Re: [zfs-discuss] CR 6880994 and pkg fix
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 07:22:59PM -0400, Frank Middleton wrote: On 03/22/10 11:50 PM, Richard Elling wrote: Look again, the checksums are different. Whoops, you are correct, as usual. Just 6 bits out of 256 different... Look which bits are different - digits 24, 53-56 in both cases. This is very likely an error introduced during the calculation of the hash, rather than an error in the input data. I don't know how that helps narrow down the source of the problem, though.. It suggests an experiment: try switching to another hash algorithm. It may move the problem around, or even make it worse, of course. I'm also reminded of a thread about the implementation of fletcher2 being flawed, perhaps you're better switching regardless. o Why is the file flagged by ZFS as fatally corrupted still accessible? This is the part I was hoping to get answers for since AFAIK this should be impossible. Since none of this is having any operational impact, all of these issues are of interest only, but this is a bit scary! It's only the blocks with bad checksums that should return errors. Maybe you're not reading those, or the transient error doesn't happen next time when you actually try to read it / from the other side of the mirror. Repeated errors in the same file could also be a symptom of an error calculating the hash when the file was written. If there's a bit-flipping issue at the root of it, with some given probability, that would invert the probabilities of correct and error results. -- Dan. pgpGRgBlRkr4l.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] CR 6880994 and pkg fix
You could try copying the file to /tmp (ie swap/ram) and do a continues loop of checksums e.g. while [ ! -f ibdlpi.so.1.x ] ; do sleep 1; cp libdlpi.so.1 libdlpi.so.1.x ; A=`sha512sum -b libdlpi.so.1.x` ; [ $A == what it should be libdlpi.so.1.x ] rm libdlpi.so.1.x ; done ; date Assume the file never goes to swap, it would tell you if something on the motherboard is playing up. I have seen CPU randomly set a byte to 0 which should not be 0, think it was an L1 or L2 cache problem. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] CR 6880994 and pkg fix
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 How about running memtest86+ (http://www.memtest.org/) on the machine for a while? It doesn't test the arithmetics on the CPU very much, but it stresses data paths quite a lot. Just a quick suggestion... - -- Saso Damon Atkins wrote: You could try copying the file to /tmp (ie swap/ram) and do a continues loop of checksums e.g. while [ ! -f ibdlpi.so.1.x ] ; do sleep 1; cp libdlpi.so.1 libdlpi.so.1.x ; A=`sha512sum -b libdlpi.so.1.x` ; [ $A == what it should be libdlpi.so.1.x ] rm libdlpi.so.1.x ; done ; date Assume the file never goes to swap, it would tell you if something on the motherboard is playing up. I have seen CPU randomly set a byte to 0 which should not be 0, think it was an L1 or L2 cache problem. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkuqHm8ACgkQRO8UcfzpOHD9PQCgyehtxeAt8tieOlIKfHICQQI9 bFoAnRGzfWayNDsjHj5NdF+5n++Pdqaq =cru5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] CR 6880994 and pkg fix
you could also use psradm to take a CPU off-line. At boot I would ??assume?? the system boots the same way every time unless something changes, so you could be hiting the came CPU core every time or the same bit of RAM until booted fully. Or even run SunVTS Validation Test Suite which I belive has a simlar test to the cp in /tmp and all the other tests it has. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Thoughts on ZFS Pool Backup Strategies
Darren J Moffat darr...@opensolaris.org wrote: You cannot get a single file out of the zfs send datastream. I don't see that as part of the definition of a backup - you obviously do - so we will just have to disagree on that. If you need to set up a file server of the same size as the original one in order to be able to access a specific file from backup data, this could be sees as major handicap. getattrat(3C) / setattrat(3C) Even has example code in it. This is what ls(1) uses. It could be easily possible to add portable support integrated into the framework that already supports FreeBSD and Linux attributes. Great, do you have a time frame for when you will have this added to star then ? I need to write some missing 50 lines of code (formatting virgin BD-RE and BD-RE/DL media) in cdrecordl and publish cdrtools-3.0-final before I start working on other projects, but this will hopefully be soon. - A public interface to get the property state That would come from libzfs. There are private interfaces just now that are very likely what you need zfs_prop_get()/zfs_prop_set(). They aren't documented or public though and are subject to change at any time. mmm, as the state of the compression flag may seriously affect media consumption, this seems to be an important part of the meta data in case of a backup. Is there no way to define an interface that will just evolve without becoming ncompatible? Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Thoughts on ZFS Pool Backup Strategies
On Wed, March 24, 2010 10:36, Joerg Schilling wrote: - A public interface to get the property state That would come from libzfs. There are private interfaces just now that are very likely what you need zfs_prop_get()/zfs_prop_set(). They aren't documented or public though and are subject to change at any time. mmm, as the state of the compression flag may seriously affect media consumption, this seems to be an important part of the meta data in case of a backup. Is there no way to define an interface that will just evolve without becoming ncompatible? I think the larger question is: when will ZFS be stable enough that Oracle will say that libzfs is an officially supported interface? Once that happens it will probably be possible for third parties to start accessing ZFS in ways other than the POSIX interface. I'm guessing that support for crypto, device removal, and parity changing (RAID-Z1 - Z2 - Z3) need to be put in first (the latter two necessitating bp rewrite). I would hazard to guess it will be at least a year before it's even considered and longer before it happens (Solaris 12? or maybe a latter update of Solaris 11?). Until that happens we'll be stuck with working at the ZPL for most things. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
