On 05/ 9/10 10:07 AM, Tony wrote:
Lets say I have two servers, both running opensolaris with ZFS. I basically
want to be able to create a filesystem where the two servers have a common
volume, that is mirrored between the two. Meaning, each server keeps an
identical, real time backup of the
On 05/ 8/10 04:38 PM, Giovanni wrote:
Hi guys,
I have a quick question, I am playing around with ZFS and here's what I did.
I created a storage pool with several drives. I unplugged 3 out of 5 drives
from the array, currently:
NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
gpool
On 05/ 6/10 05:32 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
On May 4, 2010, at 7:55 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Mon, 3 May 2010, Richard Elling wrote:
This is not a problem on Solaris 10. It can affect OpenSolaris, though.
That's precisely the opposite of what I thought. Care to
On 05/ 6/10 11:48 AM, Brandon High wrote:
I know for certain that my rpool and tank pool are not both using
c6t0d0 and c6t1d0, but that's what zpool status is showing.
It appears to be an output bug, or a problem with the zpool.cache,
since format shows my rpool devices at c8t0d0 and c8t1d0.
On 05/ 6/10 03:35 PM, Richard Jahnel wrote:
Hmm...
To clarify.
Every discussion or benchmarking that I have seen always show both off,
compression only or both on.
Why never compression off and dedup on?
After some further thought... perhaps it's because compression works at the
byte level
On 05/ 5/10 11:09 AM, Brad wrote:
I yanked a disk to simulate failure to the test pool to test hot spare failover
- everything seemed fine until the copy back completed. The hot spare is still
showing in used...do we need to remove the spare from the pool to get it to
deattach?
Once the
On 05/ 4/10 11:33 AM, Michael Shadle wrote:
Quick sanity check here. I created a zvol and exported it via iSCSI to
a Windows machine so Windows could use it as a block device. Windows
formats it as NTFS, thinks it's a local disk, yadda yadda.
Is ZFS doing it's magic checksumming and whatnot on
On 05/ 4/10 03:39 PM, Richard Elling wrote:
On May 3, 2010, at 7:55 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: Richard Elling [mailto:richard.ell...@gmail.com]
Once you register your original Solaris 10 OS for updates, are
you
unable to get updates on the removable OS?
This is
On 05/ 1/10 04:46 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
One more really important gotcha. Let's suppose the version of zfs on the
CD supports up to zpool 14. Let's suppose your live system had been fully
updated before crash, and let's suppose the zpool had been upgraded to zpool
15. Wouldn't that
On 05/ 1/10 03:09 PM, devsk wrote:
Looks like the X's vesa driver can only use 1600x1200 resolution and not the
native 1920x1200.
Asking these question on the ZFS list isn't going to get you very far.
Troy the opensolaris-help list.
--
Ian.
On 04/30/10 10:35 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
While there may be some possible optimizations, i'm sure everyone
would love the random performance of mirror vdevs, combined with the
redundancy of raidz3 and the space of a raidz1. However, as in
On 04/29/10 10:21 AM, devsk wrote:
I had a pool which I created using zfs-fuse, which is using March code base
(exact version, I don't know; if someone can tell me the command to find the
zpool format version, I would be grateful).
Try [zfs|zpool] upgrade.
These commands will tell you
On 04/29/10 11:02 AM, autumn Wang wrote:
One quick question: When will the next formal release be released?
Of what?
Does oracle have plan to support OpenSolaris community as Sun did before?
What is the direction of ZFS in future?
Do you really expect answers to those question
On 04/28/10 03:17 AM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
Hi all
I have a test system with snv134 and 8x2TB drives in RAIDz2 and currently no
Zil or L2ARC. I noticed the I/O speed to NFS shares on the testpool drops to
something hardly usable while scrubbing the pool.
Is that small random or
On 04/28/10 10:01 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 28 Apr 2010, Ian Collins wrote:
On 04/28/10 03:17 AM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
Hi all
I have a test system with snv134 and 8x2TB drives in RAIDz2 and
currently no Zil or L2ARC. I noticed the I/O speed to NFS shares on
the testpool
On 04/27/10 09:41 AM, Lutz Schumann wrote:
Hello list,
a pool shows some strange status:
volume: zfs01vol
state: ONLINE
scrub: scrub completed after 1h21m with 0 errors on Sat Apr 24 04:22:38
mirror ONLINE 0 0 0
c2t12d0ONLINE 0
On 04/26/10 12:08 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
[why do you snip attributions?]
