Re: [zfs-discuss] Please warn a home user against OpenSolaris under VirtualBox under WinXP ; )
Well at the risk of being repetetive too: or another box. So yes I am considering it, but that is probably the option that requires less guidance in this thread. -- 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] Please warn a home user against OpenSolaris under VirtualBox under WinXP ; )
OK, replying to myself after having played around a bit with both Unix under Billware and vice versa: 1) - Somehow the HDs turned into a GPT Protective Partition, which XP cannot read. Googling a bit reveals that XP cannot read these (although a utility for destroying and reformatting is available). XP not touching it is A Good Thing I think. Sorry for letting this slip into a Billware support question, but: Is it safe to have a guest OS raw-accessing these discs, without worrying that the data being destroyed by an XP host? 2) - Using XP under OpenSolaris (build 134, most recent VirtualBox) is still not appealing -- even having done a fresh install. It is unbearably slow, I can't even play a media file on an external USB soundcard (using pass-through). So ... either WinXP host, or another box. -- 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] Please warn a home user against OpenSolaris under VirtualBox under WinXP ; )
At the risk of being repetitive: [i]Why not two separate machines, one for XP, one for zfs/raid?[/i] At today's network speeds, hooking a cable between those two would provide any speed data access to the files in the raid that you want. A suitable ZFS machine could sit in another room if you want the quiet for home theater. The idea of having one set of hardware run everything is clever, and virtualizing everything is neat, efficient - and [i]complicated[/i]. Now that Oracle has gutted Open Solaris, I'm forced to once again articulate why I got into Open Solaris about a year ago - I wanted ZFS, and was willing to go learn Open Solaris to get it. ZFS was a powerful motivator. But I can get what I need there with just a ZFS back end machine; and last-generation hardware is very, very cheap. [i]For me, the UN complication of using two hardware setups is well worth it.[/i] -- 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] Please warn a home user against OpenSolaris under VirtualBox under WinXP ; )
Hmm...according to http://www.mail-archive.com/vbox-users-commun...@lists.sourceforge.net/msg00640.html that's only needed before VirtualBox 3.2, or for IDE. = 3.2, non-IDE should honor flush requests, if I read that correctly. Which is good, because I haven't seen an example of how to enabling flushing for SAS (which is the emulation I usually use because it's supposed to have better performance). -- 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] Please warn a home user against OpenSolaris under VirtualBox under WinXP ; )
@ kebabber: There was a guy doing that: Windows as host and OpenSolaris as guest with raw access to his disks. He lost his 12 TB data. It turned out that VirtualBox dont honor the write flush flag (or something similar). That story is in the link I provided, and as has been pointed out here, it is solvable. I am more worried that the hard drives I wanted to reserve for server use, will be taken over by host. Initialized in MS'esque, might be dangerous? -- 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] Please warn a home user against OpenSolaris under VirtualBox under WinXP ; )
There was a guy doing that: Windows as host and OpenSolaris as guest with raw access to his disks. He lost his 12 TB data. It turned out that VirtualBox dont honor the write flush flag (or something similar). In other words, I would never ever do that. Your data is safer with Windows only and a Windows raid solution. Use OpenSolaris as host instead, and Win as guest. -- 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] Please warn a home user against OpenSolaris under VirtualBox under WinXP ; )
