Re: [zfs-discuss] Performance drop during scrub?

2010-04-30 Thread Tonmaus
In my opinion periodic scrubs are most useful for pools based on mirrors, or raidz1, and much less useful for pools based on raidz2 or raidz3. It is useful to run a scrub at least once on a well-populated new pool in order to validate the hardware and OS, but otherwise, the scrub is

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practice for full stystem backup - equivelent of ufsdump/ufsrestore

2010-04-30 Thread Euan Thoms
Thanks Cindy for the links. I see that this could possibly be a replacement for ufsbackup/ufsrestore but unless a further snapshot can be appended to the file containing the recursive rootpool snapshot, it would still regress from the incremental backup that ufsbackup has. It would take a long

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practice for full stystem backup - equivelent of ufsdump/ufsrestore

2010-04-30 Thread Euan Thoms
Thanks Edward, you understood me perfectly. Your suggestion sounds very promising. I like the idea of letting the installation CD set everything up, that way some hardware/drivers could possibly be updated and yet it still work. On top of a bare metal recovery, I would like to leverage the

[zfs-discuss] Can we recover a deleted directory?

2010-04-30 Thread Ashish Nabira
Hello Experts; There was a CIFS share we were using /export/cifs1 . It got deleted accidently. Is there any way I can recover this directory. We don't have snapshot for this directory. regards; Ashish ___ zfs-discuss mailing list

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practice for full stystem backup - equivelent of ufsdump/ufsrestore

2010-04-30 Thread Euan Thoms
Well I'm so impressed with zfs at the moment! I just got steps 5 and 6 (form my last post) to work, and it works well. Not only does it send the increment over to the backup drive, the latest increment/snapshot appears in the mounted filesystem. In nautilus I can browse an exact copy of my PC,

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs inherit vs. received properties

2010-04-30 Thread Tom Erickson
Brandon High wrote: I'm seeing some weird behavior on b133 with 'zfs inherit' that seems to conflict with what the docs say. According to the man page it clears the specified property, causing it to be inherited from an ancestor but that's not the behavior I'm seeing. For example: basestar:~$

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practice for full stystem backup - equivelent of ufsdump/ufsrestore

2010-04-30 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Euan Thoms My ideal solution would be to have the data accessible from the backup media (external HDD) as well as be used as full syatem restore. Below is what I would consider ideal: 1.)

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practice for full stystem backup - equivelent of ufsdump/ufsrestore

2010-04-30 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Euan Thoms pfexec zfs send rp...@first | pfexec zfs receive -u backup-pool/rpool pfexec zfs send rpool/r...@first | pfexec zfs receive -u backup- pool/rpool/ROOT pfexec zfs send

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS snapshot versus Netapp - Security and convenience

2010-04-30 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
From: Peter Jeremy [mailto:peter.jer...@alcatel-lucent.com] I gather you are suggesting that the inode be extended to contain a list of the inode numbers of all directories that contain a filename referring to that inode. Correct. [inodes] can have up to 32767 links [to them]. Where

[zfs-discuss] ARC Summary

2010-04-30 Thread Tony MacDoodle
Was wondering if anyone of you see any issues with the following in Solaris 10 u8 ZFS? System Memory: Physical RAM: 11042 MB Free Memory : 5250 MB LotsFree: 168 MB ZFS Tunables (/etc/system): ARC Size: Current Size: 4309 MB (arcsize) Target Size (Adaptive): 10018 MB (c) Min Size (Hard Limit):

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practice for full stystem backup - equivelent of ufsdump/ufsrestore

2010-04-30 Thread Cindy Swearingen
Hi Ned, Unless I misunderstand what bare metal recovery means, the following procedure describes how to boot from CD, recreate the root pool, and restore the root pool snapshots: http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/ghzur?l=ena=view I retest this process at every Solaris release. Thanks,

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS snapshot versus Netapp - Security and convenience

2010-04-30 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
From: Peter Jeremy [mailto:peter.jer...@alcatel-lucent.com] Whilst it's trivially easy to get from the file to the list of directories containing that file, actually getting from one directory to its parent is less so: A directory containing N sub-directories has N+2 links. Whilst the '.'

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practice for full stystem backup - equivelent of ufsdump/ufsrestore

2010-04-30 Thread erik.ableson
On 30 avr. 2010, at 13:47, Euan Thoms wrote: Well I'm so impressed with zfs at the moment! I just got steps 5 and 6 (form my last post) to work, and it works well. Not only does it send the increment over to the backup drive, the latest increment/snapshot appears in the mounted

Re: [zfs-discuss] Performance drop during scrub?

