>The default install for OpenSolaris creates a single root pool, and creates a
>swap and dump dataset within this pool.
>
>In a mutipool environment, would be make sense to add swap to a pool outside
>or
>the root pool, either as the sole swap dataset to be used or as extra swap ?
>
>Would this
>Is there a method to view the status of the rams ecc single or double bit
>errors? I would like to
confirm that ecc on my xeon e5520 and ecc ram are performing their role since
memtest is ambiguous.
>
>
>I am running memory test on a p6t6 ws, e5520 xeon, 2gb samsung ecc modules and
>this is w
>Carson Gaspar wrote:
>>> Not quite.
>>> 11 x 10^12 =~ 10.004 x (1024^4).
>>>
>>> So, the 'zpool list' is right on, at "10T" available.
>>
>> Duh, I was doing GiB math (y = x * 10^9 / 2^20), not TiB math (y = x *
>> 10^12 / 2^40).
>>
>> Thanks for the correction.
>>
>You're welcome. :-)
>
>
>On
>IMHO, what matters is that pretty much everything from the disk controller
>to the CPU and network interface is advertised in power-of-2 terms and disks
>sit alone using power-of-10. And students are taught that computers work
>with bits and so everything is a power of 2.
That is simply not tru
>> That would add unnecessary code to the ZFS layer for something that
>> cron can handle in one line.
>
>Actually ... Why should there be a ZFS property to share NFS, when you can
>already do that with "share" and "dfstab?" And still the zfs property
>exists.
Probably because it is easy to crea
>I'm not saying that ZFS should consider doing this - doing a validation
>for in-memory data is non-trivially expensive in performance terms, and
>there's only so much you can do and still expect your machine to
>survive. I mean, I've used the old NonStop stuff, and yes, you can
>shoot them
>If you disable the ZIL, the filesystem still stays correct in RAM, and the
>only way you lose any data such as you've described, is to have an
>ungraceful power down or reboot.
>The advice I would give is: Do zfs autosnapshots frequently (say ... every
>5 minutes, keeping the most recent 2 hour
>Well being fair to Linux the default for NFS exports is to export them
>'sync' now which syncs to disk on close or fsync. It has been many
>years before they exported 'async' by default. Now if Linux admins set
>their shares 'async' and loose important data then it's operator error
>and n
>If you have an ungraceful shutdown in the middle of writing stuff, while the
>ZIL is disabled, then you have corrupt data. Could be files that are
>partially written. Could be wrong permissions or attributes on files.
>Could be missing files or directories. Or some other problem.
>
>Some chan
>Dude, don't be so arrogant. Acting like you know what I'm talking about
>better than I do. Face it that you have something to learn here.
You may say that, but then you post this:
>> Why do you think that a "Snapshot" has a "better quality" than the last
>> snapshot available?
>
>If you rol
>> Is that what "sync" means in Linux?
>
>A sync write is one in which the application blocks until the OS acks that
>the write has been committed to disk. An async write is given to the OS,
>and the OS is permitted to buffer the write to disk at its own discretion.
>Meaning the async write fun
>> This approach does not solve the problem. When you do a snapshot,
>> the txg is committed. If you wish to reduce the exposure to loss of
>> sync data and run with ZIL disabled, then you can change the txg commit
>> interval -- however changing the txg commit interval will not eliminate
>> the
>On 01/04/2010 13:01, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>>> Is that what "sync" means in Linux?
>>>
>> A sync write is one in which the application blocks until the OS acks that
>> the write has been committed to disk. An async write is given to the OS,
>> and the OS is permitted to buffer the write
>It does seem like rollback to a snapshot does help here (to assure
>that sync & async data is consistent), but it certainly does not help
>any NFS clients. Only a broken application uses sync writes
>sometimes, and async writes at other times.
But doesn't that snapshot possibly have the sam
>On 01/04/2010 20:58, Jeroen Roodhart wrote:
>>
>>> I'm happy to see that it is now the default and I hope this will cause the
>>> Linux NFS client implementation to be faster for conforming NFS servers.
>>>
>> Interesting thing is that apparently defaults on Solaris an Linux are chosen
>>
>> > http://nfs.sourceforge.net/
>>
>> I think B4 is the answer to Casper's question:
>
>We were talking about ZFS, and under what circumstances data is flushed to
>disk, in what way "sync" and "async" writes are handled by the OS, and what
>happens if you disable ZIL and lose power to your syste
>So you're saying that while the OS is building txg's to write to disk, the
>OS will never reorder the sequence in which individual write operations get
>ordered into the txg's. That is, an application performing a small sync
>write, followed by a large async write, will never have the second op
>Questions to answer would be:
>
>Is a ZIL log device used only by sync() and fsync() system calls? Is it
>ever used to accelerate async writes?
