[zfs-discuss] Space usage
I'm just uploading all my data to my server and the space used is much more than what i'm uploading; Documents = 147MB Videos = 11G Software= 1.4G By my calculations, that equals 12.547T, yet zpool list is showing 21G as being allocated; NAMESIZE ALLOC FREECAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT dpool 27.2T 21.2G 27.2T 0% 1.00x ONLINE - It doesn't look like any snapshots have been taken, according to zfs list -t snapshot. I've read about the 'copies' parameter but I didn't specify this when creating filesystems and I guess the default is 1? Any ideas? -- 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] Space usage
Thanks fj. Should have realized that when it showed 27T available, which is the raw total size before raid-z2! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Indexing - Windows 7
Hiya, I am trying to add shares to my Win7 libraries but Windows won't let me add them due to them not being indexed. Does S11E have any server-side indexing feature? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ACLs and Windows
Hiya, My S11E server is needed to serve Windows clients. I read a while ago (last year!) about 'fudging' it so that Everyone has read/write access. Is it possible for me to lock this down to users? I only have a single user on my Windows clients and in some case (htpc) this user is logged on automatically. So could I map a Windows user with a Solaris user (matching credentials) and only give (owner) access to my ZFS filesystems to this user? Thanks -- 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] Disk IDs and DD
Oh no I am not bothered at all about the target ID numbering. I just wondered if there was a problem in the way it was enumerating the disks. Can you elaborate on the dd command LaoTsao? Is the 's' you refer to a parameter of the command or the slice of a disk - none of my 'data' disks have been 'configured' yet. I wanted to ID them before adding them to pools. -- 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] Disk IDs and DD
Thanks Andrew, Fajar. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Scripting
Hiya, Now I have figured out how to read disks using dd to make LEDs blink, I want to write a little script that iterates through all drives, dd's them with a few thousand counts, stop, then dd's them again with another few thousand counts, so I end up with maybe 5 blinks. I don't want somebody to write something for me, I'd like to be pointed in the right direction so I can build one myself :) Thanks -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Disk IDs and DD
Hiya, Is there any reason (and anything to worry about) if disk target IDs don't start at 0 (zero). For some reason mine are like this (3 controllers - 1 onboard and 2 PCIe); AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS: 0. c8t0d0 ATA-ST9160314AS-SDM1 cyl 19454 alt 2 hd 255 sec 63 /pci@0,0/pci10de,cb84@5/disk@0,0 1. c8t1d0 ATA-ST9160314AS-SDM1 cyl 19454 alt 2 hd 255 sec 63 /pci@0,0/pci10de,cb84@5/disk@1,0 2. c9t7d0 ATA-HitachiHDS72302-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,376@a/pci1000,3140@0/sd@7,0 3. c9t8d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,376@a/pci1000,3140@0/sd@8,0 4. c9t9d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,376@a/pci1000,3140@0/sd@9,0 5. c9t10d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,376@a/pci1000,3140@0/sd@a,0 6. c9t11d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,376@a/pci1000,3140@0/sd@b,0 7. c9t12d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,376@a/pci1000,3140@0/sd@c,0 8. c9t13d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,376@a/pci1000,3140@0/sd@d,0 9. c9t14d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,376@a/pci1000,3140@0/sd@e,0 10. c10t8d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,377@f/pci1000,3140@0/sd@8,0 11. c10t9d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,377@f/pci1000,3140@0/sd@9,0 12. c10t10d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,377@f/pci1000,3140@0/sd@a,0 13. c10t11d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,377@f/pci1000,3140@0/sd@b,0 14. c10t12d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,377@f/pci1000,3140@0/sd@c,0 15. c10t13d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,377@f/pci1000,3140@0/sd@d,0 16. c10t14d0 ATA-Hitachi HDS7230-A5C0 cyl 60798 alt 2 hd 255 sec 252 /pci@0,0/pci10de,377@f/pci1000,3140@0/sd@e,0 So apart from the onboard controller, the tx (where x is the number) doesn't start at 0. Also, I am trying to make disk LEDs blink by using dd so I can match up disks in Solaris to the physical slot, but I can't work out the right command; admin@ok-server01:~# dd if=/dev/dsk/c9t7d0 of=/dev/null dd: /dev/dsk/c9t7d0: open: No such file or directory admin@ok-server01:~# dd if=/dev/rdsk/c9t7d0 of=/dev/null dd: /dev/rdsk/c9t7d0: open: No such file or directory Thanks -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Mirrored rpool