Hello all, I am a complete newbie to OpenSolaris, and must to setup a ZFS NAS. I do have linux experience, but have never used ZFS. I have tried to install OpenSolaris Developer 134 on a 11TB HW RAID-5 virtual disk, but after the installation I can only use one 2TB disk, and I cannot partition the rest. I realize that maximum partition size is 2TB, but I guess the rest must be usable. For hardware I am using HP ProLiant DL180G6, 12 1TB disks connected to P212 controller in RAID-5. Could someone direct me or suggest what I am doing wrong. Any help is greatly appreciated. Cheers, Dusan -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Dusan Radovanovic dusa...@gmail.comwrote: Hello all, I am a complete newbie to OpenSolaris, and must to setup a ZFS NAS. I do have linux experience, but have never used ZFS. I have tried to install OpenSolaris Developer 134 on a 11TB HW RAID-5 virtual disk, but after the installation I can only use one 2TB disk, and I cannot partition the rest. I realize that maximum partition size is 2TB, but I guess the rest must be usable. For hardware I am using HP ProLiant DL180G6, 12 1TB disks connected to P212 controller in RAID-5. Could someone direct me or suggest what I am doing wrong. Any help is greatly appreciated. Cheers, Dusan You would be much better off installing to a small internal disk, and then creating a separate pool for the 11TB of storage. The 2TB limit is because it's a boot drive. That limit should go away if you're using it as a separate storage pool. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
Hi On Wednesday 24 March 2010 17:01:31 Dusan Radovanovic wrote: connected to P212 controller in RAID-5. Could someone direct me or suggest what I am doing wrong. Any help is greatly appreciated. I don't know, but I would get around this like this: My suggestion would be to configure the HW RAID controller to act as a dumb JBOD controller and thus make the 12 disks visible to the OS. Then you can start playing around with ZFS on these disks, e.g. creating different pools: zpool create testpool raidz c0t0d0 c0t1d0 c0t2d0 c0t3d0 c0t4d0 c0t5d0 \ raidz c0t6d0 c0t7d0 c0t8d0 c0t9d0 c0t10d0 c0t11d0 (Caveat: this is from the top of my head and might be - very -wrong). This would create something like RAID50. Then I would start reading, reading and testing and testing :) HTH Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Fwd: Re: ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Forgot to cc the list, well here goes... - Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 17:10:58 +0100 From: Svein Skogen sv...@stillbilde.net To: Dusan Radovanovic dusa...@gmail.com On 24.03.2010 17:01, Dusan Radovanovic wrote: Hello all, I am a complete newbie to OpenSolaris, and must to setup a ZFS NAS. I do have linux experience, but have never used ZFS. I have tried to install OpenSolaris Developer 134 on a 11TB HW RAID-5 virtual disk, but after the installation I can only use one 2TB disk, and I cannot partition the rest. I realize that maximum partition size is 2TB, but I guess the rest must be usable. For hardware I am using HP ProLiant DL180G6, 12 1TB disks connected to P212 controller in RAID-5. Could someone direct me or suggest what I am doing wrong. Any help is greatly appreciated. Cheers, Dusan If you have a recent enough raid controller to reliably handle more than 2TB per Logical Disk, it has support for more than one logical disk per drivegroup/span of drivegroups. Do yourself the favour of setting up a 100GB logical disk 0 for the system, and the rest of the drivegroup/span for the storage pool. Remember to disable write cache unless you have battery backup, unless you really want to try out ZFS's famous corruption-recovery algorithms by personal experience. //Svein -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkuqOdEACgkQSBMQn1jNM7bbEgCcDN3sEs1wDI86l04ch0eUZ3yw BL8AmgIJ6uaiuqPX2nelqR645rn4IuyW =trHb -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
I believe that write caching is turned off on the boot drives or is it the controller or both? Which could be a big problem. On 03/24/10 11:07, Tim Cook wrote: On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Dusan Radovanovic dusa...@gmail.com mailto:dusa...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, I am a complete newbie to OpenSolaris, and must to setup a ZFS NAS. I do have linux experience, but have never used ZFS. I have tried to install OpenSolaris Developer 134 on a 11TB HW RAID-5 virtual disk, but after the installation I can only use one 2TB disk, and I cannot partition the rest. I realize that maximum partition size is 2TB, but I guess the rest must be usable. For hardware I am using HP ProLiant DL180G6, 12 1TB disks connected to P212 controller in RAID-5. Could someone direct me or suggest what I am doing wrong. Any help is greatly appreciated. Cheers, Dusan You would be much better off installing to a small internal disk, and then creating a separate pool for the 11TB of storage. The 2TB limit is because it's a boot drive. That limit should go away if you're using it as a separate storage pool. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication (including all attachments) is confidential and is intended for the use of the named addressee(s) only and may contain information that is private, confidential, privileged, and exempt from disclosure under law. All rights to privilege are expressly claimed and reserved and are not waived. Any use, dissemination, distribution, copying or disclosure of this message and any attachments, in whole or in part, by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete this communication from all data storage devices and destroy all hard copies. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] CR 6880994 and pkg fix