There are quite a few of "sync" writes, specifically when you mix in the
NFS server.
>Suppose there is an application which sometimes does sync writ
>The only way to guarantee consistency in the snapshot is to always
>(regardless of ZIL enabled/disabled) give priority for sync writes to get
>into the TXG before async writes.
>
>If the OS does give priority for sync writes going into TXG's before async
>writes (even with ZIL disabled), then af
>brtfs could be supported on Opensolaris, too. IMO it could even
>complement ZFS and spawn some concurrent development between both. ZFS
>is too high end and works very poorly with less than 2GB while brtfs
>reportedly works well with 128MB on ARM.
Both have license issues; Oracle can now re-lice
>On Mon, 19 Apr 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>> Improbability assessment aside, suppose you use something like the DDRDrive
>> X1 ... Which might be more like 4G instead of 32G ... Is it even physically
>> possible to write 4G to any device in less than 10 seconds? Remember, to
>> achieve worst
>I understand you cannot lookup names by inode number in general, because
>that would present a security violation. Joe User should not be able to
>find the name of an item that's in a directory where he does not have
>permission.
>
>
>
>But, even if it can only be run by root, is there some wa
>No, a NFS client will not ask the NFS server for a name by sending the
>inode or NFS-handle. There is no need for a NFS client to do that.
The NFS clients certainly version 2 and 3 only use the "file handle";
the file handle can be decoded by the server. It filehandle does not
contain the name
>You can do in the kernel by calling vnodetopath(). I don't know if it
>is exposed to user space.
Yes, in /proc/*/path (kinda).
>But that could be slow if you have large directories so you have to
>think about where you would use it.
The kernel caches file names; however, it cannot be use for
>On 06/05/2010 21:07, Erik Trimble wrote:
>> VM images contain large quantities of executable files, most of which
>> compress poorly, if at all.
>
>What data are you basing that generalisation on ?
>
>Look at these simple examples for libc on my OpenSolaris machine:
>
>1.6M /usr/lib/libc.so.1*
>
>On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 06:09:55PM +0200, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
>> 1. even though they're 5900, not 7200, benchmarks I've seen show they are
>> quite good
>
>Minor correction, they are 5400rpm. Seagate makes some 5900rpm drives.
>
>The "green" drives have reasonable raw throughput rate,
Swap is perhaps the wrong name; it is really "virtual memory"; virtual
memory consists of real memory and swap on disk. In Solaris, a page
either exists on the physical swap device or in memory. Of course, not
all memory is available as the kernel and other caches use a large part
of the memor
>On Thu, 10 Jun 2010, casper@sun.com wrote:
>>
>> Swap is perhaps the wrong name; it is really "virtual memory"; virtual
>> memory consists of real memory and swap on disk. In Solaris, a page
>> either exists on the physical swap device or in memory. Of course, not
>> all memory is available
>If I have a directory with a bazillion files in it (or, let's say, a
>directory subtree full of raw camera images, about 15MB each, totalling
>say 50GB) on a ZFS filesystem, and take daily snapshots of it (without
>altering it), the snapshots use almost no extra space, I know.
>
>If I now rename
>On Sep 30, 2009, at 5:48 AM, Brian Hubbleday wrote:
>
>> I am looking to use Opensolaris/ZFS to create an iscsi SAN to
>> provide storage for a collection of virtual systems and replicate to
>> an offiste device.
>>
>> While testing the environment I was surprised to see the size of the
>>
>I only have ZFS filesystems exported right now, but I assume it would
>behave the same for ufs. The underlying issue seems to be the Sun NFS
>server expects the NFS client to apply the sgid bit itself and create the
>new directory with the parent directory's group, while the Linux NFS client
>ex
>
>We're currently using the Sun bundled Samba to provide CIFS access to our
>ZFS user/group directories.
So why not the built-in CIFS support in OpenSolaris? Probably has a
similar issue, but still.
>I found a bug in active directory integration mode, where if a user is in
>more than 32 activ
>Regarding Solaris 10, my understanding was that the current 32 group limit
>could only be changed by modifying internal kernel structures that would
>break backwards compatibility, which wouldn't happen because Solaris
>guarantees backwards binary compatibility. I could most definitely be
>mista
Very easy:
- make a directory
- mount it using lofs
run filebench on both directories.