Hiya, I am using S11E Live CD to install. The install wouldn't let me select 2 disks for a mirrored rpool so I done this post-install using this guide; http://darkstar-solaris.blogspot.com/2008/09/zfs-root-mirror.html Before I go ahead and continue building my server (zpools) I want to make sure the above guide is correct for S11E? The mirrored rpool seems to look OK but want to make sure there's nothing else to do. Thanks -- 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] Finding disks [was: # disks per vdev]
Thanks Trond. I am aware of this, but to be honest I will not be upgrading very often (my current WHS setup has lasted 5 years without a single change!) and certainly not to each iteration of TB size increase, so by the time I do upgrade, say in the next 5 years PCIe will have probably been replaced, or got to revision 10.0 or something stupid! And anyway, my current motherboard (expensive server board) is only PCIe 1.0 so I wouldn't get the benefit of having a PCIe 2.0 card. -- 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] Finding disks [was: # disks per vdev]
The testing was utilizing a portion of our drives, we have 120 x 750 SATA drives in J4400s dual pathed. We ended up with 22 vdevs each a raidz2 of 5 drives, with one drive in each of the J4400, so we can lose two complete J4400 chassis and not lose any data. Thanks pk. You know I never thought about doing 5 drive z2's. That would be an a acceptable compromise for me between 2x 7 drive z2's as; 1) resilver times should be faster 2) 5 drive groupings, matching my 5 drive caddies 3) only losing 2TB usable against 2x 7 drive z2's 4) IOPS should be faster 5) if and when I scale up, I can add another 5 drives, in another 5 drive caddy Super! -- 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] Finding disks [was: # disks per vdev]
OK, I have finally settled on hardware; 2x LSI SAS3081E-R controllers 2x Seagate Momentus 5400.6 rpool disks 15x Hitachi 5K3000 'data' disks I am still undecided as to how to group the disks. I have read elsewhere that raid-z1 is best suited with either 3 or 5 disks and raid-z2 is better suited with 6 or 10 disks - is there any truth in this, although I think this was in reference to 4K sector disks; 3x 5 drive z1 = 24t usable 2x 6 drive z2 = 16t usable keeping to those recommendations or 2x 7 disk z2 = 20t usable with 1 cold/warm/hot spare as per my original idea. -- 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] Finding disks [was: # disks per vdev]
Thanks. I ruled out the SAS2008 controller as my motherboard is only PCIe 1.0 so would not have been able to make the most of the difference in increased bandwidth. I can't see myself upgrading every few months (my current WHZ build has lasted over 4 years without a single change) so by the time I do come to upgrade PCIe will probably be obselete!! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] 512b vs 4K sectors
Hiya, I''ve been doing a lot of research surrounding this and ZFS, including some posts on here, though I am still left scratching my head. I am planning on using slow RPM drives for a home media server, and it's these that seem to 'suffer' from a few problems; Seagate Barracuda LP - Looks to be the only true 512b sector hard disk. Serious firmware issues Western Digital Cavier Green - 4K sectors = crap write performance Hitachi 5K3000 - Variable sector sizing (according to tech. specs) Samsung SpinPoint F4 - Just plain old problems with them What is the best drive of the above 4, and are 4K drives really a no-no with ZFS. Are there any alternatives in the same price bracket? Who would have thought choosing a hard disk could be so 'hard'! Thanks -- 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] Finding disks [was: # disks per vdev]
Sorry to pester, but is anyone able to say if the Marvell 9480 chip is now supported in Solaris? The article I read saying it wasn't supported was dated May 2010 so over a year ago. -- 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] Finding disks [was: # disks per vdev]
Thanks for all the replies. I have a pretty good idea how the disk enclosure assigns slot locations so should be OK. One last thing - I see thet Supermicro has just released a newer version of the card I mentioned in the first post that supports SATA 6Gbps. From what I can see it uses the Marvell 9480 controller, which I don't think is supported in Solaris Express 11 yet. Does this mean it strictly won't work (ie no available drivers) or that it just wouldn't be supported if there's problems? -- 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] # disks per vdev