On Mar 23, 2010, at 11:21 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote: On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 07:22:59PM -0400, Frank Middleton wrote: On 03/22/10 11:50 PM, Richard Elling wrote: Look again, the checksums are different. Whoops, you are correct, as usual. Just 6 bits out of 256 different... Look which bits are different - digits 24, 53-56 in both cases. This is very likely an error introduced during the calculation of the hash, rather than an error in the input data. I don't know how that helps narrow down the source of the problem, though.. The exact same code is used to calculate the checksum when writing or reading. However, we assume the processor works and Frank's tests do not indicate otherwise. It suggests an experiment: try switching to another hash algorithm. It may move the problem around, or even make it worse, of course. I'm also reminded of a thread about the implementation of fletcher2 being flawed, perhaps you're better switching regardless. Clearly, fletcher2 identified the problem. -- richard ZFS storage and performance consulting at http://www.RichardElling.com ZFS training on deduplication, NexentaStor, and NAS performance Las Vegas, April 29-30, 2010 http://nexenta-vegas.eventbrite.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
Thank you all for your valuable experience and fast replies. I see your point and will create one virtual disk for the system and one for the storage pool. My RAID controller is battery backed up, so I'll leave write caching on. Thanks again, Dusan -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Fwd: Re: ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
Thank you for your advice. I see your point and will create one virtual disk for the system and one for the storage pool. My RAID controller is battery backed up, so I'll leave write caching on. Thanks again, Dusan -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
On Mar 24, 2010, at 9:14 AM, Karl Rossing wrote: I believe that write caching is turned off on the boot drives or is it the controller or both? By default, ZFS will not enable volatile write caches on disks for SMI labeled disk drives (eg boot). Which could be a big problem. Actually, it is very rare that the synchronous write performance of a boot drive is a performance problem. Nonvolatile write caches are not a problem. On 03/24/10 11:07, Tim Cook wrote: On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Dusan Radovanovic dusa...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, I am a complete newbie to OpenSolaris, and must to setup a ZFS NAS. I do have linux experience, but have never used ZFS. I have tried to install OpenSolaris Developer 134 on a 11TB HW RAID-5 virtual disk, but after the installation I can only use one 2TB disk, and I cannot partition the rest. I realize that maximum partition size is 2TB, but I guess the rest must be usable. For hardware I am using HP ProLiant DL180G6, 12 1TB disks connected to P212 controller in RAID-5. Could someone direct me or suggest what I am doing wrong. Any help is greatly appreciated. Simple. Make a small LUN, say 20GB or so, and install the OS there. -- richard ZFS storage and performance consulting at http://www.RichardElling.com ZFS training on deduplication, NexentaStor, and NAS performance Las Vegas, April 29-30, 2010 http://nexenta-vegas.eventbrite.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
On 24.03.2010 17:42, Richard Elling wrote: Nonvolatile write caches are not a problem. Which is why ZFS isn't a replacement for proper array controllers (defining proper as those with sufficient battery to leave you with a seemingly intact filesystem), but a very nice augmentation for them. ;) As someone pointed out in another thread: Proper storage still takes proper planning. ;) //Svein -- Sending mail from a temporary set up workstation, as my primary W500 is off for service. PGP not installed. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] LSISAS2004 support
Loaded mpt_sas, world of difference, thanks. Then I yanked a drive out of the hot plug backplane to see what would happened. My ZPOOL detects an IO failure and runs in degraded mode. All good, pop the drive back in, but a zpool replace appears not sufficient. (This works with the 1068E/mpt driver) combo. I then ran cfgadm -c configure c4, completes, no change in the configuration status of the device. cfgadm -c configure c4::dsk/c4t3d0 fails. Is there a equivalent to -xsata_port_activate for scsi-sas that I should use? Thanks, Bart On Mar 22, 2010, at 23:40, James C. McPherson wrote: On 23/03/10 01:23 PM, Bart Nabbe wrote: All, I did some digging and I was under the impression that the mr_sas driver was to support the LSISAS2004 HBA controller from LSI. I did add the pci id to the driver alias for mr_sas, but then the driver still showed up as unattached (see below). Did I miss something, or was my assumption that this controller was supported in the dev branch flawed. I'm running: SunOS 5.11 snv_134 i86pc i386 i86pc Solaris. Thanks in advance for any pointers. node name: pci1000,3010 Vendor: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic Device: SAS2004 PCI-Express Fusion-MPT SAS-2 [Spitfire] Sub-Vendor: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic binding name: pciex1000,70 devfs path: /p...@0,0/pci8086,3...@3/pci1000,3010 pci path: 3,0,0 compatible name: (pciex1000,70.1000.3010.2)(pciex1000,70.1000.3010)(pciex1000,70.2)(pciex1000,70)(pciexclass,010700)(pciexclass,0107)(pci1000,70.1000.3010.2)(pci1000,70.1000.3010)(pci1000,3010)(pci1000,70.2)(pci1000,70)(pciclass,010700)(pciclass,0107) driver name:mr_sas This should be using the mpt_sas driver, not the mr_sas driver. James C. McPherson -- Senior Software Engineer, Solaris Sun Microsystems http://www.jmcp.homeunix.com/blog ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Moving drives around...
