Re: [zfs-discuss] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Brian Hechinger
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter? I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card that I wanted to use for a boot pool and even though the BIOS reports the disk, Solaris B95 (or the

Re: [zfs-discuss] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Ian Collins
Brian Hechinger wrote: On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter? I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card that I wanted to use for a boot pool and even though the BIOS reports the

Re: [zfs-discuss] OpenSolaris installer can't be run, if target ZFS pool exists.

2008-08-20 Thread jan damborsky
And log an RFE for having user defined properties at the pool (if one doesn't already exist). 6739057 was filed to track this. Thank you, Jan ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org

[zfs-discuss] ETA on zpool vdev removal?

2008-08-20 Thread Daniel Polombo
I've just recently discovered that ZFS doesn't support (yet) removing a disk other than a hot spare from a zpool. I've also found out that this feature has been on the TODO list for ages (at least since January 2006). Is there any kind of ETA on that feature's availability? Unfortunately,

Re: [zfs-discuss] ETA on zpool vdev removal?

2008-08-20 Thread Glaser, David
When you say 'removing a disk' from a zpool, do you mean shrinking a zpool by logically taking disks away from it, or just removing a failing disk from a zpool? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Daniel Polombo Sent: Wednesday, August 20,

Re: [zfs-discuss] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Robert Milkowski
Hello Ian, Wednesday, August 20, 2008, 8:57:33 AM, you wrote: IC Brian Hechinger wrote: On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter? I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card that I

[zfs-discuss] ARCSTAT Kstat Definitions

2008-08-20 Thread Ben Rockwood
Would someone in the know be willing to write up (preferably blog) definitive definitions/explanations of all the arcstats provided via kstat? I'm struggling with proper interpretation of certain values, namely p, memory_throttle_count, and the mru/mfu+ghost hit vs demand/prefetch hit

Re: [zfs-discuss] ETA on zpool vdev removal?

2008-08-20 Thread Daniel Polombo
I meant shrinking the pool. I know it's already possible to replace a disk, failing or not. 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] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Will Murnane
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17, Ian Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter? I have two of these:

Re: [zfs-discuss] ARCSTAT Kstat Definitions

2008-08-20 Thread Sanjeev
Ben, Here is an attempt. c - Is the total cache size (MRU + MFU) p - represents the limit of MRU (c - p) - represents the limit of MFU c_max, c_min- hard limits size- Total amount consumed by ARC memory_throttle_count - The number of times ZFS decided to

Re: [zfs-discuss] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Florin Iucha
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter? I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card that I wanted to use for a boot pool and even though the BIOS reports the disk, Solaris B95 (or the

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread John
WOW! This is quite a departure from what we've been told for the past 2 years... In fact if your comments are true that we'll never be able to shrink a ZFS pool, i will be, for lack of a better word, PISSED. Like others not being able to shrink is a feature that truly prevents us from

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread Mario Goebbels
WOW! This is quite a departure from what we've been told for the past 2 years... This must be misinformation. The reason there's no project (yet) is very likely because pool shrinking depends strictly on the availability of bp_rewrite functionality, which is still in development. The last

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread Kyle McDonald
Mario Goebbels wrote: WOW! This is quite a departure from what we've been told for the past 2 years... This must be misinformation. The reason there's no project (yet) is very likely because pool shrinking depends strictly on the availability of bp_rewrite functionality, which is

[zfs-discuss] Help! Possible with b80 and newest ZFS?

2008-08-20 Thread Orvar Korvar
I, as several others, have severe problems with the latest builds of SXCE. After b93-94 or, everything became extremely unstable to the point of rendering my Solaris totally useless. This is written from a Windows machine. http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=69654tstart=0 The

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread John
Our enterprise is about 300TB.. maybe a bit more... You are correct that most of the time we grow and not shrink... however, we are fairly dynamic and occasionally do shrink. DBA's have been known to be off on their space requirements/requests. There is also the human error factor. If someone

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] [Fwd: beadm: Unable to activate opensolaris-x (build 95)]

2008-08-20 Thread Evan Layton
Rob McMahon wrote: Evan Layton wrote: Can you set BE_PRINT_ERR to see if we can get a bit more information on what going on here? (export BE_PRINT_ERR=true) It would also be helpful to see what zpool status shows as well as what's in menu.lst env BE_PRINT_ERR=true beadm activate

Re: [zfs-discuss] [indiana-discuss] [Fwd: beadm: Unable to activate opensolaris-x (build 95)]