On 04/26/10 01:45 AM, Robert Milkowski wrote:
The system should boot-up properly even if some pools are not
accessible
(except rpool of course).
If it is not the case then there is a bug - last time I checked it
On 04/22/10 06:59 AM, Justin Lee Ewing wrote:
So I can obviously see what zpools I have imported... but how do I see
pools that have been exported? Kind of like being able to see
deported volumes using vxdisk -o alldgs list.
zpool import, kind of counter intuitive!
--
Ian.
On 04/20/10 05:32 PM, Sunil wrote:
ouch! My apologies! I did not understand what you were trying to say.
I was gearing towards:
1. Using the newer 1TB in the eventual RAIDZ. Newer hardware typically means
(slightly) faster access times and sequential throughput.
Using a slice on a newer
On 04/19/10 08:42 PM, Ian Garbutt wrote:
Having looked through the forum I gather that you cannot just add an additional
device to to raidz pool. This being the case is what are the alternatives that
I could to expand a raidz pool?
Either replace *all* the drives with bigger ones, or add
On 04/20/10 04:13 PM, Sunil wrote:
Hi,
I have a strange requirement. My pool consists of 2 500GB disks in stripe which
I am trying to convert into a RAIDZ setup without data loss but I have only two
additional disks: 750GB and 1TB. So, here is what I thought:
1. Carve a 500GB slice (A) in
On 04/20/10 05:00 PM, Sunil wrote:
On 04/20/10 04:13 PM, Sunil wrote:
Hi,
I have a strange requirement. My pool consists of 2
500GB disks in stripe which I am trying to convert
into a RAIDZ setup without data loss but I have only
two additional disks: 750GB and 1TB. So, here is
On 04/18/10 01:25 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: Ian Collins [mailto:i...@ianshome.com]
But is a fundamental of zfs:
snapshot
A read-only version of a file system or volume at a
given point in time. It is specified as filesys...@name
or vol
On 04/17/10 09:34 AM, MstAsg wrote:
I have a question. I have a disk that solaris 10 zfs is installed. I wanted
to add the other disks and replace this with the other. (totally three others). If
I do this, I add some other disks, would the data be written immediately? Or only
the new data is
On 04/17/10 10:09 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
On Apr 16, 2010, at 2:49 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
On 04/17/10 09:34 AM, MstAsg wrote:
I have a question. I have a disk that solaris 10 zfs is installed. I wanted
to add the other disks and replace this with the other. (totally three
On 04/17/10 11:41 AM, Brandon High wrote:
When I set up my opensolaris system at home, I just grabbed a 160 GB
drive that I had sitting around to use for the rpool.
Now I'm thinking of moving the rpool to another disk, probably ssd,
and I don't really want to shell out the money for two 160 GB
On 04/17/10 12:56 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: Erik Trimble [mailto:erik.trim...@oracle.com]
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 7:35 PM
Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a snapshot?
Eric hits
the
nail right on the head: you *don't* want to support such a feature,
as it breaks
On 04/ 2/10 10:25 AM, Ian Collins wrote:
Is this callstack familiar to anyone? It just happened on a Solaris
10 update 8 box:
genunix: [ID 655072 kern.notice] fe8000d1b830
unix:real_mode_end+7f81 ()
genunix: [ID 655072 kern.notice] fe8000d1b910 unix:trap+5e6 ()
genunix: [ID 655072
On 04/15/10 06:16 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
Because 132 was the most current last time I paid much attention :-). As
I say, I'm currently holding out for 2010.$Spring, but knowing how to get
to a particular build via package would be potentially interesting for the
future still.
I hope
On 04/12/10 05:39 PM, Willard Korfhage wrote:
IT is a Corsair 650W modular power supply, with 2 or 3 disks per cable.
However, the Areca card is not reporting any errors, so I think power to the
disks is unlikely to be a problem.
Here's what is in /var/adm/messages
Apr 11 22:37:41 fs9 fmd:
On 04/11/10 11:55 AM, Harry Putnam wrote:
Would you mind expanding the abbrevs: ssd zil 12arc?
http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Best_Practices_Guide
--
Ian.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
On 04/ 9/10 08:58 PM, Andreas Höschler wrote:
zpool attach tank c1t7d0 c1t6d0
This hopefully gives me a three-way mirror:
mirror ONLINE 0 0 0
c1t15d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c1t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c1t6d0
On 04/10/10 06:20 AM, Daniel Bakken wrote:
My zfs filesystem hangs when transferring large filesystems (500GB)
with a couple dozen snapshots between servers using zfs send/receive
with netcat. The transfer hangs about halfway through and is
unkillable, freezing all IO to the filesystem,
On 04/ 9/10 10:48 AM, Erik Trimble wrote:
Well
The problem is (and this isn't just a ZFS issue) that resilver and scrub
times /are/ very bad for1TB disks. This goes directly to the problem
of redundancy - if you don't really care about resilver/scrub issues,
then you really shouldn't
On 04/ 3/10 10:23 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
Momentarily, I will begin scouring the omniscient interweb for
information, but I’d like to know a little bit of what people would
say here. The question is to slice, or not to slice, disks before
using them in a zpool.