On Tue, March 23, 2010 12:00, Ray Van Dolson wrote: ZFS recognizes disks based on various ZFS special blocks written to them. It also keeps a cache file on where things have been lately. If you export a ZFS pool, swap the physical drives around, and import it, everything should be fine. If you don't export first, you may have to give it a bit of help. And there are pathological cases where for example you don't have a link in the /dev/dsk directory which can cause a default import to not find all the pieces of a pool. Indeed. Before I wised up and bought an HBA for my RAIDZ2 array instead of using randomly-assorted SATA controllers, I tried rearranging some disks without exporting the pool first. I almost had a heart attack when the system came up reporting corrupted data on the drives that had been switched. As it turned out, I just needed to export and re-import the pool, and it was fine after that. Needless to say, when the HBA went in, I made sure to export the pool FIRST. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] To reserve space
Is there a way to reserve space for a particular user or group? Or perhaps to set a quota for a group which includes everyone else? I have one big pool, which holds users' home directories, and also the backend files for the svn repositories etc. I would like to ensure the svn server process will always have some empty space to work with, even if some users go hog wild and consume everything they can. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
On Mar 24, 2010, at 10:05 AM, Svein Skogen wrote: On 24.03.2010 17:42, Richard Elling wrote: Nonvolatile write caches are not a problem. Which is why ZFS isn't a replacement for proper array controllers (defining proper as those with sufficient battery to leave you with a seemingly intact filesystem), but a very nice augmentation for them. ;) Nothing prevents a clever chap from building a ZFS-based array controller which includes nonvolatile write cache. However, the economics suggest that the hybrid storage pool model can provide a highly dependable service at a lower price-point than the traditional array designs. As someone pointed out in another thread: Proper storage still takes proper planning. ;) Good advice :-) -- richard ZFS storage and performance consulting at http://www.RichardElling.com ZFS training on deduplication, NexentaStor, and NAS performance Las Vegas, April 29-30, 2010 http://nexenta-vegas.eventbrite.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] To reserve space
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.comwrote: Is there a way to reserve space for a particular user or group? Or perhaps to set a quota for a group which includes everyone else? I have one big pool, which holds users’ home directories, and also the backend files for the svn repositories etc. I would like to ensure the svn server process will always have some empty space to work with, even if some users go hog wild and consume everything they can. zfs set reservation=100GB dataset/name That will reserve 100 GB of space for the dataset, and will make that space unavailable to the rest of the pool. -- Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
Thank you all for your valuable experience and fast replies. I see your point and will create one virtual disk for the system and one for the storage pool. My RAID controller is battery backed up, so I'll leave write caching on. I think the point is to say: ZFS software raid is both faster and more reliable than your hardware raid. Surprising though it may be for a newcomer, I have statistics to back that up, and explanation of how it's possible. If you want to know. You will do best if you configure the raid controller to JBOD. Yes it's ok to enable WriteBack on all those disks, but just use the raid card for write buffering, not raid. The above suggestion might be great ideally. But how do you boot from some disk which isn't attached to the raid controller? Most servers don't have any other option ... So you might just make a 2-disk mirror, use that as a boot volume, and then JBOD all the other disks. That's somewhat a waste of disk space, but it might be your best solution. This is in fact, what I do. I have 2x 1TB disks dedicated to nothing but the OS. That's tremendous overkill. And all the other disks are a data pool. All of the disks are 1TB, because it greatly simplifies the usage of a hotspare... And I'm wasting nearly 1TB on the OS disks. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] To reserve space
zfs set reservation=100GB dataset/name That will reserve 100 GB of space for the dataset, and will make that space unavailable to the rest of the pool. That doesn't make any sense to me ... How does that allow subversionuser to use the space, and block joeuser from using it? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] To reserve space
zfs set reservation=100GB dataset/name That will reserve 100 GB of space for the dataset, and will make that space unavailable to the rest of the pool. That doesn't make any sense to me ... How does that allow subversionuser to use the space, and block joeuser from using it? Oh - I get it - In the case of subversion server, it's pretty safe to assume all the svnuser files are under a specific subdirectory (or a manageably finite number of directories) and therefore could use a separate zfs filesystem within the same pool, and therefore that directory or directories could have a space reservation. I think that will be sufficient for our immediate needs. Thanks for the suggestion. Out of curiosity, the more general solution would be the ability to create a reservation on a per-user or per-group basis (just like you create quotas on a per-user or per-group basis). Is this possible? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Moving drives around...