It seems like that we need to make lofs faster.
Casper
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailm
>I did that.
Isn't that sufficient proof?
Perhaps run both tests in the global zone?
Casper
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> So essentially there is no way to grow that zpool. Is this the case?
>
>There's the option of getting a bigger disk and do a send - receive.
>I'm guessing the restriction is necessary for simplicity sake to allow
>bootloaders work with zfs
>I posted a little while back about a problem we are having where when a
>new directory gets created over NFS on a Solaris NFS server from a Linux
>NFS client, the new directory group ownership is that of the primary group
>of the process, even if the parent directory has the sgid bit set and is
>On Thu, 5 Nov 2009, Chris Du wrote:
>
>> I think I finally see what you mean.
>>
>> # luactivate b126
>> System has findroot enabled GRUB
>> ERROR: Unable to determine the configuration of the current boot environment
>> .
>
>Hmm. Does this mean that lupgrading from b121 to b126 will also fail
>Hi,
>
>Am I right to assume ZFS currently doesn't support the least privilege model ?
>I'm trying to make bacula run as non root on zfs and be able to restore
>files a non-root with the correct least privilege modes but when I
>enable debugging with ppriv -D I get
>
>Nov 5 20:39:27 corona genun
>While reading about NILFS here:
>
>http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7345/1.html
>
>
>I saw this:
>
>*One of the most noticeable features of NILFS is that it can "continu=
>ously
>> and automatically save instantaneous states of the file system with=
>out
>> interrupting service". NILFS refers to th
>Hi, if someone running 129 could try this out, turn off compression in your
>pool, mkfile 10g /pool
/file123, see used space and then remove the file and see if it makes used
space available again. I
'm having trouble with this, reminds me of similar bug that occurred in
111-release.
Any auto
>On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 09:30:29PM +0300, Andrey Kuzmin wrote:
>> ZFS deduplication is block-level, so to deduplicate one needs data
>> broken into blocks to be written. With compression enabled, you don't
>> have these until data is compressed. Looks like cycles waste indeed,
>> but ...
>
>ZFS c
>On Tue, January 5, 2010 05:34, Mikko Lammi wrote:
>
>> As a result of one badly designed application running loose for some time,
>> we now seem to have over 60 million files in one directory. Good thing
>> about ZFS is that it allows it without any issues. Unfortunatelly now that
>> we need to g
>On Tue, January 5, 2010 10:12, casper@sun.com wrote:
>
>>>How about creating a new data set, moving the directory into it, and then
>>>destroying it?
>>>
>>>Assuming the directory in question is /opt/MYapp/data:
>>> 1. zfs create rpool/junk
>>> 2. mv /opt/MYapp/data /rpool/junk/
>>> 3. zfs
>no - mv doesn't know about zpools, only about posix filesystems.
"mv" doesn't care about filesystems only about the interface provided by
POSIX.
There is no zfs specific interface which allows you to move a file from
one zfs to the next.
Casper
___
>I find that when people take this argument, they assuming that each component
>has perfect implementation and 100% fault coverage. The real world isn't so
>lucky
Recently I bought a disk with a broken 32MB buffer (256 bits had bits
stuck to 1 or 0) It was corrupting data by the bucket.
Casp
>Hi,
>
>I recently installed OpenSoalris 200906 on a 10GB primary partition on
>my laptop. I noticed there wasn't any option for customizing the
>slices inside the solaris partition. After installation, there was
>only a single slice (0) occupying the entire partition. Now the
>problem is that I n
>If there were a real-world device that tended to randomly flip bits,
>or randomly replace swaths of LBA's with zeroes, but otherwise behave
>normally (not return any errors, not slow down retrying reads, not
>fail to attach), then copies=2 would be really valuable, but so far it
>seems no such d
>
>
>>If there were a real-world device that tended to randomly flip bits,
>>or randomly replace swaths of LBA's with zeroes, but otherwise behave
>>normally (not return any errors, not slow down retrying reads, not
>>fail to attach), then copies=2 would be really valuable, but so far it
>>seems n
>Is it possible to grow a ZFS volume on a SPARC system with a SMI/VTOC label
>without losing data as the OS is built on this volume?
Sure as long as the new partition starts on the same block and is longer.
It was a bit more difficult with UFS but for zfs it is very simple.
I had a few system
>So in a ZFS boot disk configuration (rpool) in a running environment, it's
>not possible?