2008-08-20 Thread Evan Layton
Evan Layton wrote: Rob McMahon wrote: Evan Layton wrote: Can you set BE_PRINT_ERR to see if we can get a bit more information on what going on here? (export BE_PRINT_ERR=true) It would also be helpful to see what zpool status shows as well as what's in menu.lst env BE_PRINT_ERR=true

[zfs-discuss] SSD update

2008-08-20 Thread Al Hopper
It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the latest SSD product announcements. No pricing yet ... but the specs will push computer system IO bandwidth performance to numbers only possible today with extremely expensive RAM based disk subsystems. SSDs + ZFS - a marriage made

Re: [zfs-discuss] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Neal Pollack
Ian Collins wrote: Brian Hechinger wrote: On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter? I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card that I wanted to use for a boot pool and even though

[zfs-discuss] ZFS with Traditional SAN

2008-08-20 Thread Aaron Blew
All, I'm currently working out details on an upgrade from UFS/SDS on DAS to ZFS on a SAN fabric. I'm interested in hearing how ZFS has behaved in more traditional SAN environments using gear that scales vertically like EMC Clarion/HDS AMS/3PAR etc. Do you experience issues with zpool integrity

Re: [zfs-discuss] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Ian Collins
Neal Pollack wrote: Ian Collins wrote: Brian Hechinger wrote: On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter? I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card that I wanted to use for a boot pool

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread Miles Nordin
j == John [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: j There is also the human error factor. If someone accidentally j grows a zpool or worse, accidentally adds an unredundant vdev to a redundant pool. Once you press return, all you can do is scramble to find mirrors for it. vdev removal is also

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread Ian Collins
John wrote: Our enterprise is about 300TB.. maybe a bit more... You are correct that most of the time we grow and not shrink... however, we are fairly dynamic and occasionally do shrink. DBA's have been known to be off on their space requirements/requests. Isn't that one of the

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS with Traditional SAN

2008-08-20 Thread Vincent Fox
div id=jive-html-wrapper-div div dir=ltrAll,brI'm currently working out details on an upgrade from UFS/SDS on DAS to ZFS on a SAN fabric.  I'm interested in hearing how ZFS has behaved in more traditional SAN environments using gear that scales vertically like EMC Clarion/HDS AMS/3PAR etc. 

Re: [zfs-discuss] Help! Possible with b80 and newest ZFS?

2008-08-20 Thread Ross
I wouldn't know about using newer ZFS with older builds, but I can tell you that b94 looks rock solid to me. I've been running it for a few weeks on a live server and haven't had any crashing or instability problems at all. Ordinarily, if you're having problems, the first thing I would try

Re: [zfs-discuss] SSD update

2008-08-20 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote: It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the latest SSD product announcements. No pricing yet ... but the specs will push computer system IO bandwidth performance to numbers only possible today with extremely expensive RAM based

Re: [zfs-discuss] FW: Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 hang when drive removed

2008-08-20 Thread Brian D. Horn
Well, when you leave out a bunch of relevant information you also leave people guessing! :-) Regardless, is it possibly that all of your testing was done with ZFS and not just the raw disk? If so, it is possible that ZFS isn't noticing the hot unplugging of the disk until it tries to access the

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Miles Nordin wrote: j == John [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: j There is also the human error factor. If someone accidentally j grows a zpool or worse, accidentally adds an unredundant vdev to a redundant pool. Once you press return, all you can do is scramble to

Re: [zfs-discuss] SSD update

2008-08-20 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Tim wrote: I don't know about that. I just went from an SSD back to a SATA drive because the SSD started failing in less than a month (I'm having troubles believing this great write-leveling they talk about is working properly...). And the SATA drive is dog slow in

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread Will Murnane
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 18:40, Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The errant command which accidentally adds a vdev could just as easily be a command which scrambles up or erases all of the data. True enough---but if there's a way to undo accidentally adding a vdev, there's one source of

Re: [zfs-discuss] FW: Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 hang when drive removed

2008-08-20 Thread James C. McPherson
Ross wrote: lol, I got bored after 13 pages and a whole day of going back through my notes to pick out the relevant information. Besides, I did mention that I was using cfgadm to see what was connected :-p. If you're really interested, most of my troubleshooting notes have been posted to

Re: [zfs-discuss] SSD update

2008-08-20 Thread Neal Pollack
Bob Friesenhahn wrote: SSDs + ZFS - a marriage made in (computer) heaven! Where's the beef? I sense a lot of smoke and mirrors here, similar to Intel's recent CPU announcements which don't even reveal the number of cores. No prices and funny numbers that the writers of technical

Re: [zfs-discuss] SSD update

2008-08-20 Thread Ian Collins
Bob Friesenhahn writes: The SSD drives will work well for a boot drive, or a non-volatile transaction cache, but will be dramatically more expensive for storage than traditional hard drives. This must be why Intel is focusing on laptop users and not on enterprise storage. The sweet

Re: [zfs-discuss] FW: Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 hang when drive removed

2008-08-20 Thread Ross Smith
Without fail, cfgadm changes the status from disk to sata-port when I unplug a device attached to port 6 or 7, but most of the time unplugging disks 0-5 results in no change in cfgadm, until I also attach disk 6 or 7. That does seem inconsistent, or at least, it's not what I'd expect.