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:47:27AM -0700, Russ Price wrote: On Tue, March 23, 2010 12:00, Ray Van Dolson wrote: ZFS recognizes disks based on various ZFS special blocks written to them. It also keeps a cache file on where things have been lately. If you export a ZFS pool, swap the physical drives around, and import it, everything should be fine. If you don't export first, you may have to give it a bit of help. And there are pathological cases where for example you don't have a link in the /dev/dsk directory which can cause a default import to not find all the pieces of a pool. Indeed. Before I wised up and bought an HBA for my RAIDZ2 array instead of using randomly-assorted SATA controllers, I tried rearranging some disks without exporting the pool first. I almost had a heart attack when the system came up reporting corrupted data on the drives that had been switched. As it turned out, I just needed to export and re-import the pool, and it was fine after that. Needless to say, when the HBA went in, I made sure to export the pool FIRST. In my limited testing (with an HBA based system), I've been able to move drives around without exporting first... but sounds like good practice just to export anyways to be on the safe side. :) Thanks, Ray ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] To reserve space
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.comwrote: Out of curiosity, the more general solution would be the ability to create a reservation on a per-user or per-group basis (just like you create quotas on a per-user or per-group basis). Is this possible? OpenSolaris's zfs has supported quotas for a little while, so make sure you're using a recent build. I'm not sure if it's in Solaris 10, but I believe it is. Before quotas were supported, the answer was to create a new dataset per user, eg: tank/home/user1, tank/home/user2, etc. It's easy to do in zfs, but it doesn't always work for storage that is shared between users. -B -- Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
Which is why ZFS isn't a replacement for proper array controllers (defining proper as those with sufficient battery to leave you with a seemingly intact filesystem), but a very nice augmentation for them. ;) Nothing prevents a clever chap from building a ZFS-based array controller which includes nonvolatile write cache. However, the economics suggest that the hybrid storage pool model can provide a highly dependable service at a lower price-point than the traditional array designs. I don't have finished results that are suitable for sharing yet, but I'm doing a bunch of benchmarks right now that suggest: -1- WriteBack enabled is much faster for writing than WriteThrough. (duh.) -2- Ditching the WriteBack, and using a ZIL instead, is even faster than that. Oddly, the best performance seems to be using ZIL, with all the disks WriteThrough. You actually get slightly lower performance if you enable the ZIL together with WriteBack. My theory to explain the results I'm seeing is: Since the ZIL performs best for zillions of tiny write operations and the spindle disks perform best for large sequential writes, I suspect the ZIL accumulates tiny writes until they add up to a large sequential write, and then they're flushed to spindle disks. In this configuration, the HBA writeback cannot add any benefit, because the datastreams are already optimized for the device they're writing to. Yet, by enabling the WriteBack, you introduce a small delay before writes begin to hit the spindle. By switching to WriteThrough, you actually get better performance. As counter-intuitive as that may seem. :-) So, if you've got access to a pair of decent ZIL devices, you're actually faster and more reliable to run all your raid and caching and buffering via ZFS instead of using a fancy HBA. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Dedup Performance
srbi == Steve Radich, BitShop, Inc ste...@bitshop.com writes: srbi http://www.bitshop.com/Blogs/tabid/95/EntryId/78/Bug-in-OpenSolaris-SMB-Server-causes-slow-disk-i-o-always.aspx I'm having trouble understanding many things in here like ``our file move'' (moving what from where to where with what protocol?) and ``with SMB running'' (with the server enabled on Solaris, with filesystems mounted, with activity on the mountpoints? what does running mean?) and ``RAID-0/stripe reads is the slow point'' (what does this mean? How did you determine which part of the stack is limiting the observed speed? This is normally quite difficult and requires comparing several experiments, not doing just one experiment like ``a file move between zfs pools''.). What is ``bytes the negotiated protocol allows''? mtu, mss, window size? Can you show us in what tool you see one number and where you see the other number that's too big? pgpAMuI2YHJGk.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] To reserve space
The question is not how to create quotas for users. The question is how to create reservations for users. One way to create a reservation for a user is to create a quota for everyone else, but that's a little less manageable, so a reservation per-user would be cleaner and more desirable. From: Brandon High [mailto:bh...@freaks.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 2:33 PM To: Edward Ned Harvey Cc: Freddie Cash; zfs-discuss Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] To reserve space On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.com wrote: Out of curiosity, the more general solution would be the ability to create a reservation on a per-user or per-group basis (just like you create quotas on a per-user or per-group basis). Is this possible? OpenSolaris's zfs has supported quotas for a little while, so make sure you're using a recent build. I'm not sure if it's in Solaris 10, but I believe it is. Before quotas were supported, the answer was to create a new dataset per user, eg: tank/home/user1, tank/home/user2, etc. It's easy to do in zfs, but it doesn't always work for storage that is shared between users. -B -- Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
On 03/24/10 12:54, Richard Elling wrote: Nothing prevents a clever chap from building a ZFS-based array controller which includes nonvolatile write cache. +1 to that. Something that is inexpensive and small (4GB?) and works in a PCI express slot. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication (including all attachments) is confidential and is intended for the use of the named addressee(s) only and may contain information that is private, confidential, privileged, and exempt from disclosure under law. All rights to privilege are expressly claimed and reserved and are not waived. Any use, dissemination, distribution, copying or disclosure of this message and any attachments, in whole or in part, by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete this communication from all data storage devices and destroy all hard copies. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] To reserve space
On Wed, March 24, 2010 14:36, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: The question is not how to create quotas for users. The question is how to create reservations for users. There is currently no way to do per-user reservations. That ZFS property is only available per-file system. Even per-user and per-group quotas are a recent addition (requested a lot from academic environments). For most of the existence of ZFS, only per-file system (i.e., data set) quotas were available. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 24.03.2010 19:53, Karl Rossing wrote: On 03/24/10 12:54, Richard Elling wrote: Nothing prevents a clever chap from building a ZFS-based array controller which includes nonvolatile write cache. +1 to that. Something that is inexpensive and small (4GB?) and works in a PCI express slot. Maybe someone should look at implementing the zfs code for the XScale range of io-processors (such as the IOP333)? //Svein - -- - +---+--- /\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE - +---+--- If you really are in a hurry, mail me at svein-mob...@stillbilde.net This mailbox goes directly to my cellphone and is checked even when I'm not in front of my computer. - Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ - -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkuqYa4ACgkQSBMQn1jNM7Z32QCbBfyhDz34vTkSNIT0JO9gbgZ2 TkUAoPlRbirW5VQ0bYS3k/kmbOWaUUc0 =SDFD -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ZFS backup configuration
Sorry if this has been dicussed before. I tried searching but I couldn't find any info about it. We would like to export our ZFS configurations in case we need to import the pool onto another box. We do not want to backup the actual data in the zfs pool, that is already handled through another program. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS backup configuration
On Wed, Mar 24 at 12:20, Wolfraider wrote: Sorry if this has been dicussed before. I tried searching but I couldn't find any info about it. We would like to export our ZFS configurations in case we need to import the pool onto another box. We do not want to backup the actual data in the zfs pool, that is already handled through another program. I'm pretty sure the configuration is embedded in the pool itself. Just import on the new machine. You may need --force/-f the pool wasn't exported on the old system properly. --eric -- Eric D. Mudama edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Pool vdev imbalance - getting worse?