1 - are the 2 vdevs in the same pool, or two separate pools? I was planning on having the 2 z2 vdevs in one pool. Although having 2 pools and having them sync'd sounds really good, I fear it may be overkill for the intended purpose. 3 - spare temperature for levels raidz2 and better, you might be happier with a warm spare and manual replacement, compared to overly-aggressive automated replacement if there is a cascade of errors. See recent threads. You may also consider a cold spare, leaving a drive bay free for disks-as-backup-tapes swapping. If you replace the 1Tb's now, repurpose them for this rather than reselling. I have considered this. The fact I am using cheap disks inevitably means they will fail sooner and more often than enterprise equivalents so the hot spare may be need to be over-used. Could I have different sized vdevs and still have them both in one pool - i.e. an 8 disk z2 vdev and a 7 disk z2 vdev. 4 - the 16th port Can you find somewhere inside the case for an SSD as L2ARC on your last port? Could be very worthwhile for some of your other data and metadata (less so the movies). Yes! I have 10 5.1/4 drive bays in my case. 9 of them are occupied by the 5-in-3 hot swop caddies leaving 1 bay left. I was planning on using one of these http://www.scan.co.uk/products/icy-dock-mb994sp-4s-4in1-sas-sata-hot-swap-backplane-525-raid-cage in the drive bay and having 2x 2.5 SATA drives mirrored for the root pool, leaving 2 drive bays spare. For the mirrored root pool I was going to use 2 of the 6 motherboard SATA II ports so they are entirely seperate to the 'data' controllers. So I could either use the 16th port on the Supermicro controllers for an SSD or one of the remaining motherboard ports. What size would you recommend for the L2ARC disk. I ask as I have a 72GB SAS 10k disk spare so could use this for now (being faster than SATA), but it would have to be on the Supermicro card as this also supports SAS drives. SSD's are a bit out of range price wise at the moment so i'd wait to use one. Also ZFS doesn't support TRIM yet does it? Thank you for you excellent post! :) -- 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] # disks per vdev
Thanks Richard. How does ZFS enumerate the disks? In terms of listing them does it do them logically, i.e; controller #1 (motherboard) | |--- disk1 |--- disk2 controller #3 |--- disk3 |--- disk4 |--- disk5 |--- disk6 |--- disk7 |--- disk8 |--- disk9 |--- disk10 controller #4 |--- disk11 |--- disk12 |--- disk13 |--- disk14 |--- disk15 |--- disk16 |--- disk17 |--- disk18 or is it completely random leaving me with some trial and error to work out what disk is on what port? -- 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] # disks per vdev
I was planning on using one of these http://www.scan.co.uk/products/icy-dock-mb994sp-4s-4in 1-sas-sata-hot-swap-backplane-525-raid-cage Imagine if 2.5 2TB disks were price neutral compared to 3.5 equivalents. I could have 40 of the buggers in my system giving 80TB raw storage! I'd happily use mirrors all the way in that scenario -- 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] # disks per vdev
4 - the 16th port Can you find somewhere inside the case for an SSD as L2ARC on your last port? Although saying that, if we are saying hot spares may be bad in my scenario, I could ditch it and use an 3.5 SSD in the 15th drive's place? -- 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] # disks per vdev
Thanks guys. I have decided to bite the bullet and change to 2TB disks now rather than go through all the effort using 1TB disks and then maybe changing in 6-12 months time or whatever. The price difference between 1TB and 2TB disks is marginal and I can always re-sell my 6x 1TB disks. I think I have also narrowed down the raid config to these 4; 2x 7 disk raid-z2 with 1 hot spare - 20TB usable 3x 5 disk raid-z2 with 0 hot spare - 18TB usable 2x 6 disk raid-z2 with 2 hot spares - 16TB usable with option 1 probably being preferred at the moment. I am aware that bad batches of disks do exist so I tend to either a) buy them in sets from different suppliers or b) use different manufacturers. How sensitive to different disks is ZFS, in terms of disk features (NCQ, RPM speed, firmware/software versions, cache etc). Thanks -- 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] # disks per vdev