Not.
One reason to
Is this callstack familiar to anyone? It just happened on a Solaris 10
update 8 box:
genunix: [ID 655072 kern.notice] fe8000d1b830 unix:real_mode_end+7f81 ()
genunix: [ID 655072 kern.notice] fe8000d1b910 unix:trap+5e6 ()
genunix: [ID 655072 kern.notice] fe8000d1b920
On 04/ 2/10 02:52 PM, Andrej Gortchivkin wrote:
Hi All,
I just got across a strange (well... at least for me) situation with ZFS and I
hope you might be able to help me out. Recently I built a new machine from
scratch for my storage needs which include various CIFS / NFS and most
importantly
On 04/ 2/10 03:30 PM, Andrej Gortchivkin wrote:
I created the pool by using:
zpool create ZPOOL_SAS_1234 raidz c7t0d0 c7t1d0 c7t2d0 c7t3d0
However now that you mentioned the lack of redundancy I see where is the problem. I guess
it will then remain a mystery how did this happen, since I'm
On 03/31/10 10:54 PM, Peter Tribble wrote:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Eric Schrockeric.schr...@oracle.com wrote:
On Mar 30, 2010, at 5:39 PM, Peter Tribble wrote:
I have a pool (on an X4540 running S10U8) in which a disk failed, and the
hot spare kicked in. That's perfect.
On 04/ 1/10 01:51 AM, Charles Hedrick wrote:
We're getting the notorious cannot destroy ... dataset already exists. I've
seen a number of reports of this, but none of the reports seem to get any response.
Fortunately this is a backup system, so I can recreate the pool, but it's going to take
On 04/ 1/10 02:01 PM, Charles Hedrick wrote:
So we tried recreating the pool and sending the data again.
1) compression wasn't set on the copy, even though I did sent -R, which is
supposed to send all properties
2) I tried killing to send | receive pipe. Receive couldn't be killed. It hung.
On 04/ 1/10 02:01 PM, Charles Hedrick wrote:
So we tried recreating the pool and sending the data again.
1) compression wasn't set on the copy, even though I did sent -R, which is
supposed to send all properties
Was compression explicitly set on the root filesystem of your set?
I don't
On 03/31/10 10:39 AM, Peter Tribble wrote:
I have a pool (on an X4540 running S10U8) in which a disk failed, and the
hot spare kicked in. That's perfect. I'm happy.
Then a second disk fails.
Now, I've replaced the first failed disk, and it's resilvered and I have my
hot spare back.
But: why
On 03/29/10 10:31 AM, Jim wrote:
I had a drive fail and replaced it with a new drive. During the resilvering
process the new drive had write faults and was taken offline. These faults were
caused by a broken SATA cable (drive checked with Manufacturers software and
all ok). New cable fixed
On 03/27/10 08:14 PM, Svein Skogen wrote:
On 26.03.2010 23:55, Ian Collins wrote:
On 03/27/10 09:39 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
On Mar 26, 2010, at 2:34 AM, Bruno Sousa wrote:
Hi,
The jumbo-frames in my case give me a boost of around 2 mb/s, so it's
not that much
On 03/26/10 12:16 AM, Bruno Sousa wrote:
Well...i'm pretty much certain that at my job i faced something similar..
We had a server with 2 raidz2 groups each with 3 drives, and one drive
has failed and replaced by a hot spare. However, the balance of data
between the 2 groups of raidz2 start to
On 03/28/10 10:02 AM, Harry Putnam wrote:
Bob Friesenhahnbfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us writes:
On Sat, 27 Mar 2010, Harry Putnam wrote:
What to do with a status report like the one included below?
What does it mean to have an unrecoverable error but no data errors?
I
On 03/27/10 11:22 AM, Muhammed Syyid wrote:
Hi
I have a couple of questions
I currently have a 4disk RaidZ1 setup and want to move to a RaidZ2
4x2TB = RaidZ1 (tank)
My current plan is to setup
8x1.5TB in a RAIDZ2 and migrate the data from the tank vdev over.
