Edward,
Thanks for the reply.
Good point on platter density. I'ld considered the benefit of lower
fragmentation but not the possible increase in sequential iops due to density.
I assume while a 2TB 7200rpm drive may have better sequential IOPS than a
500GB, it will not be double and
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of James
I assume while a 2TB 7200rpm drive may have better sequential IOPS than a
500GB, it will not be double and therefore,
Don't know why you'd assume that. I would assume a 2TB drive
On Feb 2, 2011, at 6:10 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of James
I assume while a 2TB 7200rpm drive may have better sequential IOPS than a
500GB, it will not be double and therefore,
Don't
On Feb 1, 2011, at 8:54 PM, Krunal Desai wrote:
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Richard Elling
richard.ell...@gmail.com wrote:
There is a failure going on here. It could be a cable or it could be a bad
disk or firmware. The actual fault might not be in the disk reporting the
errors (!)
I agree that we need to get email updates for failing
devices.
If FMA discovers it, email can be sent, at least in Solaris Express 11;
http://blogs.sun.com/robj/entry/fma_and_email_notifications
br,
syljua
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
From: Richard Elling [mailto:richard.ell...@gmail.com]
They aren't. Check the datasheets, the max media bandwidth is almost
always
published.
I looked for said data sheets before posting. Care to drop any pointers? I
didn't see any drives publishing figures for throughput to/from platter
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 6:10 AM, Edward Ned Harvey
opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com wrote:
Don't know why you'd assume that. I would assume a 2TB drive would be
precisely double the sequential throughput of a 500G. I think if you double
That's assuming that the drives have
Thanks Richard Edward for the additional contributions.
I had assumed that maximum sequential transfer rates on datasheets (btw -
those are the same for differing capacity seagate's) were based on large block
sizes and a ZFS 4kB recordsize* would mean much lower IOPS. e.g. Seagate
On 01/31/11 04:48 PM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
As I've said here on the list a few times earlier, the last on the
thread 'ZFS not usable (was ZFS Dedup question)', I've been doing some
rather thorough testing on zfs dedup, and as you can see from the
posts, it wasn't very satisfactory. The
Hello Eric,
Thanks for your response. I have another question. This time regarding zfs
send. I have updated the subject line to include zfs send question in this
thread.
If the pool tank has 5000 descendent file systems and the snapshots are
being taken using zfs snapshot -r. Now I will be
On Wed, Feb 2 at 17:03, Rahul Deb wrote:
Is zfs send -R sends snapshot all at once OR does it send all
the descendent snapshots serially(one after another) ? I am
asking this because, if it sends serially, send/recv will take
long time to finish based on the number of snapshots need to be
On 2/1/11 5:52 PM, Krunal Desai wrote:
SMART status was reported healthy as well (got smartctl kind of
working), but I cannot read the SMART data of my disks behind the
1068E due to limitations of smartmontools I guess. (e.g. 'smartctl -d
scsi -a /dev/rdsk/c10t0d0' gives me serial #, model, and
From: Brandon High [mailto:bh...@freaks.com]
That's assuming that the drives have the same number of platters. 500G
drives are generally one platter, and 2T drives are generally 4
platters. Same size platters, same density. The 500G drive could be
Wouldn't multiple platters of the same
This error code means the device is gone.
The command got the bus, but could not access the target.
Thanks for that!
I updated firmware on both of my USAS-L8i (LSI1068E based), and while
controller numbering has shifted around in Solaris (went from c10/c11
to c11/c12, not a big deal I think),
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of James
block sizes and a ZFS 4kB recordsize* would mean much lower IOPS. e.g.
Seagate Constellations are around 75-141MB/s(inner-outer) and 75MB/s is
18750 4kB IOPS! However I've just
# uname -a
SunOS gandalf.taltos.org 5.11 snv_151a i86pc i386 i86pc
movax@megatron:~# uname -a
SunOS megatron 5.11 snv_151a i86pc i386 i86pc
# /usr/local/sbin/smartctl -H -i -d sat /dev/rdsk/c7t0d0
smartctl 5.40 2010-10-16 r3189
[i386-pc-solaris2.11]
On Wed, Feb 2 at 20:40, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
Wouldn't multiple platters of the same density still produce a throughput
that's a multiple of what it would have been with a single platter? I'm
assuming the heads on the multiple platters are all able to operate
simultaneously.
Nope. Most
On 2/2/11 5:47 PM, Krunal Desai wrote:
Fails for me, my version does not recognize the 'sat' option. I've
been using -d scsi:
movax@megatron:~# smartctl -h
smartctl version 5.36 [i386-pc-solaris2.8] Copyright (C) 2002-6 Bruce Allen
So build the current version of smartmontools. As you should
On Wed, Feb 2 at 20:45, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
For sustained throughput, I don't measure in IOPS. I measure in MB/s, or
Mbit/s. For a slow hard drive, 500Mbit/s. For a fast one, 1 Gbit/s or
higher. I was surprised by the specs of the seagate disks I just emailed a
moment ago. 1Gbit out
So build the current version of smartmontools. As you should have seen in my
original response, I'm using 5.40. Bugs in 5.36 are unlikely to be
interesting to the maintainers of the package ;-)
Oops, missed that in your log. Will try compiling from source and see what
happens.
Also,
On Wed, Feb 2 at 21:05, Krunal Desai wrote:
So build the current version of smartmontools. As you should have seen in my
original response, I'm using 5.40. Bugs in 5.36 are unlikely to be interesting
to the maintainers of the package ;-)
Oops, missed that in your log. Will try compiling
If you search for 'lsiutil solaris' on lsi.com, it'll direct you to
zipfile that includes a solaris binary for x86 solaris.
Yep, that worked, grabbed it off some other adapter's page. Thanks!
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Feb 2, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Eric D. Mudama wrote:
All other
things being equal, the 15k and the 7200 drive, which share
electronics, will have the same max transfer rate at the OD.
Is that true? So the only difference is in the access time?
Mark
Uhm. Higher RPM = higher linear speed of the head above the platter = higher
throughput. If the bit pitch (ie the size of each bit on the platter) is the
same, then surely a higher linear speed corresponds with a larger number of
bits per second?
So if all other things being equal includes the
On Feb 2, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Oyvind Syljuasen wrote:
I agree that we need to get email updates for failing
devices.
If FMA discovers it, email can be sent, at least in Solaris Express 11;
http://blogs.sun.com/robj/entry/fma_and_email_notifications
For NexentaStor we have a slightly
On Thu, Feb 3 at 14:18, taemun wrote:
Uhm. Higher RPM = higher linear speed of the head above the platter =
higher throughput. If the bit pitch (ie the size of each bit on the
platter) is the same, then surely a higher linear speed corresponds with a
larger number of bits per second?
Two caveats inline …
On 1 Feb 2011, at 01:05, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
On 01/31/11 04:48 PM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
As I've said here on the list a few times earlier, the last on the
thread 'ZFS not usable (was ZFS Dedup question)', I've been doing some
rather thorough testing on zfs
27 matches
Mail list logo
