Re: [zfs-discuss] any more efficient way to transfer snapshot between two hosts than ssh tunnel?

[Fred Liu]

>Add the HPN patches to OpenSSH and enable the NONE cipher.  We can saturate a 
>gigabits link (980 mbps) between two FreeBSD hosts using that.
>Without it, we were only able to hit ~480 mbps on a good day.
>If you want 0 overhead, there's always netcat. :)

980mbps is awesome! I am thinking running two ssh services -- one normal and 
one with HPN patches only for backup job.
But now sure they can work before I try them. I will also try netcat.

Many thanks.

Fred
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] any more efficient way to transfer snapshot between two hosts than ssh tunnel?

[Freddie Cash]

On Dec 13, 2012 8:02 PM, "Fred Liu"  wrote:
>
> Assuming in a secure and trusted env, we want to get the maximum transfer
speed without the overhead from ssh.

Add the HPN patches to OpenSSH and enable the NONE cipher.  We can saturate
a gigabits link (980 mbps) between two FreeBSD hosts using that.

Without it, we were only able to hit ~480 mbps on a good day.

If you want 0 overhead, there's always netcat. :)
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] any more efficient way to transfer snapshot between two hosts than ssh tunnel?

[Fred Liu]

Adrian,

That is cool!

Thank you so much!

BTW, anyone played NDMP in solaris? Or is it feasible to transfer snapshot via 
NDMP protocol?
Before the acquisition, SUN advocated the NDMP backup feature in the 
openstorage/fishwork.
I am sorry if it is the wrong place to ask this question.

Thanks.

Fred

From: Adrian Smith [mailto:adrian.sm...@rmit.edu.au]
Sent: 星期五, 十二月 14, 2012 12:08
To: Fred Liu
Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] any more efficient way to transfer snapshot between 
two hosts than ssh tunnel?

Hi Fred,

Try mbuffer (http://www.maier-komor.de/mbuffer.html)

On 14 December 2012 15:01, Fred Liu 
mailto:fred_...@issi.com>> wrote:
Assuming in a secure and trusted env, we want to get the maximum transfer speed 
without the overhead from ssh.

Thanks.

Fred

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss



--
Adrian Smith (ISUnix), Ext: 55070




___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] any more efficient way to transfer snapshot between two hosts than ssh tunnel?

[Adrian Smith]

Hi Fred,

Try mbuffer (http://www.maier-komor.de/mbuffer.html)


On 14 December 2012 15:01, Fred Liu  wrote:

>  Assuming in a secure and trusted env, we want to get the maximum
> transfer speed without the overhead from ssh.
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks.
>
> ** **
>
> Fred
>
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
>


-- 
Adrian Smith (ISUnix), Ext: 55070
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] any more efficient way to transfer snapshot between two hosts than ssh tunnel?

[Fred Liu]

Assuming in a secure and trusted env, we want to get the maximum transfer speed 
without the overhead from ssh.

Thanks.

Fred
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] S11 vs illumos zfs compatiblity

[Bob Netherton]

Perhaps slightly elegant, you can do the new pool/rsync thing on the 11.1 live 
CD so you don't actually have to stand up a new system to do this.   Assuming 
this is x86 and VirtualBox works on Illumos, you could fire up a VM to do this 
as well. 

Bob

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 13, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Jan Owoc  wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Bob Netherton  
> wrote:
>> On Dec 13, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Jan Owoc  wrote:
>>> Yes, that is correct. The last version of Solaris with source code
>>> used zpool version 28. This is the last version that is readable by
>>> non-Solaris operating systems FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, but also
>>> OpenIndiana. The filesystem, "zfs", is technically at the same
>>> version, but you can't access it if you can't access the pool :-).
>> 
>> That is a touch misleading.  This has always been the case since S10u2.  You 
>> have to create the pool AND the file systems at the oldest versions you want 
>> to support.
>> 
>> I maintain a table of pool and version numbers on my blog (blogs.oracle. 
>> com/bobn) for this very purpose.   I got lazy the other day and made this 
>> mistake between 11ga and 11.1.
>> 
>> Watch the ZFS send approach because you might be sending a newer file system 
>> version than is supported.  Yes, I've done that too :)
> 
> Bob, you are correct. There is now a new version of "zfs" in Solaris
> 11.1. I assume it's incompatible with the previous version:
> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E26502_01/html/E29007/gjxik.html#scrolltoc
> 
> Any suggestions how to help OP read his data on anything but Solaris
> 11.1 or migrate it "back" a version?
> 
> Jan
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] S11 vs illumos zfs compatiblity

[Bob Netherton]

At this point, the only thing would be to use 11.1 to create a new pool at 
151's version (-o version=) and top level dataset (-O version=).   Recreate the 
file system hierarchy and do something like an rsync.  I don't think there is 
anything more elegant, I'm afraid.  