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread paul
Kyle wrote: ... If I recall, the low priority was based on the percieved low demand for the feature in enterprise organizations. As I understood it shrinking a pool is percieved as being a feature most desired by home/hobby/development users, and that enterprises mainly only grow thier

Re: [zfs-discuss] FW: Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 hang when drive removed

2008-08-20 Thread James C. McPherson
Ross Smith wrote: Without fail, cfgadm changes the status from disk to sata-port when I unplug a device attached to port 6 or 7, but most of the time unplugging disks 0-5 results in no change in cfgadm, until I also attach disk 6 or 7. That does seem inconsistent, or at

[zfs-discuss] Question: Disable ACL on ZFS filesystem

2008-08-20 Thread Arlina G. Capiral
All, System running Solaris 10 8/07 withe ZFS filesystem and Oracle application on it. Customer accidentally removed one of the Oracle directories under zfs filesystem and now would like to restore. They are using EMC Networker Backup software for backup/restore. Cu tried to restore the

Re: [zfs-discuss] FW: Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 hang when drive removed

2008-08-20 Thread Tim
I don't think its just b94, I recall this behavior for as long as I've had the card. I'd also be interested to know if the sun driver team has ever even tested with this card. I realize its probably not a top priority, but it sure would be nice to have it working properly. On 8/20/08, Ross

Re: [zfs-discuss] SSD update

2008-08-20 Thread Ross
Where's the beef? I sense a lot of smoke and mirrors here, similar to Intel's recent CPU announcements which don't even reveal the number of cores. No prices and funny numbers that the writers of technical articles can't seem to get straight. Obviously these are a significant

Re: [zfs-discuss] SSD update

2008-08-20 Thread Marion Hakanson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Seriously, I don't even care about the cost. Even with the smallest capacity, four of those gives me 128GB of write cache supporting 680MB/s and 40k IOPS. Show me a hardware raid controller that can even come close to that. Four of those will strain even 10GB/s

Re: [zfs-discuss] SSD update

2008-08-20 Thread Al Hopper
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where's the beef? I sense a lot of smoke and mirrors here, similar to Intel's recent CPU announcements which don't even reveal the number of cores. No prices and funny numbers that the writers of technical articles can't seem to

Re: [zfs-discuss] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Al Hopper
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Neal Pollack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ian Collins wrote: Brian Hechinger wrote: On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter? I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with

Re: [zfs-discuss] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Nathan Kroenert
I second that question, and also ask what brand folks like for performance and compatibility? Ebay is killing me with vast choice and no detail... ;) Nathan. Al Hopper wrote: On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Neal Pollack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ian Collins wrote: Brian Hechinger wrote:

Re: [zfs-discuss] SSD update

2008-08-20 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote: How about for serving up CDROM and DVD images (genunix.org). Even two 32Gb drives in a ZFS mirrored config would give you 20K+ read OPs/Sec - as compared to a 10k RPM SCSI drive that starts to fall-over at 400 read IOPS. This type is workload is way

Re: [zfs-discuss] CF to SATA adapters for boot device

2008-08-20 Thread Ian Collins
Al Hopper writes: Interesting thread - thanks to all the contributors. I've seen, on several different forums, that many CF users lean towards Sandisk for reliability and longevity. Does anyone else see consensus in terms of CF brands? The people to ask are probably professional

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread Kyle McDonald
John wrote: Our enterprise is about 300TB.. maybe a bit more... You are correct that most of the time we grow and not shrink... however, we are fairly dynamic and occasionally do shrink. DBA's have been known to be off on their space requirements/requests. For the record I agree with

Re: [zfs-discuss] shrinking a zpool - roadmap

2008-08-20 Thread Kyle McDonald
Zlotnick Fred wrote: On Aug 20, 2008, at 6:39 PM, Kyle McDonald wrote: My suggestion still remains though. Log your enterprises wish for this feature through as many channels as you have into Sun. This list, Sales, Support, every way you can think of. Get it documented, so that when they go