What's the best way to accomplish
On 03/27/10 11:32 AM, Svein Skogen wrote:
On 26.03.2010 23:25, Marc Nicholas wrote:
Richard,
My challenge to you is that at least three vedors that I know of built
their storage platforms on FreeBSD. One of them sells $4bn/year of
product - petty sure that eclipses all (Open)Solaris-based
On 03/27/10 11:33 AM, Richard Jahnel wrote:
zfs send s...@oldpool | zfs receive newpool
In the OP's case, a recursive send is in order.
--
Ian.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
On 03/27/10 09:39 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
On Mar 26, 2010, at 2:34 AM, Bruno Sousa wrote:
Hi,
The jumbo-frames in my case give me a boost of around 2 mb/s, so it's not that
much.
That is about right. IIRC, the theoretical max is about 4% improvement, for
MTU of 8KB.
Now i
On 03/25/10 09:32 PM, Bruno Sousa wrote:
On 24-3-2010 22:29, Ian Collins wrote:
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
On 03/25/10 11:23 PM, Bruno Sousa wrote:
On 25-3-2010 9:46, Ian Collins wrote:
On 03/25/10 09:32 PM, Bruno Sousa wrote:
On 24-3-2010 22:29, Ian Collins wrote:
On 02/28/10 08:09 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
I was running zpool iostat on a pool comprising a stripe
On 03/26/10 08:47 AM, Bruno Sousa wrote:
Hi all,
The more readings i do about ZFS, and experiments the more i like this
stack of technologies.
Since we all like to see real figures in real environments , i might
as well share some of my numbers ..
The replication has been achieved with the
On 03/26/10 10:00 AM, Bruno Sousa wrote:
[Boy top-posting sure mucks up threads!]
Hi,
Indeed the 3 disks per vdev (raidz2) seems a bad idea...but it's the
system i have now.
Regarding the performance...let's assume that a bonnie++ benchmark
could go to 200 mg/s in. The possibility of
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
On 03/23/10 09:34 AM, Harry Putnam wrote:
This may be a bit dimwitted since I don't really understand how
snapshots work. I mean the part concerning COW (copy on right) and
how it takes so little room.
But here I'm not asking about that.
It appears to me that the default snapshot setup shares
On 03/20/10 09:28 AM, Richard Jahnel wrote:
They way we do this here is:
zfs snapshot voln...@snapnow
[i]#code to break on error and email not shown.[/i]
zfs send -i voln...@snapbefore voln...@snapnow | pigz -p4 -1 file
[i]#code to break on error and email not shown.[/i]
scp /dir/file
On 03/18/10 12:07 PM, Khyron wrote:
Ian,
When you say you spool to tape for off-site archival, what software do
you
use?
NetVault.
--
Ian.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
On 03/18/10 11:09 AM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On 03/17/10 14:03, Ian Collins wrote:
I ran a scrub on a Solaris 10 update 8 system yesterday and it is 100%
done, but not complete:
scrub: scrub in progress for 23h57m, 100.00% done, 0h0m to go
Don't panic. If zpool iostat still shows active
On 03/18/10 03:53 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
Anybody using the in-kernel CIFS is also concerned with the ACLs, and I
think that's the big issue.
Especially in a paranoid organisation with 100s of ACEs!
Also, snapshots. For my purposes, I find snapshots at some level a very
important
On 03/18/10 01:03 PM, Matt wrote:
Shipping the iSCSI and SAS questions...
Later on, I would like to add a second lower spec box to continuously (or
near-continously) mirror the data (using a gig crossover cable, maybe). I have
seen lots of ways of mirroring data to other boxes which has
On 03/18/10 11:09 AM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On 03/17/10 14:03, Ian Collins wrote:
I ran a scrub on a Solaris 10 update 8 system yesterday and it is 100%
done, but not complete:
scrub: scrub in progress for 23h57m, 100.00% done, 0h0m to go
If blocks that have already been visited are freed
On 03/11/10 05:42 AM, Andrew Daugherity wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 20:47 -0800, mingli wrote:
And I update the sharenfs option with rw,ro...@100.198.100.0/24, it works
fine, and the NFS client can do the write without error.
Thanks.