On 02/28/10 08:09 PM, Ian Collins wrote: I was running zpool iostat on a pool comprising a stripe of raidz2 vdevs that appears to be writing slowly and I notice a considerable imbalance of both free space and write operations. The pool is currently feeding a tape backup while receiving a large filesystem. Is this imbalance normal? I would expect a more even distribution as the poll configuration hasn't been changed since creation. The system is running Solaris 10 update 7. capacity operationsbandwidth pool used avail read write read write - - - - - - tank 15.9T 2.19T 87119 2.34M 1.88M raidz2 2.90T 740G 24 27 762K 95.5K raidz2 3.59T 37.8G 20 0 546K 0 raidz2 3.58T 44.1G 27 0 1.01M 0 raidz2 3.05T 587G 7 47 24.9K 1.07M raidz2 2.81T 835G 8 45 30.9K 733K - - - - - - This system has since been upgraded, but the imbalance in getting worse: zpool iostat -v tank | grep raid raidz2 3.60T 28.5G166 41 6.97M 764K raidz2 3.59T 33.3G170 35 7.35M 709K raidz2 3.60T 26.1G173 35 7.36M 658K raidz2 1.69T 1.93T129 46 6.70M 610K raidz2 2.25T 1.38T124 54 5.77M 967K Is there any way to determine how this is happening? I may have to resort to destroying and recreating some large filesystems, but there's no way to determine which ones to target... -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS backup configuration
Yes, I think Eric is correct. Funny, this is an adjunct to the thread I started entitled Thoughts on ZFS Pool Backup Strategies. I was going to include this point in that thread but thought better of it. It would be nice if there were an easy way to extract a pool configuration, with all of the dataset properties, ACLs, etc. so that you could easily reload it into a new pool. I could see this being useful in a disaster recovery sense, and I'm sure people smarter than I can think of other uses. From my reading of the documentation and man pages, I don't see that any such command currently exists. Something that would allow you dump the config into a file and read it back from a file using typical Unix semantics like STDIN/STDOUT. I was thinking something like: zpool dump pool [-o filename] zpool load pool [-f filename] Without -o or -f, the output would go to STDOUT or the input would come from STDIN, so you could use this in pipelines. If you have a particularly long lived and stable pool, or one that has been through many upgrades, this might be a nice way to save a configuration that you could restore later (if necessary) with a single command. Thoughts? On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 15:31, Eric D. Mudama edmud...@bounceswoosh.orgwrote: On Wed, Mar 24 at 12:20, Wolfraider wrote: Sorry if this has been dicussed before. I tried searching but I couldn't find any info about it. We would like to export our ZFS configurations in case we need to import the pool onto another box. We do not want to backup the actual data in the zfs pool, that is already handled through another program. I'm pretty sure the configuration is embedded in the pool itself. Just import on the new machine. You may need --force/-f the pool wasn't exported on the old system properly. --eric -- Eric D. Mudama edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- You can choose your friends, you can choose the deals. - Equity Private If Linux is faster, it's a Solaris bug. - Phil Harman Blog - http://whatderass.blogspot.com/ Twitter - @khyron4eva ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots as versioning tool
Brandon High bh...@freaks.com writes: Someone pointed out that you can use bart, but that also scans the directories. It might do what you want, but it doesn't work at the zpool / zfs level, just at the file level layer. Apparently I missed any suggestion about bart, but looking it up just now, I guess maybe in what they call `safe mode' where changed files aren't deleted, it might be useful as a versioning tool. Sounds like it could be targeted with a little finer granularity than snapshots generally can be. At just a quick read, it really just sounds like rsync, after its been in a severe wreck and was badly crippled. Maybe `bart' handles windows files better than rsync? I'm just curious why `bart' would be recommended over rsync? Are there abilities that make it more attractive? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots as versioning tool
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes: At just a quick read, it really just sounds like rsync, after its been in a severe wreck and was badly crippled. OOps, I may have looked at the wrong bart. One of the first hits google turned up was: http://www.zhornsoftware.co.uk/bart/index.html But I think maybe this `bart' is what was suggested: http://www.unisol.com/papers/bart_paper.html This looks to be a comprehensive network backup system. But would be way overdone for what I talked about. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 08:02:06PM +0100, Svein Skogen wrote: Maybe someone should look at implementing the zfs code for the XScale range of io-processors (such as the IOP333)? NetBSD runs on (many of) those. NetBSD has an (in-progress, still-some-issues) ZFS port. Hopefully they will converge in due course to provide exactly this. The particularly nice thing would be that, using ZFS in the RAID controller firmware like this would result in contents that are interchangable with standard zfs, needing just an import/export. This is a big improvement over many other dedicated raid solutions, and provides good comfort when thinking about recovery scenarios for a controller failure. Unfortunately, it would mostly be only useful with zvols for presentation to the host - there's not a good interface, and usually not much RAM, for the controller to run all the ZPL layer. That would still be useful for controllers running in non-ZFS servers, as an alternative to external boxes with comstar and various transports. If you could find a way to get a zfs send/recv stream through from the controller, though, some interesting deployment possibilities open up. -- Dan. pgphc7wlO3yRB.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots as versioning tool