The example I have does grows the rpool while running from the rpool.
But you need a recent version of zfs to grow the pool while it is in use.
>On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:25 AM, wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> >Is it
>Hello list,
>
>beeing a Linux Guy I'm actually quite new to Opensolaris. One thing I miss is
>udev. I found that w
hen using SATA disks with ZFS - it always required manual intervention (cfgadm)
to do SATA hot plug
.
>
>I would like to automate the disk replacement, so that it is a fully aut
>I know it's documented in the manual, but I find it a bit strange behaviour
>that chmod -R changes the permissions of the target of a
>symbolic link.
>
>Is there any reason for this behaviour?
>
Symbolic links do not have a mode; so you can't chmod them; chmod(2)
follows symbolic links (it wa
>I'm looking to migrate a pool from using multiple smaller LUNs to one larger
>LUN.
>I don't see a way to do a zpool replace for multiple to one. Anybody know how
>to do this? It needs to be non disruptive.
Depends on the zpool's layout and the source of the old and the new files;
you can only
>Hi Romain,
>
>The option to select a ZFS root file system or a UFS root file system
>is available starting in the Solaris 10 10/08 release.
(aka update 6, right?)
>> I wish to install a Solaris 10 on a ZFS mirror but in the installer (in
>> interactive text mode) I don't have choice of the fi
>Hi Cindy,
>
>thanks for your quick response ! I'm trying to install Solaris 10 11/06.
>I don't know how the version numbering works so I don't know if my
>version is newer than 10/08.
>
It's month/year; 11/06 is a three years and a bit over.
Casper
_
>> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
>> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Cindy Swearingen
>>
>> In the steps below, you're missing a zpool import step.
>> I would like to see the error message when the zpool import
>> step fails.
>
>I see him doing this...
>
>
>>
>> From: casper@oracle.com [mailto:casper@oracle.com]
>>
>> What is the partition table?
>
>He also said this...
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
>> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of John D Groenveld
>>
>> # zpool crea
>I think the "too many open files" is a generic error message about
>running out of file descriptors. You should check your shell ulimit
>information.
Yeah, but mv shouldn't run out of file descriptors or should be
handle to deal with that.
Are we moving a tree of files?
Casper
_
>If the performance of the outer tracks is better than the performance of the
>inner tracks due to limitations of magnetic density or rotation speed (not
>being limited by the head speed or bus speed), then the sequential
>performance of the drive should increase as a square function, going towar
>
>I have a desktop system with 2 ZFS mirrors. One drive in one mirror is
>starting to produce read errors and slowing things down dramatically. I
>detached it and the system is running fine. I can't tell which drive it is
>though! The error message and format command let me know which pair the ba
>On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
>
>> I just played and knocked this up (note the stunning lack of comments,
>> missing optarg processing, etc)...
>> Give it a list of files to check...
>
>This is a cool program, but programmers were asking (and answering)
>this same question 20+ year
>Is it possible to access the data from a detached device from an
>mirrored pool.
If it is detached, I don't think there is a way to get access
to the mirror. Had you used split, you should be able to reimport it.
(You can try aiming "zpool import" at the disk but I'm not hopeful)
Casper
>Hi,
>As an addendum to this, I'm curious about how to grow the split pool in
>size.
>
>Scenario, mirrored pool comprising of two disks, one 200GB and the other
>300GB, naturally the size of the mirrored pool is 200GB e.g. the smaller
>of the two devices.
>
>I ran some tests within vbox env and
>Hello all, I'd like some practical advice on migration of a
>Sun Fire X4500 (Thumper) from aging data disks to a set of
>newer disks. Some questions below are my own, others are
>passed from the customer and I may consider not all of them
>sane - but must ask anyway ;)
>
>1) They hope to use 3Tb
>The drives were the seagate green barracuda IIRC, and performance for
>just about everything was 20MB/s per spindle or worse, when it should
>have been closer to 100MB/s when streaming. Things were worse still when
>doing random...
It is possible that your partitions weren't aligned at 4K an
>Does someone know the history which led to the EPERM for unlink() of
>directories on ZFS? Why was this done this way, and not something like
>allowing the unlink and execute it on the next scrub or remount?
It's not about the unlink(), it's about the link() and unlink().
But not allowing link &
>The decision to not support link(2) of directories was very deliberate - it
>is an abomination that never should have been allowed in the first place.
>My guess is that the behavior of unlink(2) on directories is a direct
>side-effect of that (if link isn't supported, then why support unlink?).
