!
I don't think a lot of Solaris users ask on the Linux kernel mailing
list to relicense Linux kernel components to CDDL so that they can use
the features on
On 11/04/07, Toby Thain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11-Apr-07, at 8:25 PM, Ignatich wrote:
Rich Teer writes:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Rayson Ho wrote:
Why does everyone need to be compatible with Linux?? Why not Linux
changes its license and be compatible with *BSD and Solaris??
I agree with
This Asus board looks promising, assuming the parts (nForce 680a
chipset) are Solaris friendly:
http://www.asus.com.tw/products4.aspx?l1=3l2=136l3=486model=1530modelmenu=2
The board boasts 12 (!) SATA2 ports.
The FX-7x series CPUs appear to be a very cost effective ($799) 4 core
solution.
Ian
44 matches
Mail list logo