OOps, I may have looked at the wrong bart. I think he meant this BART: http://blogs.sun.com/gbrunett/entry/automating_solaris_10_file_integrity I'm going to make one quick comment about this, despite better judgment to probably keep quiet. I don't think anyone should use ZFS as a VCS like Subversion ... that's nuts! How many developers on your project? How many sub projects, how many commits a day? I just started a new repo and I'm up in the hundreds in a few weeks. Do you want to keep that many snapshots around? Someone is going to get the idea to use ZFS like this, and 8 months from now, get bitter and heart-broken and dump on ZFS for not behaving like a VCS, which it is not. VCS has logs, easy diffs, easy rollback, merge, branch, feeds into build automation software, allows IDEs to be fed into it, integrates with tracking tools ... none of which ZFS does (and I'm not saying this like it's a bad thing.) If you want to do a code release, say, 1.0, put that on a ZFS filesystem, snapshot it, keep developing until you get to somewhere you want to call a 1.1, snapshot that ... that is a wonderful thing to do. You can clone and make active an entire bundle of stuff. But please, use versioning software (good ones are free, even) for versioning and don't shoehorn ZFS. CT ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ZFS file system confusion
Hello, I have boxed myself into a mental corner and need some help getting out. I am confused about working with ZFS file systems. Here is a simple example of what has me confused: Let's say I create the ZFS file system tank/nfs and share that over NFS. Then I create the ZFS file systems tank/nfs/foo1 and tank/nfs/foo2. I want to manage snapshots independently for foo1 and foo2, but I would like to be able to access both from the single NFS share for tank/nfs. Here are my questions: 1. Can I in fact access foo1 and foo2 through the NFS share of tank/nfs or do I need to create separate NFS shares for each of them? 2. Is there any difference in interacting with foo1 and foo2 through the tank/nfs share versus interacting with them directly? I don't even know if that question makes sense, but it's at the heart of my confusion - nesting file systems. 3. If I make a snapshot of tank/nfs, does it include the data in foo1 and foo2 or are they excluded since they are separate ZFS file systems? Thanks for your help. Regards, Chris Dunbar ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS file system confusion
2010/3/24 Chris Dunbar cdun...@earthside.net I have boxed myself into a mental corner and need some help getting out. I am confused about working with ZFS file systems. Here is a simple example of what has me confused: Let's say I create the ZFS file system tank/nfs and share that over NFS. Then I create the ZFS file systems tank/nfs/foo1 and tank/nfs/foo2. I want to manage snapshots independently for foo1 and foo2, but I would like to be able to access both from the single NFS share for tank/nfs. Here are my questions: 1. Can I in fact access foo1 and foo2 through the NFS share of tank/nfs or do I need to create separate NFS shares for each of them? No, but sort of yes. If you mount server:/nfs on another host, it will not include server:/nfs/foo1 or server:/nfs/foo2. Some nfs clients (notably Solaris's) will attempt to mount the foo1 foo2 datasets automatically, so it looks like you've exported everything under server:/nfs. Linux clients don't behave in the same fashion, you'll have to separately mount all the exports. The sharenfs property will be inherited by the descendant datasets, so if you set it on tank/nfs, tank/nfs/foo1 will have the same settings. 2. Is there any difference in interacting with foo1 and foo2 through the tank/nfs share versus interacting with them directly? I don't even know if that question makes sense, but it's at the heart of my confusion - nesting file systems. There are some functions that are unavailable, such as retrieving the zfs settings, etc. I'm not really sure about specifics. Depending on the client nfs version, you may not be able to manipulate acls from clients. 3. If I make a snapshot of tank/nfs, does it include the data in foo1 and foo2 or are they excluded since they are separate ZFS file systems? No, foo1 and foo2 are separate datasets and have completely independent snapshots. You can do 'zfs snapshot -r tank/nfs' which will make a recursive snapshot. All the datasets under tank/nfs will have a snapshot taken at the exact same transaction. I'm guessing that's what you'd want? -B -- Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS file system confusion
Brandon, Thank you for the explanation. It looks like I will have to share out each file system. I was trying to keep the number of shares manageable, but it sounds like that won't work. Regards, Chris On Mar 24, 2010, at 9:36 PM, Brandon High wrote: 2010/3/24 Chris Dunbar cdun...@earthside.net I have boxed myself into a mental corner and need some help getting out. I am confused about working with ZFS file systems. Here is a simple example of what has me confused: Let's say I create the ZFS file system tank/nfs and share that over NFS. Then I create the ZFS file systems tank/nfs/foo1 and tank/nfs/foo2. I want to manage snapshots independently for foo1 and foo2, but I would like to be able to access both from the single NFS share for tank/nfs. Here are my questions: 1. Can I in fact access foo1 and foo2 through the NFS share of tank/nfs or do I need to create separate NFS shares for each of them? No, but sort of yes. If you mount server:/nfs on another host, it will not include server:/nfs/foo1 or server:/nfs/foo2. Some nfs clients (notably Solaris's) will attempt to mount the foo1 foo2 datasets automatically, so it looks like you've exported everything under server:/nfs. Linux clients don't behave in the same fashion, you'll have to separately mount all the exports. The sharenfs property will be inherited by the descendant datasets, so if you set it on tank/nfs, tank/nfs/foo1 will have the same settings. 2. Is there any difference in interacting with foo1 and foo2 through the tank/nfs share versus interacting with them directly? I don't even know if that question makes sense, but it's at the heart of my confusion - nesting file systems. There are some functions that are unavailable, such as retrieving the zfs settings, etc. I'm not really sure about specifics. Depending on the client nfs version, you may not be able to manipulate acls from clients. 3. If I make a snapshot of tank/nfs, does it include the data in foo1 and foo2 or are they excluded since they are separate ZFS file systems? No, foo1 and foo2 are separate datasets and have completely independent snapshots. You can do 'zfs snapshot -r tank/nfs' which will make a recursive snapshot. All the datasets under tank/nfs will have a snapshot taken at the exact same transaction. I'm guessing that's what you'd want? -B -- Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com eSoft SpamFilter Training Tool Train as Spam Blacklist for All Users Whitelist for All Users ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS file system confusion