>
>> To be honest, I think we should also remove this from all other
>> filesystems and I think ZFS was created this way because all modern
>> filesystems do it that way.
>
>This may be wrong way to go if it breaks existing applications which
>rely on this feature. It does break applications in our
>We've already asked our Netapp representative. She said it's not hard
>to add that.
And symlinks don't work for this? I'm amazed because we're talking about
the same file system. Or is it that the code you have does the
hardlinking?
If you want this rfo Oracle, you would need to talk to
>You do realize that the age of the universe is only on the order of
>around 10^18 seconds, do you? Even if you had a trillion CPUs each
>chugging along at 3.0 GHz for all this time, the number of processor
>cycles you will have executed cumulatively is only on the order 10^40,
>still 37 orders o
>Sorry, but isn't this what dedup=verify solves? I don't see the problem here.
>Maybe all that's needed is a comment in the manpage saying hash algorithms
>aren't perfect.
The point is that hash functions are many to one and I think the point
was about that verify wasn't really needed if the hash
>On 07/11/2012 12:24 PM, Justin Stringfellow wrote:
>>> Suppose you find a weakness in a specific hash algorithm; you use this
>>> to create hash collisions and now imagined you store the hash collisions
>>> in a zfs dataset with dedup enabled using the same hash algorithm.
>>
>> Sorry, but
>This assumes you have low volumes of deduplicated data. As your dedup
>ratio grows, so does the performance hit from dedup=verify. At, say,
>dedupratio=10.0x, on average, every write results in 10 reads.
I don't follow.
If dedupratio == 10, it means that each item is *referenced* 10 times
but
>On Tue, 10 Jul 2012, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>>
>> CPU's are not getting much faster. But IO is definitely getting faster.
>> It's best to keep ahea
d of that curve.
>
>It seems that per-socket CPU performance is doubling every year.
>That seems like faster to me.
I think that I/O isn't get
>Unfortunately, the government imagines that people are using their home com=
>puters to compute hashes and try and decrypt stuff. Look at what is happen=
>ing with GPUs these days. People are hooking up 4 GPUs in their computers =
>and getting huge performance gains. 5-6 char password space co
>Do you need assurances that in the next 5 seconds a meteorite won't fall
>to Earth and crush you? No. And yet, the Earth puts on thousands of tons
>of weight each year from meteoric bombardment and people have been hit
>and killed by them (not to speak of mass extinction events). Nobody has
>eve
>On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 9:48 AM, wrote:
>>>Huge space, but still finite=85
>>
>> Dan Brown seems to think so in "Digital Fortress" but it just means he
>> has no grasp on "big numbers".
>
>I couldn't get past that. I had to put the book down. I'm guessing
>it was as awful as it threatened to
>On 12-08-29 12:29 AM, Gregg Wonderly wrote:
>> On Aug 28, 2012, at 6:01 AM, Murray Cullen wrote:
>>
>>> I've copied an old home directory from an install of OS 134 to the data
>>> pool on my OI install.
Opensolaris apparently had wine installed as I now have a link to / in my data
pool. I've
>On 01/22/2013 02:39 PM, Darren J Moffat wrote:
>>
>> On 01/22/13 13:29, Darren J Moffat wrote:
>>> Since I'm replying here are a few others that have been introduced in
>>> Solaris 11 or 11.1.
>>
>> and another one I can't believe I missed since I was one of the people
>> that helped design it
>Some vendors call this (and thins like it) "Thin Provisioning", I'd say
>it is more "accurate communication between 'disk' and filesystem" about
>in use blocks.
In some cases, users of disks are charged by bytes in use; when not using
SCSI UNMAP, a set of disks used for a zpool will in the en
>IIRC dump is special.
>
>As for swap... really, you don't want to swap. If you're swapping you
>have problems. Any swap space you have is to help you detect those
>problems and correct them before apps start getting ENOMEM. There
>*are* exceptions to this, such as Varnish. For Varnish and any
>On 01/22/2013 10:50 PM, Gary Mills wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:54:53PM +, Edward Ned Harvey
>> (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolari
s) wrote:
>> Paging out unused portions of an executing process from real memory to
>> the swap device is certainly beneficial. Swapping out complete
>
>No tools, ZFS does it automaticaly when freeing blocks when the
>underlying device advertises the functionality.
>
>ZFS ZVOLs shared over COMSTAR advertise SCSI UNMAP as well.
