Re: [zfs-discuss] Slow file system access on zfs

2007-11-08 Thread Adrian Immler
how is the performance on the zfs directly without nfs? i have experienced big problems running nfs on large volumes (independent on the underlaying fs) This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list

Re: [zfs-discuss] Yager on ZFS

2007-11-08 Thread Louwtjie Burger
On 11/8/07, Mark Ashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Economics for one. Yep, for sure ... it was a rhetoric question ;) Why would I consider a new solution that is safe, fast enough, stable .. easier to manage and lots cheaper? Rephrase, Why would I NOT consider ...? :)

Re: [zfs-discuss] Slow file system access on zfs

2007-11-08 Thread Łukasz K
Dnia 8-11-2007 o godz. 7:58 Walter Faleiro napisał(a): Hi Lukasz, The output of the first sript gives bash-3.00# ./test.sh dtrace: script './test.sh' matched 4 probes CPU ID FUNCTION:NAME 0 42681 :tick-10s 0 42681 :tick-10s 0 42681 :tick-10s 0 42681 :tick-10s 0 42681 :tick-10s

[zfs-discuss] 3rd posting: ZFS question (case 65730249)

2007-11-08 Thread Dave Bevans
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Hi, I have a customer with the following questions... *Describe the problem:* A ZFS Question - I have one ZFS pool which is made from 2 storage arrays (vdevs). I have to delete the zfs filesystems with the names of /orbits/araid/* and remove one of

Re: [zfs-discuss] Yager on ZFS

2007-11-08 Thread Adam Leventhal
On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 01:47:04PM -0800, can you guess? wrote: I do consider the RAID-Z design to be somewhat brain-damaged [...] How so? In my opinion, it seems like a cure for the brain damage of RAID-5. Adam -- Adam Leventhal, FishWorkshttp://blogs.sun.com/ahl

Re: [zfs-discuss] Yager on ZFS

2007-11-08 Thread Mark Ashley
Economics for one. We run a number of testing environments which mimic the production one. But we don't want to spend $750,000 on EMC storage each time when something costing $200,000 will do the job we need. At the moment we have over 100TB on four SE6140s and we're very happy with the

Re: [zfs-discuss] X4500 device disconnect problem persists

2007-11-08 Thread Dan Poltawski
That is interesting, again we're having the same problem with our X4500s. I am trying to work out what is causing the problem with NFS, restarting the service causes it to try and stop and not bring it back up. Rebooting the whole box fails and it just hangs till a hard reset.. This

Re: [zfs-discuss] Yager on ZFS

2007-11-08 Thread can you guess?
On 11/7/07, can you guess? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Monday, November 5, 2007, 4:42:14 AM, you wrote: cyg Having gotten a bit tired of the level of ZFS hype floating ... But I do believe that some of the hype is justified Just to make it clear, so do I: it's the *unjustified*

Re: [zfs-discuss] Yager on ZFS

2007-11-08 Thread can you guess?
On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 01:47:04PM -0800, can you guess? wrote: I do consider the RAID-Z design to be somewhat brain-damaged [...] How so? In my opinion, it seems like a cure for the brain damage of RAID-5. Nope. A decent RAID-5 hardware implementation has no 'write hole' to worry

Re: [zfs-discuss] Yager on ZFS

2007-11-08 Thread can you guess?
Au contraire: I estimate its worth quite accurately from the undetected error rates reported in the CERN Data Integrity paper published last April (first hit if you Google 'cern data integrity'). While I have yet to see any checksum error reported by ZFS on Symmetrix arrays or

Re: [zfs-discuss] Yager on ZFS

2007-11-08 Thread Richard Elling
can you guess? wrote: CERN was using relatively cheap disks and found that they were more than adequate (at least for any normal consumer use) without that additional level of protection: the incidence of errors, even including the firmware errors which presumably would not have occurred

Re: [zfs-discuss] Major problem with a new ZFS setup

2007-11-08 Thread Michael Stalnaker
We weren't able to do anything at all, and finally rebooted the system. When we did, everything came back normally, even with the target that was reporting errors before. We're using an LSI PCI-E controller that's on the supported device list, and LSI 3801-E. Right now, I'm trying to figure out if