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Chris Dunbar cdun...@earthside.net wrote: Thank you for the explanation. It looks like I will have to share out each file system. I was trying to keep the number of shares manageable, but it sounds like that won't work. Thanks to inheritance, it's easier than you think when you've laid out your datasets properly. If all the datasets you want to export are descendant from the same starting point, you'll only need to set sharenfs once. Management on the opensolaris box is easy, but you may have to do some clever automounter configs on other hosts. -B -- Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.com wrote: I think the point is to say: ZFS software raid is both faster and more reliable than your hardware raid. Surprising though it may be for a newcomer, I have statistics to back that up, Can you share it? You will do best if you configure the raid controller to JBOD. Problem: HP's storage controller doesn't support that mode. -- Fajar ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
Fajar A. Nugraha wrote: On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.com wrote: I think the point is to say: ZFS software raid is both faster and more reliable than your hardware raid. Surprising though it may be for a newcomer, I have statistics to back that up, Can you share it? You will do best if you configure the raid controller to JBOD. Problem: HP's storage controller doesn't support that mode. It does, ish. It forces you to create a bunch of single disk raid 0 logical drives. It's what we do at work on our HP servers running ZFS. The bigger problem is that you have to script around a disk failure, as the array won't bring a non-redundant logicaldrive back online after a disk failure without being kicked (which is a good thing in general, but annoying for ZFS). -- Carson ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
Carson Gaspar wrote: Fajar A. Nugraha wrote: On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.com wrote: I think the point is to say: ZFS software raid is both faster and more reliable than your hardware raid. Surprising though it may be for a newcomer, I have statistics to back that up, Can you share it? You will do best if you configure the raid controller to JBOD. Problem: HP's storage controller doesn't support that mode. It does, ish. It forces you to create a bunch of single disk raid 0 logical drives. It's what we do at work on our HP servers running ZFS. The bigger problem is that you have to script around a disk failure, as the array won't bring a non-redundant logicaldrive back online after a disk failure without being kicked (which is a good thing in general, but annoying for ZFS). *sigh* too tired - I meant after you replace a failed disk. Obviously it won't come back online while the disk is failed... -- Carson ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a 11TB HW RAID-5 controller
Fajar A. Nugraha wrote: On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Carson Gaspar car...@taltos.org wrote: Fajar A. Nugraha wrote: You will do best if you configure the raid controller to JBOD. Problem: HP's storage controller doesn't support that mode. It does, ish. It forces you to create a bunch of single disk raid 0 logical drives. It's what we do at work on our HP servers running ZFS. that's different. Among other things, it won't allow tools like smartctl to work. The bigger problem is that you have to script around a disk failure, as the array won't bring a non-redundant logicaldrive back online after a disk failure without being kicked (which is a good thing in general, but annoying for ZFS). How do you replace a bad disk then? Is there some userland tool for opensolaris which can tell the HP array to bring that disk back up? Or do you have to restart the server, go to BIOS, and enable it there? hpacucli will do it (usually /opt/HPQacucli/sbin/hpacucli). You need to: # Wipe the new disk. Not strictly necessary, but I'm paranoid hpacucli crtl slot=$n physicaldrive $fixeddrive modify erase # And online the LD... hpacucli ctrl slot=$n logicaldrive $ld modify reenable forced -- Carson ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS backup configuration
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Khyron khyron4...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, I think Eric is correct. Funny, this is an adjunct to the thread I started entitled Thoughts on ZFS Pool Backup Strategies. I was going to include this point in that thread but thought better of it. It would be nice if there were an easy way to extract a pool configuration, with all of the dataset properties, ACLs, etc. so that you could easily reload it into a new pool. I could see this being useful in a disaster recovery sense, and I'm sure people smarter than I can think of other uses. From my reading of the documentation and man pages, I don't see that any such command currently exists. Something that would allow you dump the config into a file and read it back from a file using typical Unix semantics like STDIN/STDOUT. I was thinking something like: zpool dump pool [-o filename] zpool load pool [-f filename] Without -o or -f, the output would go to STDOUT or the input would come from STDIN, so you could use this in pipelines. If you have a particularly long lived and stable pool, or one that has been through many upgrades, this might be a nice way to save a configuration that you could restore later (if necessary) with a single command. I don't use ACLs, but you can get the pool configuration and dataset properties via zfs get poolname. With some fancy scripting, you should be able to come up with something that would take that output and recreate the pool with the same settings. -- Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