If a system was running something older, e.g., Solaris 11; the "free"
blocks will not be marked such on the server e
> hi all
>Try to learn how UFS root to ZFS root liveUG work.
>
>I download the vbox image of s10u8, it come up as UFS root.
>add a new disks (16GB)
>create zpool rpool
>run lucreate -n zfsroot -p rpool
>run luactivate zfsroot
>run lustatus it do show zfsroot will be active in next boot
>init 6
>On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Orvar Korvar
> wrote:
>> No replies. Does this mean that you should avoid large drives with 4KB
>> sectors, that is, new dri
ves? ZFS does not handle new drives?
>
>Solaris 10u9 handles 4k sectors, so it might be in a post-b134 release of osol.
>
Build 118 add
I'm using ZFS on a system w/o ECC; it works (it's an Atom 230).
Note that this is not different from using another OS; the difference is
that ZFS will complain when memory leads to disk corruption; without ZFS
you will still have memory corruption but you wouldn't know.
Is it helpful not know
> On 23-9-2010 10:25, casper@sun.com wrote:
>> I'm using ZFS on a system w/o ECC; it works (it's an Atom 230).
>
>I'm using ZFS on a non-ECC machine for years now without any issues.
>Never had errors. Plus, like others said, other OS'ses have the same
>problems and also run quite well. If
>Ok, that doesn't seem to have worked so well ...
>
>I took one of the drives offline, rebooted and it just hangs at the
>splash screen after prompting for which BE to boot into.
>It gets to
>hostname: blah
>and just sits there.
When you say "offline", did you:
- remove the drive ph
>hi all
>
>I'm using a custom snaopshot scheme which snapshots every hour, day,
>week and month, rotating 24h, 7d, 4w and so on. What would be the best
>way to zfs send/receive these things? I'm a little confused about how
>this works for delta udpates...
>
>Vennlige hilsener / Best regards
T
>Typically on most filesystems, the inode number of the root
>directory of the filesystem is 2, 0 being unused and 1 historically
>once invisible and used for bad blocks (no longer done, but kept
>reserved so as not to invalidate assumptions implicit in ufsdump tapes).
>
>However, my observation s
>I have both EVDS and EARS 2TB green drive. And I have to say they are
>not good to build storage servers.
I think both have native 4K sectors; as such, they balk or perform slowly
when a smaller I/O or an unaligned IOP hits them.
How are they formatted? Specifically, solaris slices must be al
>Additionally, even though zpool and zfs "get version" display the true and
>updated versions, I'm not convinced that the problem is zdb, as the label
>config is almost certainly set by the zpool and/or zfs commands. Somewhere,
>something is not happening that is supposed to when initiating a zp
>My immediate reaction to this is "time to avoid WD drives for a while";
>until things shake out and we know what's what reliably.
>
>But, um, what do we know about say the Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ($70),
>the SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 1TB ($75), or the HITACHI Deskstar 1TB 3.5"
>($70)?
I've seen s
>Changing the sector size (if it's possible at all) would require a
>reformat of the drive.
The WD drives only support a 4K sector but they pretend to have 512byte
sectors. I don't think they need to format the drive when changing to 4K
sectors. A non-aligned write requires a read-modify-writ
>This would require a low-level re-format and would significantly
>reduce the available space if it was possible at all.
I don't think it is possible.
>> WD has a jumper,
>>but is there explicitly to work with WindowsXP, and is not a real way
>>to dumb down the drive to 512.
>
>All it does is
>On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:49 PM, wrote:
>> I'm not sure that that is correct; the drive works on naive clients but I
>> believe it can reveal its true colors.
>
>The drive reports 512 byte sectors to all hosts. AFAIK there's no way
>to make it report 4k sectors.
Too bad because it makes it le
>Is there a ZFS equivalent (or alternative) of inotify?
>
>
>
>You have some thing, which wants to be notified whenever a specific file or
>directory changes. For example, a "live" sync application of some kind...
Have you looked at port_associate and ilk?
Casper
>>> You have an application filesystem from one LUN. (vxfs is expensive,
>>> ufs/svm is not really able
to handle online filesystem increase. Thus we plan to use zfs for application
filesystems.)
>
>>What do you mean by "not really"?
>...
>>Use growfs to grow UFS on the grown device.
>
>I know
>tank com.sun:auto-snapshot true local
>
>I don't utilize snapshots (this machine just stores media)...so what
>could be up?
You've also disabled the time-slider functionality? (automatic snapshots)
Casper
___
zfs-discuss mailin
1 - 100 of 409 matches
Mail list logo