I've found that when using hostnames in the
On 03/11/10 09:27 AM, Robert Thurlow wrote:
Ian Collins wrote:
On 03/11/10 05:42 AM, Andrew Daugherity wrote:
I've found that when using hostnames in the sharenfs line, I had to use
the FQDN; the short hostname did not work, even though both client and
server were in the same DNS domain
On 03/11/10 03:21 PM, Harry Putnam wrote:
Running b133
When you see this line in a `zpool status' report:
status: The pool is formatted using an older on-disk format. The
pool can still be used, but some features are unavailable.
Is it safe and effective to heed the advice given
Tim Cook wrote:
Is there a way to manually trigger a hot spare to kick in? Mine
doesn't appear to be doing so. What happened is I exported a pool to
reinstall solaris on this system. When I went to re-import it, one of
the drives refused to come back online. So, the pool imported
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
For a system where you care about capacity and safety, but not that
much about IO throughput (that's my interpretation of what you said
you would use it for), with 16 bays, I believe the expert opinion will
tell you that two RAIDZ2 groups of 8 disks each is one of
Slack-Moehrle wrote:
Do you have any thoughts on implementation? I think I would just like to put my
Home directory on the ZFS pool and just SCP files up as needed. I dont think I
need to mount drives on my mac, etc. SCP seems to suite me.
One important point to note is you can only boot off
valrh...@gmail.com wrote:
Does this work with dedup?
Does what work? Context, Please! (I'm reading this on webmail with
limited history..)
If you have a deduped pool and send it to a file, will it reflect the smaller size, or
will this rehydrate things first?
That depends on the
Gary Mills wrote:
We have an IMAP e-mail server running on a Solaris 10 10/09 system.
It uses six ZFS filesystems built on a single zpool with 14 daily
snapshots. Every day at 11:56, a cron command destroys the oldest
snapshots and creates new ones, both recursively. For about four
minutes
Erwin Panen wrote:
Hi,
I'm not very familiar with manipulating zfs.
This is what happened:
I have an osol 2009.06 system on which I have some files that I need
to recover. Due to my ignorance and blindly testing, I have managed to
get this system to be unbootable... I know, my own fault.
So
Erwin Panen wrote:
Richard, thanks for replying;
I seem to have complicated matters:
I shutdown the system (past midnight here :-) )and seeing your reply
come in, fired it up again to further test.
The system wouldn't come up anymore (dumped in maintenance shell) as
it would try to import both
Erwin Panen wrote:
Ian, thanks for replying.
I'll give cfgadm | grep sata a go in a minute.
At the mo I've rebooted from 2009.06 livecd. Of course I can't import
rpool because it's a newer zfs version :-(
Any way to update zfs version on a running livecd?
No, if you can get a failsafe
Eduardo Bragatto wrote:
On Mar 1, 2010, at 4:04 PM, Tim Cook wrote:
The primary concern as I understand it is performance. If they're
close in size, it shouldn't be a big deal, but when you've got
mismatched rg's it can cause quite the performance troubleshooting
nightmare. It's the same
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
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
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?
Paul B. Henson wrote:
I've been surveying various forums looking for other places using ZFS ACL's
in production to compare notes and see how if at all they've handled some
of the issues we've found deploying them.
So far, I haven't found anybody using them in any substantial way, let
alone
dick hoogendijk wrote:
# zfs list
rpool/www 3.64G 377G 3.64G /var/www
rpool/zones 3.00G 377G24K /zones
rpool/zones/anduin1.94G 377G24K /zones/anduin
rpool/zones/anduin/ROOT 1.94G 377G21K legacy
Henu wrote:
So do you mean I cannot gather the names and locations of
changed/created/removed files just by analyzing a stream of
(incremental) zfs_send?
That's correct, you can't. Snapshots do not work at the file level.
--
Ian.
___
zfs-discuss
[cross posting is probably better than muli-posts]
Petros Koutoupis wrote:
As I was navigating through the source code for the ZFS file system I saw that
in zvol.c where the ioctls are defined, if a program sends a DKIOCGGEOM or
DKIOCDVTOV, an ENOTSUP (Error Not Supported) is returned.
You
My main server doubles as a both a development system and web server for
my work and a media server for home. When I built it in the early days
of ZFS, drive prices were about four times current (500GB were the
beading edge) and affordable SSDs were a way off so I opted for a stripe
of 4 2way
A Darren Dunham wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 08:11:27AM +1300, Ian Collins wrote:
True, but I wonder how viable its future is. One of my clients
requires 17 LT04 types for a full backup, which cost more and takes
up more space than the equivalent in removable hard drives.
What kind
Robert Milkowski wrote:
On 20/01/2010 19:20, Ian Collins wrote:
Julian Regel wrote:
It is actually not that easy.
