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
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
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
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,
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,
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
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
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
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:
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
[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
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
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
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:
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
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
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
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
48 matches
Mail list logo
