Hello ozan,
Friday, November 3, 2006, 3:57:00 PM, you wrote:
osy for s10u2, documentation recommends 3 to 9 devices in raidz. what is the
osy basis for this recommendation? i assume it is performance and not failure
osy resilience, but i am just guessing... [i know, recommendation was intended
Richard Elling - PAE wrote:
Robert Milkowski wrote:
I almost completely agree with your points 1-5, except that I think
that having at least one hot spare by default would be better than
having none at all - especially with SATA drives.
Yes, I pushed for it, but didn't win.
In a perfect
Jay Grogan wrote:
The V120 has 4GB of RAM , on the HDS side we are in a RAID 5 on the LUN and not
shairing any ports on the MCdata, but with so much cache we aren't close to
taxing the disk.
Are you sure? At some point data has to get flushed from the cache to
the drives themselves. In most
An alternate way will be to use NFSv4. When an NFSv4
client crosses
a mountpoint on the server, it can detect this and
mount the filesystem.
It can feel like a lite version of the automounter
in practice, as
you just have to mount the root and discover the
filesystems as needed.
The
Chris Gerhard wrote:
An alternate way will be to use NFSv4. When an NFSv4
client crosses
a mountpoint on the server, it can detect this and
mount the filesystem.
It can feel like a lite version of the automounter
in practice, as
you just have to mount the root and discover the
filesystems as
ozan s. yigit wrote:
for s10u2, documentation recommends 3 to 9 devices in raidz. what is the
basis for this recommendation? i assume it is performance and not failure
resilience, but i am just guessing... [i know, recommendation was intended
for people who know their raid cold, so it needed no
For background on what this is, see:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=24416#24416
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=25200#25200
=
zfs-discuss 10/16 - 10/31
=
Size of all threads during
If I add a ZFS dataset to a zone, and then want to zfs send from another
computer into a file system that the zone has created in that data set, can I zfs
send to the zone, or can I send to that zone's global zone, or will either of
those work?
Matthew Flanagan wrote:
Matt,
Matthew Flanagan wrote:
mkfile 100m /data
zpool create tank /data
...
rm /data
...
panic[cpu0]/thread=2a1011d3cc0: ZFS: I/O failure
(write on unknown off 0: zio 60007432bc0 [L0
unallocated] 4000L/400P DVA[0]=0:b000:400
DVA[1]=0:120a000:400 fletcher4
I actually think this is an NFSv4 issue, but I'm going to ask here
anyway...
Server:Solaris 10 Update 2 (SPARC), with several ZFS file systems
shared via the legacy method (/etc/dfs/dfstab and share(1M), not via the
ZFS property). Default settings in /etc/default/nfs
bigbox# share
-
Erik Trimble wrote:
I actually think this is an NFSv4 issue, but I'm going to ask here
anyway...
Server:Solaris 10 Update 2 (SPARC), with several ZFS file systems
shared via the legacy method (/etc/dfs/dfstab and share(1M), not via the
ZFS property). Default settings in /etc/default/nfs
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Richard Elling - PAE wrote:
ozan s. yigit wrote:
for s10u2, documentation recommends 3 to 9 devices in raidz. what is the
basis for this recommendation? i assume it is performance and not failure
resilience, but i am just guessing... [i know, recommendation was intended
Don't forget to restart mapid after modifying default domain in
/etc/default/nfs.
As root, run svcadm restart svc:/network/nfs/mapid.
I've run into this in the past.
Karen
eric kustarz wrote:
Erik Trimble wrote:
I actually think this is an NFSv4 issue, but I'm going to ask here
anyway...
Hi there
I'm busy with some tests on the above hardware and will post some scores soon.
For those that do _not_ have the above available for tests, I'm open to
suggestions on potential configs that I could run for you.
Pop me a mail if you want something specific _or_ you have suggestions
Al Hopper wrote:
[1] Using MTTDL = MTBF^2 / (N * (N-1) * MTTR)
But ... I'm not sure I buy into your numbers given the probability that
more than one disk will fail inside the service window - given that the
disks are identical? Or ... a disk failure occurs at 5:01 PM (quitting
time) on a
Hi Louwtjie,
Are you running FC or SATA-II disks in the 6140? How many spindles too?
Best Regards,
Jason
On 11/3/06, Louwtjie Burger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there
I'm busy with some tests on the above hardware and will post some scores soon.
For those that do _not_ have the above
Jeff Victor wrote:
If I add a ZFS dataset to a zone, and then want to zfs send from
another computer into a file system that the zone has created in that
data set, can I zfs send to the zone, or can I send to that zone's
global zone, or will either of those work?
I believe that the 'zfs
17 matches
Mail list logo