2010-04-30 Thread David Dyer-Bennet
On Thu, April 29, 2010 17:35, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: In my opinion periodic scrubs are most useful for pools based on mirrors, or raidz1, and much less useful for pools based on raidz2 or raidz3. It is useful to run a scrub at least once on a well-populated new pool in order to validate the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Panic when deleting a large dedup snapshot

2010-04-30 Thread Cindy Swearingen
Brandon, You're probably hitting this CR: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6924824 I'm tracking the existing dedup issues here: http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+zfs/dedup Thanks, Cindy On 04/29/10 23:11, Brandon High wrote: I tried destroying a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practice for full stystem backup - equivelent of ufsdump/ufsrestore

2010-04-30 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: This is why I suggested the technique of: Reinstall the OS just like you did when you first built your machine, before the catastrophy. It doesn't even matter if you make the same selections you With the new Oracle policies, it seems unlikely that

Re: [zfs-discuss] Performance drop during scrub?

2010-04-30 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Tonmaus wrote: Recommending to not using scrub doesn't even qualify as a workaround, in my regard. As a devoted believer in the power of scrub, I believe that after the OS, power supplies, and controller have been verified to function with a good scrubbing, if there is

Re: [zfs-discuss] Performance drop during scrub?

2010-04-30 Thread Freddie Cash
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote: On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Tonmaus wrote: Recommending to not using scrub doesn't even qualify as a workaround, in my regard. As a devoted believer in the power of scrub, I believe that after the OS, power

Re: [zfs-discuss] Performance drop during scrub?

2010-04-30 Thread Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Tonmaus wrote: Recommending to not using scrub doesn't even qualify as a workaround, in my regard. As a devoted believer in the power of scrub, I believe that after the OS, power supplies, and controller have been verified to function with a good scrubbing, if

Re: [zfs-discuss] Performance drop during scrub?

2010-04-30 Thread David Dyer-Bennet
On Fri, April 30, 2010 13:44, Freddie Cash wrote: On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote: On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Tonmaus wrote: Recommending to not using scrub doesn't even qualify as a workaround, in my regard. As a devoted believer in the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Mapping inode numbers to file names

2010-04-30 Thread A Darren Dunham
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 09:49:04PM +0200, Ragnar Sundblad wrote: On 28 apr 2010, at 14.06, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: What indicators do you have that ONTAP/WAFL has inode-name lookup functionality? I don't think it has any such thing - WAFL is pretty much an UFS/FFS that does COW instead of

Re: [zfs-discuss] Panic when deleting a large dedup snapshot

2010-04-30 Thread Jim Horng
Looks like I am hitting the same issue now from the earlier post that you responded. http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=128532tstart=15 Continue my test migration with the dedup=off and synced couple more file systems. I decided the merge two of the file systems together by

[zfs-discuss] Virtual to physical migration

2010-04-30 Thread devsk
I had created a virtualbox VM to test out opensolaris. I updated to latest dev build and set my things up. Tested pools and various configs/commands. Learnt format/partition etc. And then, I wanted to move this stuff to a solaris partition on the physical disk. VB provides physical disk

Re: [zfs-discuss] Virtual to physical migration

2010-04-30 Thread devsk
I think I messed up just a notch! When I did zfs send|recv, I used the flag -u (because I wanted it to not mount at that time). But it set the fs property canmount to off for ROOT...YAY! I booted into livecd, imported the mypool and fixed the mount points and canmount property. And I am now in

Re: [zfs-discuss] Virtual to physical migration

2010-04-30 Thread devsk
I am getting a strange reset as soon as I say startx from normal user's console login. How do I troubleshoot this? Any ideas? I removed the /etc/X11/xorg.conf before invoking startx because that would have some PCI bus ids in there which won't be valid in real hardware. -- This message posted

Re: [zfs-discuss] Virtual to physical migration

2010-04-30 Thread devsk
Looks like the X's vesa driver can only use 1600x1200 resolution and not the native 1920x1200. And if I passed -dpi to enforce 96 DPI, it just croaks. Once -dpi was out, I am inside X with 1600x1200 resolution. Can anyone tell me how I can get the native 1920x1200 resolution working with vesa

Re: [zfs-discuss] Virtual to physical migration

2010-04-30 Thread Ian Collins
On 05/ 1/10 03:09 PM, devsk wrote: Looks like the X's vesa driver can only use 1600x1200 resolution and not the native 1920x1200. Asking these question on the ZFS list isn't going to get you very far. Troy the opensolaris-help list. -- Ian.

Re: [zfs-discuss] Virtual to physical migration

2010-04-30 Thread devsk
I have no idea why I posted in zfs discuss...ok, migration...I will post follow up in help. -- 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] Best practice for full stystem backup - equivelent of ufsdump/ufsrestore

2010-04-30 Thread Edward Ned Harvey
From: Bob Friesenhahn [mailto:bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us] Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:40 PM With the new Oracle policies, it seems unlikely that you will be able to reinstall the OS and achieve what you had before. An exact recovery method (dd of partition images or recreate pool with