Thanks Edward. In that case what 'option' would you choose - smaller raid-z vdevs or larger raid-z2 vdevs. I do like the idea of having a hot spare so 2x 7 disk raid-z2 may be the better option rather than 3x 5 disk raid-z with no hot spare. 2TB loss in the former could be acceptable I suppose for the sake of better protection. When 4-5TB drives come to market 2-3TB drives will drop in price so I could always upgrade them - can you do this with raid-z vdevs, in terms of autoexand? There might be the odd deletion here and there if a movie is truly turd, but as you say 99% of the time it will be written and left. -- 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] # disks per vdev
That's how I understood autoexpand, about not doing so until all disks have been done. I do indeed rip from disc rather than grab torrents - to VIDEO_TS folders and not ISO - on my laptop then copy the whole folder up to WHS in one go. So while they're not one large single file, they are lots of small .vob files, but being written in one hit. This is a bit OT, but can you have one vdev that is a duplicate of another vdev? By that I mean say you had 2x 7 disk raid-z2 vdevs, instead of them both being used in one large pool could you have one that is a backup of the other, allowing you to destroy one of them and re-build without data loss? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] # disks per vdev
Hiya, I am just in the planning stages for my ZFS Home Media Server build at the moment (to replace WHS v1). I plan to use 2x motherboard ports and 2x Supermicro AOC-SASLP-MV8 8 port SATA cards to give 17* drive connections; 2 disks (120GB SATA 2.5) will be used for the ZFS install using the motherboard ports and the remaing 15 disks (1TB SATA) will be used for data using the 2x 8 port cards. * = the total number of ports is 18 but I only have enough space in the chassis for 17 drives (2x 2.5 in 1x 3.5 bay and 15x 3.5 by using 5-in-3 hotswop caddies in 9x 5.1/4 bays). All disks are 5400RPM to keep power requirements down. The ZFS install will be mirrored, but I am not sure how to configure the 15 data disks from a performance (inc. resilvering) vs protection vs usable space perspective; 3x 5 disk raid-z. 3 disk failures in the right scenario, 12TB storage 2x 7 disk raid-z + hot spare. 2 disk failures in the right scenario, 12TB storage 1x 15 disk raid-z2. 2 disk failures, 13TB storage 2x 7 disk raid-z2 + hot spare. 4 disk failures in the right scenario, 10TB storage Without having a mash of different raid-z* levels I can't think of any other options. I am leaning towards the first option as it gives seperation between all the disks; I would have seperate Movie folders on each of them while having critical data (pictures, home videos, documents etc) stored on each set of raid-z. Suggestions welcomed. Thanks -- 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] # disks per vdev
Thanks Edward. I'm in two minds with mirrors. I know they provide the best performance and protection, and if this was a business critical machine I wouldn't hesitate. But as it for a home media server, which is mainly WORM access and will be storing (legal!) DVD/Bluray rips i'm not so sure I can sacrify the space. 7x 2 way mirrors would give me 7TB usable with 1 hot spare, using 1TB disks, which is a big drop from 12TB! I could always jump to 2TB disks giving me 14TB usable but I already have 6x 1TB disks in my WHS build which i'd like to re-use. Hmmm! -- 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] # disks per vdev
Thanks martysch. That is what I meant about adding disks to vdevs - not adding disks to vdevs but adding vdevs to pools. If the geometry of the vdevs should ideally be the same, it would make sense to buy one more disk now and have a 7 disk raid-z2 to start with, then buy disks as and when and create a further 7 disk raid-z2 leaving the 15th disk as a hot spare. Would 'only' give 10TB usable though. The only thing though I seem to remember reading that adding vdevs to pools way after the creation of the pool and data had been written to it, that things aren't spread evenly - is that right? So it might actually make sense to buy all the disks now and start fresh with the final build. Starting with only 6 disks would leave growth for another 6 disk raid-z2 (to keep matching geometry) leaving 3 disks spare which is not ideal. -- 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] A few questions
It's worse on raidzN than on mirrors, because the number of items which must be read is higher in radizN, assuming you're using larger vdev's and therefore more items exist scattered about inside that vdev. You therefore have a higher number of things which must be randomly read before you reach completion. In that case, isn't the answer to have a dedicated parity disk (or 2 or 3 depending on what raidz* is used), ala raid-dp. Wouldn't this effectively be the 'same' as a mirror when resilvering (the only difference being parity vs actual data), as it's doing so from a single disk. raid-dp covers the parity disk from failure so raidz1 probably wouldn't be sensible as if the parity disk fails. -- 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] A few questions