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 07:14:43AM -0700, Orvar Korvar wrote: There was a guy doing that: Windows as host and OpenSolaris as guest with raw access to his disks. He lost his 12 TB data. It turned out that VirtualBox dont honor the write flush flag (or something similar). VirtualBox has an option to honor flushes. Also, recent versions of ZFS can recover by throwing out the last N transactions that were not committed fully. In other words, I would never ever do that. Your data is safer with Windows only and a Windows raid solution. Use OpenSolaris as host instead, and Win as guest. I don't think your advice is correct. If you're going to run production services on VirtualBox VMs then you should enable cache flushes in VBox: http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ch12.html#id2692517 To enable flushing for IDE disks, issue the following command: VBoxManage setextradata VM name VBoxInternal/Devices/piix3ide/0/LUN#[x]/Config/IgnoreFlush 0 The value [x] that selects the disk is 0 for the master device on the first channel, 1 for the slave device on the first channel, 2 for the master device on the second channel or 3 for the master device on the second channel. To enable flushing for SATA disks, issue the following command: VBoxManage setextradata VM name VBoxInternal/Devices/ahci/0/LUN#[x]/Config/IgnoreFlush 0 The value [x] that selects the disk can be a value between 0 and 29. IMO VBox should have a simple toggle for this in either its disk or vm manager UI. And the flush commands should be honored by default. What VBox could do is have some radio buttons or checkboxes for indicating the purpose of a given VM, and then derive default flush behavior from that (e.g., test and gaming VMs need not honor flushes, dev VMs might, and prod VMs do). Nico -- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Please warn a home user against OpenSolaris under VirtualBox under WinXP ; )
Pardon in advance my n00b ignorance. (Yes I have googled a [i]lot[/i] before asking.) I am considering VirtualBoxing away one physical machine at home, and running WinXP as host (yes, as atrocious it may seem, explanation below [1]) and OpenSolaris guest as file server, with OpenSolaris (why?[2]) having raw access to all my SATA drives. (OSes on the IDE channel). This is for home use, as a media center -- files basically written 4 TB once and for all and later only rare addtions or overwrites. If this is a bad idea, I'd like to be warned before I spend another two weeks trying to learn, reinstall (initial bare-metal testing OK), swear curse, populate and swear curse. * Raw access. - ZFS is best off accessing physical devices, right? That means raw access, or is that even insufficient? - I am a bit scared at Windows having access to the critical hard drives ;) And raw access is considered for experts, which I ain't. And there are concerns like flush drive ( comments in http://blogs.sun.com/mock/entry/stupid_virtualbox_zfs_tricks ) -- solvable yes, but I am not confident I know all the warnings. - FTR, I will anyway have a few-months-old backup at work, so I am not too worried at a sudden data loss due to my own screwing up. * Memory. - As said, hardly any write operations, so OpenSolaris seems to run perfectly well on this (bare metal) with even less than 1GB under no load, but I haven't even tried to populate with data -- how much to even idle on a 5TB RAID-Z? - This mobo clocks down RAM if using more than 2 slots. [1] Why XP as _host_? - Will sometimes run XP on bare metal for performance -- I can then simply pause the VM. - Running my pre-installed XP under VirtualBox looks like a nightmare, judging from some googling - Stability? If XP crashes, I don't need to access my media files until XP is up and running again. Would of course be quicker to restart in VM, but hey, server uptime is really not an issue. (- Better network card support.) - I might have an OpenSolaris installation running on bare metal for those occational heavier tasks, and stick to my laptop for those couple of days. [2] Why OpenSolaris at all? - Would like ZFS for RAID management (5 disk RAID-Z) and snapshotting (basically [i]every[/i] time a file is overwritten!). -- 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] Please warn a home user against OpenSolaris under VirtualBox under WinXP ; )
I have another question to add to the two you already asked and answered. Why not two separate machines, one for XP, one for zfs/raid? At today's network speeds, hooking a cable between those two would provide any speed data access to the files in the raid that you want. A suitable ZFS machine could sit in another room if you want the quiet for home theater. The idea of having one set of hardware run everything is clever, and virtualizing everything is neat, efficient - and complicated. Now that Oracle has gutted Open Solaris, I'm forced to once again articulate why I got into Open Solaris about a year ago - I wanted ZFS, and was willing to go learn Open Solaris to get it. ZFS was a powerful motivator. But I can get what I need there with just a ZFS back end machine; and last-generation hardware is very, very cheap. For me, the UN complication of using two hardware setups is well worth it. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