Compare a cost of 2x x4540 with 1TB disks to equivalent solution on
LTO.
Each x4540 could be configured as: 4x 11 disks in raidz-2 + 2x hot
spare
+ 2x OS disks.
The four
Julian Regel wrote:
Until you try to pick one up and put it in a fire safe!
Then you backup to tape from x4540 whatever data you need.
In case of enterprise products you save on licensing here as you need
a one client license per x4540 but in fact can backup data from many
clients which are
Allen Eastwood wrote:
On Jan 19, 2010, at 22:54 , Ian Collins wrote:
Allen Eastwood wrote:
On Jan 19, 2010, at 18:48 , Richard Elling wrote:
Many people use send/recv or AVS for disaster recovery on the inexpensive
side. Obviously, enterprise backup systems also provide DR
Julian Regel wrote:
It is actually not that easy.
Compare a cost of 2x x4540 with 1TB disks to equivalent solution on LTO.
Each x4540 could be configured as: 4x 11 disks in raidz-2 + 2x hot spare
+ 2x OS disks.
The four raidz2 group form a single pool. This would provide well over
30TB of
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Ian Collins i...@ianshome.com wrote:
The correct way to archivbe ACLs would be to put them into extended POSIX tar
attrubutes as star does.
See http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/man/star/star.4.html for a format
documentation or have a look at ftp://ftp.berlios.de
Julian Regel wrote:
Based on what I've seen in other comments, you might be right.
Unfortunately, I don't feel comfortable backing up ZFS filesystems
because the tools aren't there to do it (built into the operating
system or using Zmanda/Amanda).
Commercial backup solutions are available
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Ian Collins i...@ianshome.com wrote:
Julian Regel wrote:
Based on what I've seen in other comments, you might be right.
Unfortunately, I don't feel comfortable backing up ZFS filesystems
because the tools aren't there to do it (built into the operating
system
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Ian Collins i...@ianshome.com wrote:
Sun's tar also writes ACLs in a way that is 100% non-portable. Star cannot
understand them and probably never will be able to understand this format as it
is not well defined for a portable program like star
Allen Eastwood wrote:
On Jan 19, 2010, at 18:48 , Richard Elling wrote:
Many people use send/recv or AVS for disaster recovery on the inexpensive
side. Obviously, enterprise backup systems also provide DR capabilities.
Since ZFS has snapshots that actually work, and you can use send/receive
Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
Personally, I like to start with a fresh full image once a month,
and then do daily incrementals for the rest of the month.
This doesn't buy you anything. ZFS isn't like traditional backups.
If you never send another full, then eventually the delta from
Daniel Carosone wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 05:52:25PM +1300, Ian Collins wrote:
Is it the parent snapshot for a clone?
I'm almost certain it isn't. I haven't created any clones and none show
in zpool history.
What about snapshot holds? I don't know if (and doubt
Daniel Carosone wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 06:21:45PM +1300, Ian Collins wrote:
I have a Solaris 10 update 6 system with a snapshot I can't remove.
zfs destroy -f snap reports the device as being busy. fuser doesn't
shore any process using the filesystem and it isn't shared
I have a Solaris 10 update 6 system with a snapshot I can't remove.
zfs destroy -f snap reports the device as being busy. fuser doesn't
shore any process using the filesystem and it isn't shared.
I can unmount the filesystem OK.
Any clues or suggestions of bigger sticks to hit it with?
--
Daniel Carosone wrote:
However, with the rpool mirror in place, I can't find a way to zpool
export black. It complains that the poool is busy, because of the
zvol in use. This happens regardless of whether I have set the zvol
submirror offline. I expected that, with the subdevice in the
Paul B. Henson wrote:
We just had our first x4500 disk failure (which of course had to happen
late Friday night sigh), I've opened a ticket on it but don't expect a
response until Monday so was hoping to verify the hot spare took over
correctly and we still have redundancy pending device
Cindy Swearingen wrote:
Hi Ian,
I see the problem. In your included URL below, you didn't
include the /N suffix as included in the zpool upgrade
output.
That's correct, N is the version number. I see it is fixed now, thanks.
--
Ian.
___
James Lee wrote:
I haven't seen much discussion on how deduplication affects performance.
I've enabled dudup on my 4-disk raidz array and have seen a significant
drop in write throughput, from about 100 MB/s to 3 MB/s. I can't
imagine such a decrease is normal.
What is you data?
I've
301 - 400 of 728 matches
Mail list logo