Thanks Edward. I do agree about mirrored rpool (equivalent to Windows OS volume); not doing it goes against one of my principles when building enterprise servers. Is there any argument against using the rpool for all data storage as well as being the install volume? Say for example I chucked 15x 1TB disks in there and created a mirrored rpool during installation, using 2 disks. If I added another 6 mirrors (12 disks) to it that would give me an rpool of 7TB. The 15th disk being a spare. Or, say I selected 3 disks during install, does this create a 3 way mirrored rpool or does it give you the option of creating raidz? If so, I could then create a further 4x 3 drive raidz's, giving me a 10TB rpool. Or, I could use 2 smaller disks (say 80GB) for the rpool, then create 4x 3 drive raidz's, giving me an 8TB rpool. Again this gives me a spare disk. Either of these 3 should keep resilvering times to a minimum, against say one big raidz2 of 13 disks. Why does resilvering take so long in raidz anyway? -- 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] A few questions
Oh, does anyone know if resilvering efficiency is improved or fixed in Solaris 11 Express, as that is what i'm using. -- 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] A few questions
I believe Oracle is aware of the problem, but most of the core ZFS team has left. And of course, a fix for Oracle Solaris no longer means a fix for the rest of us. OK, that is a bit concerning then. As good as ZFS may be, i'm not sure I want to committ to a file system that is 'broken' and may not be fully fixed, if at all. Hmnnn... -- 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] A few questions
Thanks relling. I suppose at the end of the day any file system/volume manager has it's flaws so perhaps it's better to look at the positives of each and decide based on them. So, back to my question above, is there a deciding argument [i]against[/i] putting data on the install volume (rpool). Forget about mirroring for a sec; 1) Select 3 disks during install creating raidz1. Create a further 4x 3 drive raidz1's, giving me a 10TB rpool with no spare disks 2) Select 5 disks during install creating raidz1. Create a further 2x 5 drive raidsz1's giving me a 12TB rpool with no spare disks 3) Select 7 disks during install creating raidz1. Create a further 7 drive raidz1 giving me 12TB rpool with 1 spare disk As there is no space gain between 2) and 3) there is no point going for 3), other than having a spare disk, but resilver times would be slower. So it becomes between 1) and 2). Neither offer spare disks but 1) would offer faster resilver times with upto 5 simultaneous disk failures and 2) would offer 2TB extra space with upto 3 simultaneous disk failures. FYI, I am using Samsung SpinPoint F2's, which have the variable RPM speeds (http://www.scan.co.uk/products/1tb-samsung-hd103si-ecogreen-f2-sata-3gb-s-32mb-cache-89-ms-ncq) I may wait at least until I get the next 4 drives in (I actually have 6 at the mo, not 5) taking me to 10, before migrating to ZFS so plenty of time to think about it and hopefully time for them to fix resilvering! ;-) Thanks again... -- 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] A few questions
On the subject of where to install ZFS, I was planning to use either Compact Flash or USB drive (both of which would be mounted internally); using up 2 of the drive bays for a mirrored install is possibly a waste of physical space, considering it's a) a home media server and b) the config can be backed up to a protected ZFS pool - if the CF or USB drive failed I would just replace and restore the config. Can you have an equivalent of a global hot spare in ZFS. If I did go down the mirror route (mirror disk0 disk1 mirror disk2 disk3 mirror disk4 disk5 etc) all the way up to 14 disks that would leave the 15th disk spare. Now this is getting really complex, but can you have server failover in ZFS, much like DFS-R in Windows - you point clients to a clustered ZFS namespace so if a complete server failed nothing is interrupted. I am still undecided as to mirror vs RAID Z. I am going to be ripping uncompressed Blu-Rays so space is vital. I use RAID DP in NetApp kit at work and I'm guessing RAID Z2 is the equivalent? I have 5TB space at the moment so going to the expense of mirroring for only 2TB extra doesn't seem much of a pay off. Maybe a compromise of 2x 7-disk RAID Z1 with global hotspare is the way to go? Put it this way, I currently use Windows Home Server, which has no true disk failure protection, so any of ZFS's redundancy schemes is going to be a step up; is there an equivalent system in ZFS where if 1 disk fails you only lose that disks data, like unRAID? Thanks everyone for your input so far :) -- 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] A few questions
Thanks for all the replies. The bit about combining zpools came from this command on the southbrain tutorial; zpool create mail \ mirror c6t600D0230006C1C4C0C50BE5BC9D49100d0 c6t600D0230006B66680C50AB7821F0E900d0 \ mirror c6t600D0230006B66680C50AB0187D75000d0 c6t600D0230006C1C4C0C50BE27386C4900d0 I admit I was getting confused between zpools and vdevs, thinking in the above command that each mirror was a zpool and not a vdev. Just so i'm correct, a normal command would like like zpool create mypool raidz disk1 disk2 disk3 disk4 disk5 which would result in a zpool called my pool, which is made up of a 5 disk raidz vdev? This means that zpools don't actually 'contain' physical devices, which is what I originally thought. -- 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] A few questions
OK cool. One last question. Reading the Admin Guid for ZFS, it says: [i]A more complex conceptual RAID-Z configuration would look similar to the following: raidz c1t0d0 c2t0d0 c3t0d0 c4t0d0 c5t0d0 c6t0d0 c7t0d0 raidz c8t0d0 c9t0d0 c10t0d0 c11t0d0 c12t0d0 c13t0d0 c14t0d0 If you are creating a RAID-Z configuration with many disks, as in this example, a RAID-Z configuration with 14 disks is better split into a two 7-disk groupings. RAID-Z configurations with single-digit groupings of disks should perform better[/i] This is relevant as my final setup was planned to be 15 disks, so only one more than the example. So, do I drop one disk and go with 2 7 drive vdevs, or stick to 3 5 drive vdevs. Also, does anyone have anything to add re the security of CIFS when used with Windows clients? Thanks again guys, and gals... -- 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] A few questions
Thanks! By single drive mirrors, I assume, in a 14 disk setup, you mean 7 sets of 2 disk mirrors - I am thinking of traditional RAID1 here. Or do you mean 1 massive mirror with all 14 disks? This is always a tough one for me. I too prefer RAID1 where redundancy is king, but the trade off for me would be 5GB of 'wasted' space - total of 7GB in mirror and 12GB in 3x RAIDZ. Decisions, decisions. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] A few questions
Hiya, I have been playing with ZFS for a few days now on a test PC, and I plan to use if for my home media server after being very impressed! I've got the basics of creating zpools and zfs filesystems with compression and dedup etc, but I'm wondering if there's a better way to handle security. I'm using Windows 7 clients by the way. I have used this 'guide' to do the permissions - http://www.slepicka.net/?p=37 Also, at present I have 5x 1TB drives to use in my home server so I plan to create a RAID-Z1 pool which will have my shares on it (Movies, Music, Pictures etc). I then plan to increase this in sets of 5 (so another 5x 1TB drives in Jan and nother 5 in Feb/March so that I can avoid all disks being from the same batch). I did plan on creating seperate zpoolz with each set of 5 drives; drives 1-5 volume0 zpool drives 6-10 volume1 zpool drives 11-15 volume2 zpool so that I can sustain 3 simultaneous drives failures, as long as it's one drive from each set. However I think this will mean each zpool will have independant shares which I don't want. I have used this guide - http://southbrain.com/south/tutorials/zpools.html - which says you can combine zpools into a 'parent' zpool, but can this be done in my scenario (staggered) as it looks like the child zpools have to be created before the parent is done. So basically I'd need to be able to; Create volume0 zpool now Create volume1 zpool in Jan, then combine volume0 and volume1 into a parent zpool Create volume2 in Feb/March and add to parent zpool I know I could just add each disk to volume0 zpool but I've read it's a bugger to do and that creating seperate zpools with news disks is a much better way to go. I think that's it for now. Sorry for the mammoth first post! Thanks -- 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] A few questions
Thanks for the reply. In that case, wouldn't it be better to, as you say, start with a 6 drive Z2, then just keep adding drives until the case is full, for a single Z2 zpool? Or even Z3, if that's available now? I have an 11x 5.1/4 bay case, with 3x 5-in-3 hot swap caddies giving me 15 drive bays. Hence the plan to start with 5, then 10, then all the way to 15. This seems a more logical (and cheaper) solution than keep replacing with bigger drives as they come to market. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