That's what I did yesterday :)

Bob

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 13, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Jan Owoc  wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Bob Netherton  
> wrote:
>> On Dec 13, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Jan Owoc  wrote:
>>> Yes, that is correct. The last version of Solaris with source code
>>> used zpool version 28. This is the last version that is readable by
>>> non-Solaris operating systems FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, but also
>>> OpenIndiana. The filesystem, "zfs", is technically at the same
>>> version, but you can't access it if you can't access the pool :-).
>> 
>> That is a touch misleading.  This has always been the case since S10u2.  You 
>> have to create the pool AND the file systems at the oldest versions you want 
>> to support.
>> 
>> I maintain a table of pool and version numbers on my blog (blogs.oracle. 
>> com/bobn) for this very purpose.   I got lazy the other day and made this 
>> mistake between 11ga and 11.1.
>> 
>> Watch the ZFS send approach because you might be sending a newer file system 
>> version than is supported.  Yes, I've done that too :)
> 
> Bob, you are correct. There is now a new version of "zfs" in Solaris
> 11.1. I assume it's incompatible with the previous version:
> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E26502_01/html/E29007/gjxik.html#scrolltoc
> 
> Any suggestions how to help OP read his data on anything but Solaris
> 11.1 or migrate it "back" a version?
> 
> Jan
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] S11 vs illumos zfs compatiblity

[Jan Owoc]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Bob Netherton  wrote:
> On Dec 13, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Jan Owoc  wrote:
>> Yes, that is correct. The last version of Solaris with source code
>> used zpool version 28. This is the last version that is readable by
>> non-Solaris operating systems FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, but also
>> OpenIndiana. The filesystem, "zfs", is technically at the same
>> version, but you can't access it if you can't access the pool :-).
>
> That is a touch misleading.  This has always been the case since S10u2.  You 
> have to create the pool AND the file systems at the oldest versions you want 
> to support.
>
> I maintain a table of pool and version numbers on my blog (blogs.oracle. 
> com/bobn) for this very purpose.   I got lazy the other day and made this 
> mistake between 11ga and 11.1.
>
> Watch the ZFS send approach because you might be sending a newer file system 
> version than is supported.  Yes, I've done that too :)

Bob, you are correct. There is now a new version of "zfs" in Solaris
11.1. I assume it's incompatible with the previous version:
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E26502_01/html/E29007/gjxik.html#scrolltoc

Any suggestions how to help OP read his data on anything but Solaris
11.1 or migrate it "back" a version?

Jan
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] S11 vs illumos zfs compatiblity

[Bob Netherton]

That is a touch misleading.  This has always been the case since S10u2.  You 
have to create the pool AND the file systems at the oldest versions you want to 
support.  

I maintain a table of pool and version numbers on my blog (blogs.oracle. 
com/bobn) for this very purpose.   I got lazy the other day and made this 
mistake between 11ga and 11.1.  

Watch the ZFS send approach because you might be sending a newer file system 
version than is supported.  Yes, I've done that too :)

Bob

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 13, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Jan Owoc  wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:14 AM, sol  wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> I've just tried to use illumos (151a5)  import a pool created on solaris
>> (11.1) but it failed with an error about the pool being incompatible.
>> 
>> Are we now at the stage where the two prongs of the zfs fork are pointing in
>> incompatible directions?
> 
> Yes, that is correct. The last version of Solaris with source code
> used zpool version 28. This is the last version that is readable by
> non-Solaris operating systems FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, but also
> OpenIndiana. The filesystem, "zfs", is technically at the same
> version, but you can't access it if you can't access the pool :-).
> 
> If you want to access the data now, your only option is to use Solaris
> to read it, and copy it over (eg. with zfs send | recv) onto a pool
> created with version 28.
> 
> Jan
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] The format command crashes on 3TB disk but zpool create ok

[John D Groenveld]

# pstack core

John
groenv...@acm.org

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] S11 vs illumos zfs compatiblity

[Jan Owoc]

Hi,

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:14 AM, sol  wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've just tried to use illumos (151a5)  import a pool created on solaris
> (11.1) but it failed with an error about the pool being incompatible.
>
> Are we now at the stage where the two prongs of the zfs fork are pointing in
> incompatible directions?

Yes, that is correct. The last version of Solaris with source code
used zpool version 28. This is the last version that is readable by
non-Solaris operating systems FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, but also
OpenIndiana. The filesystem, "zfs", is technically at the same
version, but you can't access it if you can't access the pool :-).

If you want to access the data now, your only option is to use Solaris
to read it, and copy it over (eg. with zfs send | recv) onto a pool
created with version 28.

Jan
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] S11 vs illumos zfs compatiblity

[Freddie Cash]

Oracle effectively forked ZFS with the release of Solaris 11 by not
open-sourcing any of the ZFS code.

Solaris 11 includes ZFSv31 or higher.

The last open-source release of ZFS was ZFSv28.

Thus, if you create a pool on Solaris 11+ that you want to import on other
systems, you have to manually tell it to create a ZFSv28 pool, and not use
the defaults.


On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 8:14 AM, sol  wrote:

> Hi
>
> I've just tried to use illumos (151a5)  import a pool created on solaris
> (11.1) but it failed with an error about the pool being incompatible.
>
> Are we now at the stage where the two prongs of the zfs fork are pointing
> in incompatible directions?
>
>   --
> *From:* Matthew Ahrens 
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 6:53 AM, sol  wrote:
>
>
> I would have liked to think that there was some good-will between the ex-
> and current-members of the zfs team, in the sense that the people who
> created zfs but then left Oracle still care about it enough to want the
> Oracle version to be as bug-free as possible.
>
>
> There is plenty of good will between everyone who's worked on ZFS --
> current Oracle employees, former employees, and those never employed by
> Oracle.  We would all like to see all implementations of ZFS be the highest
> quality possible.  I'd like to think that we all try to achieve that to the
> extent that it is possible within our corporate priorities.
>
>
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
>


-- 
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 array on marvell88sx in Solaris 11.1

[sol]

That's right I'm only using the 3114 out of desperation.

Does anyone else have the marvell88sx working in Solaris 11.1?




>
> From: Andrew Gabriel 
>3112 and 3114 were very early SATA controllers before there were any SATA 
>drivers, which pretend to be ATA controllers to the OS.
>No one should be using these today.
>___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] The format command crashes on 3TB disk but zpool create ok

[sol]

Hi

I added a 3TB Seagate disk (ST3000DM001) and ran the 'format' command but it 
crashed and dumped core.


However the zpool 'create' command managed to create a pool on the whole disk 
(2.68 TB space).

I hope that's only a problem with the format command and not with zfs or any 
other part of the kernel.

(Solaris 11.1 by the way)
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] S11 vs illumos zfs compatiblity

[sol]

Hi

I've just tried to use illumos (151a5)  import a pool created on solaris (11.1) 
but it failed with an error about the pool being incompatible.

Are we now at the stage where the two prongs of the zfs fork are pointing in 
incompatible directions?



>
> From: Matthew Ahrens 
>On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 6:53 AM, sol wrote:
>
>
>>
I would have liked to think that there was some good-will between the ex- and 
current-members of the zfs team, in the sense that the people who created zfs 
but then left Oracle still care about it enough to want the Oracle version to 
be as bug-free as possible.
>>
>
>
>There is plenty of good will between everyone who's worked on ZFS -- current 
>Oracle employees, former employees, and those never employed by Oracle.  We 
>would all like to see all implementations of ZFS be the highest quality 
>possible.  I'd like to think that we all try to achieve that to the extent 
>that it is possible within our corporate priorities.___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Solaris 11 System Reboots Continuously Because of a ZFS-Related Panic (7191375)

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Wed, 12 Dec 2012, Jamie Krier wrote:



I am thinking about switching to an Illumos distro, but wondering if this 
problem may be present there
as well. 


I believe that Illumos is forked before this new virtual memory 
sub-system was added to Solaris.  There have not been such reports on 
Illumos or OpenIndiana mailing lists and I don't recall seeing this 
issue in the bug trackers.


Illumos is not so good at dealing with huge memory systems but 
perhaps it is also more stable as well.


Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS array on marvell88sx in Solaris 11.1

[Andrew Gabriel]

3112 and 3114 were very early SATA controllers before there were any 
SATA drivers, which pretend to be ATA controllers to the OS.

No one should be using these today.

sol wrote:
Oh I can run the disks off a SiliconImage 3114 but it's the marvell 
controller that I'm trying to get working. I'm sure it's the 
controller which is used in the Thumpers so it should surely work in 
solaris 11.1



*From:* Bob Friesenhahn 

If the SATA card you are using is a JBOD-style card (i.e. disks
are portable to a different controller), are you able/willing to
swap it for one that Solaris is known to support well?




--
Andrew Gabriel
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS array on marvell88sx in Solaris 11.1

[sol]

Oh I can run the disks off a SiliconImage 3114 but it's the marvell controller 
that I'm trying to get working. I'm sure it's the controller which is used in 
the Thumpers so it should surely work in solaris 11.1



>
> From: Bob Friesenhahn 
>
> If the SATA card you are using is a JBOD-style card (i.e. disks are portable 
> to a different controller), are you able/willing to swap it for one that 
> Solaris is known to support well?
>___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss