Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and databases

2006-05-11 Thread Richard Elling
On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 10:31 -0600, Gregory Shaw wrote: A couple of points/additions with regard to oracle in particular: When talking about large database installations, copy-on-write may or may not apply. The files are never completely rewritten, only changed internally via

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and databases

2006-05-11 Thread Richard Elling
On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 10:27 -0700, Richard Elling wrote: On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 10:31 -0600, Gregory Shaw wrote: A couple of points/additions with regard to oracle in particular: When talking about large database installations, copy-on-write may or may not apply. The files

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS and databases

2006-05-12 Thread Richard Elling
On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 10:42 -0500, Anton Rang wrote: Now latency wise, the cost of copy is small compared to the I/O; right ? So it now turns into an issue of saving some CPU cycles. CPU cycles and memory bandwidth (which both can be in short supply on a database server). We can

Re: [zfs-discuss] remote replication with huge data using zfs?

2006-05-12 Thread Richard Elling
On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 17:01 -0700, Jeff Bonwick wrote: plan A. To mirror on iSCSI devices: keep one server with a set of zfs file systems with 2 (sub)mirrors each, one of the mirrors use devices physically on remote site accessed as iSCSI LUNs.

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS recovery from a disk losing power

2006-05-16 Thread Richard Elling
On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 10:32 -0700, Eric Schrock wrote: On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 03:22:34AM +1000, grant beattie wrote: what I find interesting is that the SCSI errors were continuous for 10 minutes before I detached it, ZFS wasn't backing off at all. it was flooding the VGA console

[zfs-discuss] zpool list sample data needed

2006-05-17 Thread Richard Elling
I need some real sample data on ZFS utilization. If you have a moment, please send me the output of zpool list for as many systems as you've got running ZFS. Feel free to obfuscate the NAME column or reply anonymously. What I'm interested in is the SIZE and USED columns. The reason I'm

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: zfs snapshot for backup, Quota

2006-05-18 Thread Richard Elling
On Fri, 2006-05-19 at 10:18 +1000, Nathan Kroenert wrote: Just piqued my interest on this one - How would we enforce quotas of sorts in large filesystems that are shared? I can see times when I might want lots of users to use the same directory (and thus, same filesystem) but still want to

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Re: I wish Sun would open-sourceQFS... / was:Re: Re: Distributed File System for Solaris

2006-05-30 Thread Richard Elling
On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 14:59 -0500, Anton Rang wrote: On May 30, 2006, at 2:16 PM, Richard Elling wrote: [assuming we're talking about disks and not hardware RAID arrays...] It'd be interesting to know how many customers plan to use raw disks, and how their performance relates to hardware

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool status and CKSUM errors

2006-06-09 Thread Richard Elling
Jeff Bonwick wrote: btw: I'm really suprised how SATA disks are unreliable. I put dozen TBs of data on ZFS last time and just after few days I got few hundreds checksum error (there raid-z was used). And these disks are 500GB in 3511 array. Well that would explain some fsck's, etc. we saw

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS and databases

2006-06-14 Thread Richard Elling
billtodd wrote: I do want to comment on the observation that enough concurrent 128K I/O can saturate a disk - the apparent implication being that one could therefore do no better with larger accesses, an incorrect conclusion. Current disks can stream out 128 KB in 1.5 - 3 ms., while taking

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS questions

2006-06-16 Thread Richard Elling
Kimberly Chang wrote: A couple of ZFS questions: 1. ZFS dynamic striping will automatically use new added devices when there are write requests. Customer has a *mostly read-only* application with I/O bottleneck, they wonder if there is a ZFS command or mechanism to enable the manual

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS questions

2006-06-20 Thread Richard Elling
Erik Trimble wrote: That is, start out with adding the ability to differentiate between access policy in a vdev. Generally, we're talking only about mirror vdevs right now. Later on, we can consider the ability to migrate data based on performance, but a lot of this has to take into

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS questions

2006-06-20 Thread Richard Elling
Eric Schrock wrote: On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 11:17:42AM -0700, Jonathan Adams wrote: On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 09:32:58AM -0700, Richard Elling wrote: Flash is (can be) a bit more sophisticated. The problem is that they have a limited write endurance -- typically spec'ed at 100k writes to any

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS questions

2006-06-20 Thread Richard Elling
Dana H. Myers wrote: What I do not know yet is exactly how the flash portion of these hybrid drives is administered. I rather expect that a non-hybrid-aware OS may not actually exercise the flash storage on these drives by default; or should I say, the flash storage will only be available to a

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on 32bit x86

2006-06-22 Thread Richard Elling
Joe Little wrote: On 6/22/06, Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rich Teer wrote: On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Joe Little wrote: Please don't top post. What if your 32bit system is just a NAS -- ZFS and NFS, nothing else? I think it would still be ideal to allow tweaking of things at

Re: [zfs-discuss] recommended hardware for a zfs/nfs NAS?

2006-06-23 Thread Richard Elling
Dick Davies wrote: I was wondering if anyone could recommend hardware forr a ZFS-based NAS for home use. The 'zfs on 32-bit' thread has scared me of a mini-itx fanless setup, so I'm looking at sparc or opteron. Ideally it would: I think the issue with ZFS on 32-bit is revolving around the

Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved

2006-06-23 Thread Richard Elling
Joe Little wrote: On 6/23/06, Roch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe, you know this but for the benefit of others, I have to highlight that running any NFS server this way, may cause silent data corruption from client's point of view. Whenever a server keeps data in RAM this way and does not

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and Storage

2006-06-26 Thread Richard Elling
Olaf Manczak wrote: Eric Schrock wrote: On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 05:26:24PM -0600, Gregory Shaw wrote: You're using hardware raid. The hardware raid controller will rebuild the volume in the event of a single drive failure. You'd need to keep on top of it, but that's a given in the case of

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS and Storage

2006-06-27 Thread Richard Elling
Peter Rival wrote: I don't like to top-post, but there's no better way right now. This issue has recurred several times and there have been no answers to it that cover the bases. The question is, say I as a customer have a database, let's say it's around 8 TB, all built on a series of high

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and Storage

2006-06-27 Thread Richard Elling
Gregory Shaw wrote: Not at all. ZFS is a quantum leap in Solaris filesystem/VM functionality. Agreed. However, I don't see a lot of use for RAID-Z (or Z2) in large enterprise customers situations. For instance, does ZFS enable Sun to walk into an account and say You can now replace all

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS and Storage

2006-06-28 Thread Richard Elling
[hit send too soon...] Richard Elling wrote: Erik Trimble wrote: The main reason I don't see ZFS mirror / HW RAID5 as useful is this: ZFS mirror/ RAID5: capacity = (N / 2) -1 speed N / 2 -1 minimum # disks to lose

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: x86 CPU Choice for ZFS

2006-07-06 Thread Richard Elling
Siegfried Nikolaivich wrote: But for ZFS, it has been said often that it currently performs much better with a 64bit address space, such as that with Opterons and other AMD64 CPUs. I think this would play a bigger part in a ZFS server performing well than just MHZ and cache size. I will no

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS needs a viable backup mechanism

2006-07-07 Thread Richard Elling
Dale Ghent wrote: ZFS we all know is just more than a dumb fs like UFS is. As mentioned, it has metadata in the form of volume options and whatnot. So, sure, I can still use my Legato/NetBackup/Amanda and friends to back that data up... but if the worst were to happen and I find myself having

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Finding a suitable server to run Solaris/ZFS as a

2006-07-08 Thread Richard Elling
David Dyer-Bennet wrote: Knowing what SATA controllers will work helps a great deal. Does the OS interact with the hot-swap rack at all, or does it just notice the device on the end of the SAAT cable is gone? Is that yet another thing I have to worry about compatibility on? SATA is

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS needs a viable backup mechanism

2006-07-08 Thread Richard Elling
Dale Ghent wrote: See, you're talking with a person who saves prtvtoc output of all his disks so that if a disk dies, all I need to do to recreate the dead disk's exact slice layout on the replacement drive is to run that saved output through fmthard. One second on the command line rather than

Re: [zfs-discuss] long time to schedule commands

2006-07-11 Thread Richard Elling
Michael Schuster - Sun Microsystems wrote: Sean Meighan wrote: I am not sure if this is ZFS, Niagara or something else issue? Does someone know why commands have the latency shown below? *1) do a ls of a directory. 6.9 seconds total, truss only shows .07 seconds.* [...] this may be an

Re: [zfs-discuss] Expanding raidz2

2006-07-12 Thread Richard Elling
There are two questions here. 1. Can you add a redundant set of vdevs to a pool. Answer: yes. 2. What is the best way for Scott to grow his archive into his disks. The answer to this is what I discuss below. David Dyer-Bennet wrote: Scott Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've been reading

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Expanding raidz2

2006-07-13 Thread Richard Elling
David Abrahams wrote: David Dyer-Bennet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Adam Leventhal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm not sure I even agree with the notion that this is a real problem (and if it is, I don't think is easily solved). Stripe widths are a function of the expected failure rate and

Re: [zfs-discuss] Hardware compatibility list for Open Solaris ZFS

2006-07-15 Thread Richard Elling
Kieran wrote: I have seen the recommendation for the Marvell storage controller. http://www.supermicro.com/products/accessories/addon/AoC-SAT2-MV8.cfm This uses the Marvell 88SX6081, which is supported by the marvell88sx(7D0 driver in Solaris. This is the same SATA controller chip used in

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool unavailable after reboot

2006-07-17 Thread Richard Elling
I too have seen this recently, due to a partially failed drive. When I physically removed the drive, ZFS figured everything out and I was back up and running. Alas, I have been unable to recreate. There is a bug lurking here, if someone has a more clever way to test, we might be able to nail it

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS bechmarks w/8 disk raid - Quirky results, any thoughts?

2006-07-17 Thread Richard Elling
Dana H. Myers wrote: Jonathan Wheeler wrote: ---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- mirror MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU 8 disk

Re: [zfs-discuss] Big JBOD: what would you do?

2006-07-17 Thread Richard Elling
[stirring the pot a little...] Jim Mauro wrote: I agree with Greg - For ZFS, I'd recommend a larger number of raidz luns, with a smaller number of disks per LUN, up to 6 disks per raidz lun. For 6 disks, 3x2-way RAID-1+0 offers better resiliency than RAID-Z or RAID-Z2. For 3-5 disks,

Re: [zfs-discuss] Big JBOD: what would you do?

2006-07-18 Thread Richard Elling
Jeff Bonwick wrote: For 6 disks, 3x2-way RAID-1+0 offers better resiliency than RAID-Z or RAID-Z2. Maybe I'm missing something, but it ought to be the other way around. With 6 disks, RAID-Z2 can tolerate any two disk failures, whereas for 3x2-way mirroring, of the (6 choose 2) = 6*5/2 = 15

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Big JBOD: what would you do?

2006-07-22 Thread Richard Elling
Thanks Rob, one comment below. Rob Logan wrote: perhaps these are good picks: 5 x (7+2) 1 hot spare 35 data disks - best safety 5 x (8+1) 1 hot spare 40 data disks - best space 9 x (4+1) 1 hot spare 36 data disks - best speed 1 x (45+1) 0 hot spare 45 data disks - max space This

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Big JBOD: what would you do?

2006-07-23 Thread Richard Elling
Rich Teer wrote: On Sat, 22 Jul 2006, Richard Elling wrote: This one stretches the models a bit. In one model, the MTTDL is For us storage newbies, what is MTTDL? I would guess Mean Time To Data Loss, which presumably is some multiple of the drives' MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS needs a viable backup mechanism

2006-07-25 Thread Richard Elling
Craig Morgan wrote: Spare a thought also for the remote serviceability aspects of these systems, if customers raise calls/escalations against such systems then our remote support/solution centre staff would find such an output useful in identifying and verifying the config. I'm don't have

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: cluster features

2006-07-27 Thread Richard Elling
Karsten Hashimoto wrote: I would urgently need a Cluster Filesystem that runs with Oracle Clusterware. Today, we would recommend the Sun Cluster Advanced Edition for Oracle RAC. This includes QFS which is a distributed file system. See http://www.sun.com/software/cluster/faq.xml#q21

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS needs a viable backup mechanism

2006-07-27 Thread Richard Elling
Timing is everything :-) http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-6612 -- richard Richard Elling wrote: Craig Morgan wrote: Spare a thought also for the remote serviceability aspects of these systems, if customers raise calls/escalations against such systems then our remote support/solution

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS vs WAFL positioning

2006-07-27 Thread Richard Elling
From a RAS perspective, ZFS's end-to-end data integrity feature is critical. If the competing file system doesn't have this capability, then they can't play in this sandbox. -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [zfs-discuss] sharing a storage array

2006-07-28 Thread Richard Elling
Danger Will Robinson... Jeff Victor wrote: Jeff Bonwick wrote: If one host failed I want to be able to do a manual mount on the other host. Multiple hosts writing to the same pool won't work, but you could indeed have two pools, one for each host, in a dual active-passive arrangement. That

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Poor performance on NFS-exported ZFS volumes

2006-07-28 Thread Richard Elling
Brian Hechinger wrote: On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 02:14:50PM +0200, Patrick Bachmann wrote: systems config? There are a lot of things you know better off-hand about your system, otherwise you need to do some benchmarking, which ZFS would have to do too, if it was to give you the best performing

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Poor performance on NFS-exported ZFS volumes

2006-07-28 Thread Richard Elling
Joseph Mocker wrote: Richard Elling wrote: The problem is that there are at least 3 knobs to turn (space, RAS, and performance) and they all interact with each other. Good point. then how about something more like zpool bench raidz favor space disk1 ... diskN zpool bench raidz favor

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Poor performance on NFS-exported ZFS volumes

2006-07-30 Thread Richard Elling
Brian Hechinger wrote: On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 02:02:13PM -0700, Richard Elling wrote: Joseph Mocker wrote: Richard Elling wrote: The problem is that there are at least 3 knobs to turn (space, RAS, and performance) and they all interact with each other. Good point. then how about something

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS iSCSI: where do do the mirroring/raidz

2006-08-01 Thread Richard Elling
Darren J Moffat wrote: So with that in mind this is my plan so far. On the target (the V880): Put all the 12 36G disks into a single zpool (call it iscsitpool). Use iscsitadm to create 2 targets of 202G each. On the initiator (the v40z): Use iscsiadm to discover (import) the 2 202G targets.

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS iSCSI: where do do the mirroring/raidz

2006-08-02 Thread Richard Elling
Darren J Moffat wrote: performance, availability, space, retention. OK, something to work with. I would recommend taking advantage of ZFS' dynamic stripe over 2-disk mirrors. This should give good performance, with good data availability. If you monitor the status of the disks

Re: [zfs-discuss] 3510 JBOD ZFS vs 3510 HW RAID

2006-08-02 Thread Richard Elling
Jonathan Edwards wrote: Now with thumper - you are SPoF'd on the motherboard and operating system - so you're not really getting the availability aspect from dual controllers .. but given the value - you could easily buy 2 and still come out ahead .. you'd have to work out some sort of timely

Re: [zfs-discuss] Assertion raised during zfs share?

2006-08-04 Thread Richard Elling
Jim Connors wrote: Working to get ZFS to run on a minimal Solaris 10 U2 configuration. What does minimal mean? Most likely, you are missing something. -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [zfs-discuss] 3510 HW RAID vs 3510 JBOD ZFS SOFTWARE RAID

2006-08-07 Thread Richard Elling
Hi Robert, thanks for the data. Please clarify one thing for me. In the case of the HW raid, was there just one LUN? Or was it 12 LUNs? -- richard Robert Milkowski wrote: Hi. 3510 with two HW controllers, configured on LUN in RAID-10 using 12 disks in head unit (FC-AL 73GB 15K disks).

Re: [zfs-discuss] Lots of seeks?

2006-08-09 Thread Richard Elling
Jesus Cea wrote: Anton B. Rang wrote: I have a two-vdev pool, just plain disk slices If the vdev's are from the same disk, your are doomed. ZFS tries to spread the load among the vdevs, so if the vdevs are from the same disk, you will have a seek hell. It is not clear to me that this is a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Proposal: multiple copies of user data

2006-09-12 Thread Richard Elling
[dang, this thread started on the one week this quarter that I don't have any spare time... please accept this one comment, more later...] Mike Gerdts wrote: On 9/11/06, Matthew Ahrens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: B. DESCRIPTION A new property will be added, 'copies', which specifies how many

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS imported simultanously on 2 systems...

2006-09-13 Thread Richard Elling
Dale Ghent wrote: James C. McPherson wrote: As I understand things, SunCluster 3.2 is expected to have support for HA-ZFS and until that version is released you will not be running in a supported configuration and so any errors you encounter are *your fault alone*. Still, after reading

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: zfs and Oracle ASM

2006-09-13 Thread Richard Elling
Anantha N. Srirama wrote: I did a non-scientific benchmark against ASM and ZFS. Just look for my posts and you'll see it. To summarize it was a statistical tie for simple loads of around 2GB of data and we've chosen to stick with ASM for a variety of reasons not the least of which is its

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS goes catatonic when drives go dead?

2006-11-22 Thread Richard Elling
Peter Eriksson wrote: There is nothing in the ZFS FAQ about this. I also fail to see how FMA could make any difference since it seems that ZFS is deadlocking somewhere in the kernel when this happens... Some people don't see a difference between hung and patiently waiting. There are failure

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Size of raidz

2006-11-24 Thread Richard Elling
Podlipnik wrote: When creating raidz pool out of n disks where n =2 pool size will get a size of the smallest disk multiplied by n: # zpool create -f newpool raidz c1t12d0 c1t10d0 c1t13d0 # zpool list NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT newpool

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS problems

2006-11-26 Thread Richard Elling
David Dyer-Bennet wrote: On 11/26/06, Al Hopper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [4] I proposed this solution to a user on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list - and it resolved his problem. His problem - the system would reset after getting about 1/2 way through a Solaris install. The installer was simply

Re: [zfs-discuss] Production ZFS Server Death (06/06)

2006-11-28 Thread Richard Elling
Matthew Ahrens wrote: Elizabeth Schwartz wrote: How would I use more redundancy? By creating a zpool with some redundancy, eg. 'zpool create poolname mirror disk1 disk2'. after the fact, you can add a mirror using 'zpool attach' -- richard ___

Re: [zfs-discuss] Convert Zpool RAID Types

2006-11-28 Thread Richard Elling
Jason J. W. Williams wrote: Is it possible to non-destructively change RAID types in zpool while the data remains on-line? Yes. With constraints, however. What exactly are you trying to do? -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list

Re: [zfs-discuss] Convert Zpool RAID Types

2006-11-28 Thread Richard Elling
your data. The simplest way to implement this with redundancy is to mirror the log zpool. You might try that first, before you relayout the data. -- richard Best Regards, Jason On 11/28/06, Richard Elling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason J. W. Williams wrote: Is it possible to non-destructively

Re: [zfs-discuss] Convert Zpool RAID Types

2006-11-29 Thread Richard Elling
Jason J. W. Williams wrote: Hi Richard, Originally, my thinking was I'd like drop one member out of a 3 member RAID-Z and turn it into a RAID-1 zpool. You would need to destroy the pool to do this -- requiring the data to be copied twice. Although, at the moment I'm not sure. So many

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: system wont boot after zfs

2006-11-29 Thread Richard Elling
David Elefante wrote: I had this happen on three different motherboards. So it seems that there should be a procedure in the documentation that states if your BIOS doesn't support EFI labels than you need to write ZFS to a partition (slice) not the overlay, causing the BIOS to hang on

Re: [zfs-discuss] Convert Zpool RAID Types

2006-11-30 Thread Richard Elling
Hi Jason, It seems to me that there is some detailed information which would be needed for a full analysis. So, to keep the ball rolling, I'll respond generally. Jason J. W. Williams wrote: Hi Richard, Been watching the stats on the array and the cache hits are 3% on these volumes. We're

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS related kernel panic

2006-12-04 Thread Richard Elling
Douglas Denny wrote: On 12/4/06, James C. McPherson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this normal behavior for ZFS? Yes. You have no redundancy (from ZFS' point of view at least), so ZFS has no option except panicing in order to maintain the integrity of your data. This is interesting from a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS related kernel panic

2006-12-04 Thread Richard Elling
Anton B. Rang wrote: And to panic? How can that in any sane way be good way to protect the application? *BANG* - no chance at all for the application to handle the problem... I agree -- a disk error should never be fatal to the system; at worst, the file system should appear to have been

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS related kernel panic

2006-12-04 Thread Richard Elling
Dale Ghent wrote: Matthew Ahrens wrote: Jason J. W. Williams wrote: Hi all, Having experienced this, it would be nice if there was an option to offline the filesystem instead of kernel panicking on a per-zpool basis. If its a system-critical partition like a database I'd prefer it to

Re: [zfs-discuss] weird thing with zfs

2006-12-05 Thread Richard Elling
This looks more like a cabling or connector problem. When that happens you should see parity errors and transfer rate negotiations. -- richard Krzys wrote: Ok, so here is an update I did restart my sysyte, I power it off and power it on. Here is screen capture of my boot. I certainly do

Re: [zfs-discuss] weird thing with zfs

2006-12-05 Thread Richard Elling
BTW, there is a way to check what the SCSI negotiations resolved to. I wrote about it once in a BluePrint http://www.sun.com/blueprints/0500/sysperfnc.pdf See page 11 -- richard Richard Elling wrote: This looks more like a cabling or connector problem. When that happens you should see

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS failover without multipathing

2006-12-07 Thread Richard Elling
Luke Schwab wrote: Hi, I am running Solaris 10 ZFS and I do not have STMS multipathing enables. I have dual FC connections to storage using two ports on an Emulex HBA. In the Solaris ZFS admin guide. It says that a ZFS file system monitors disks by their path and their device ID. If a disk

Re: [zfs-discuss] Netapp to Solaris/ZFS issues

2006-12-09 Thread Richard Elling
Jim Davis wrote: eric kustarz wrote: What about adding a whole new RAID-Z vdev and dynamicly stripe across the RAID-Zs? Your capacity and performance will go up with each RAID-Z vdev you add. Thanks, that's an interesting suggestion. This has the benefit of allowing you to grow into your

Re: [zfs-discuss] Vanity ZVOL paths?

2006-12-09 Thread Richard Elling
Jignesh K. Shah wrote: I am already using symlinks. But the problem is the ZFS framework won't know about them . Can you explain how this knowledge would benefit the combination of ZFS and databases? There may be something we could leverage here. I would expect something like this from ZVOL

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Usage in Warehousing (lengthy intro)

2006-12-09 Thread Richard Elling
Jochen M. Kaiser wrote: Dear all, we're currently looking forward to restructure our hardware environment for our datawarehousing product/suite/solution/whatever. cool. We're currently running the database side on various SF V440's attached via dual FC to our SAN backend (EMC DMX3) with

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs exported a live filesystem

2006-12-11 Thread Richard Elling
Jim Hranicky wrote: By mistake, I just exported my test filesystem while it was up and being served via NFS, causing my tar over NFS to start throwing stale file handle errors. Should I file this as a bug, or should I just not do that :- Don't do that. The same should happen if you umount

Re: [nfs-discuss] Re: [zfs-discuss] A Plea for Help: Thumper/ZFS/NFS/B43

2006-12-11 Thread Richard Elling
BR Yes, absolutely. Set var in /etc/system, reboot, system come up. That BR happened almost 2 months ago, long before this lock insanity problem BR popped up. For the archives, a high level of lock activity can always be a problem. The worst cases I've experienced were with record locking over

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS related kernel panic

2006-12-11 Thread Richard Elling
Robert Milkowski wrote: Hello Richard, Tuesday, December 5, 2006, 7:01:17 AM, you wrote: RE Dale Ghent wrote: Similar to UFS's onerror mount option, I take it? RE Actually, it would be interesting to see how many customers change the RE onerror setting. We have some data, just need more

Re: [zfs-discuss] SunCluster HA-NFS from Sol9/VxVM to Sol10u3/ZFS

2006-12-12 Thread Richard Elling
Matthew C Aycock wrote: We are currently working on a plan to upgrade our HA-NFS cluster that uses HA-StoragePlus and VxVM 3.2 on Solaris 9 to Solaris 10 and ZFS. Is there a known procedure or best practice for this? I have enough free disk space to recreate all the filesystems and copy the

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Storage Pool advice

2006-12-12 Thread Richard Elling
Kory Wheatley wrote: This question is concerning ZFS. We have a Sun Fire V890 attached to a EMC disk array. Here's are plan to incorporate ZFS: On our EMC storage array we will create 3 LUNS. Now how would ZFS be used for the best performance? What I'm trying to ask is if you have 3 LUNS

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Storage Pool advice

2006-12-13 Thread Richard Elling
Kory Wheatley wrote: The Luns will be on separate SPA controllersnot on all the same controller, so that's why I thought if we split our data on different disks and ZFS Storage Pools we would get better IO performance. Correct? The way to think about it is that, in general, for best

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Uber block corruption?

2006-12-13 Thread Richard Elling
Anton B. Rang wrote: Also note that the UB is written to every vdev (4 per disk) so the chances of all UBs being corrupted is rather low. The chances that they're corrupted by the storage system, yes. However, they are all sourced from the same in-memory buffer, so an undetected in-memory

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Kickstart hot spare attachment

2006-12-13 Thread Richard Elling
Anton B. Rang wrote: If the SCSI commands hang forever, then there is nothing that ZFS can do, as a single write will never return. The more likely case is that the commands are continually timining out with very long response times, and ZFS will continue to talk to them forever. It looks

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on a damaged disk

2006-12-13 Thread Richard Elling
blocks, but it didn't work. So, Richard Elling will likely have data but I have anecdotes: I have some data, but without knowing more about the disk, it is difficult to say where to do. In some cases a low level format will clear up some errors for a little while for some drives. I've seen two

Re: [zfs-discuss] Instructions for ignoring ZFS write cache flushing on intelligent arrays

2006-12-16 Thread Richard Elling
Jeremy Teo wrote: On 12/16/06, Richard Elling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason J. W. Williams wrote: Hi Jeremy, It would be nice if you could tell ZFS to turn off fsync() for ZIL writes on a per-zpool basis. That being said, I'm not sure there's a consensus on that...and I'm sure not smart

Re: [zfs-discuss] Some ZFS questions

2006-12-18 Thread Richard Elling
Additional comments below... Christine Tran wrote: Hi, I guess we are acquainted with the ZFS Wikipedia? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFS Customers refer to it, I wonder where the Wiki gets its numbers. For example there's a Sun marketing slide that says unlimited snapshots contradicted

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in a SAN environment

2006-12-18 Thread Richard Elling
comment far below... Jonathan Edwards wrote: On Dec 18, 2006, at 16:13, Torrey McMahon wrote: Al Hopper wrote: On Sun, 17 Dec 2006, Ricardo Correia wrote: On Friday 15 December 2006 20:02, Dave Burleson wrote: Does anyone have a document that describes ZFS in a pure SAN environment?

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and SE 3511

2006-12-19 Thread Richard Elling
sidetracking below... Matt Ingenthron wrote: Mike Seda wrote: Basically, is this a supported zfs configuration? Can't see why not, but support or not is something only Sun support can speak for, not this mailing list. You say you lost access to the array though-- a full disk failure

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in a SAN environment

2006-12-19 Thread Richard Elling
Torrey McMahon wrote: The first bug we'll get when adding a ZFS is not going to be able to fix data inconsistency problems error message to every pool creation or similar operation is going to be Need a flag to turn off the warning message... Richard pines for ditto blocks for data... --

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re[2]: ZFS in a SAN environment

2006-12-20 Thread Richard Elling
Dennis Clarke wrote: Anton B. Rang wrote: INFORMATION: If a member of this striped zpool becomes unavailable or develops corruption, Solaris will kernel panic and reboot to protect your data. Is this the official, long-term stance? I don't think it is. I think this is an interpretation of

Re: [zfs-discuss] using zpool attach/detach to migrate drives from one controller to another

2006-12-28 Thread Richard Elling
I think ZFS might be too smart here. The feature we like is that ZFS will find the devices no matter what their path is. This is very much a highly desired feature. If there are multiple paths to the same LUN, then it does expect an intermediary to handle that: MPxIO, PowerPath, etc.

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Deadlock with a pool using files on another zfs?

2006-12-29 Thread Richard Elling
Jason Austin wrote: A bit off the subject but what would be the advantage in virtualization using a pool of files verse just creating another zfs on an existing pool. My purpose for using the file pools was to experiment and learn about any quirks before I go production. It let me do things

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can ZFS solve my problem?

2007-01-02 Thread Richard Elling
Anders Troberg wrote: What I want: * Software RAID support, even across the network, so I can just add a bunch of parity disks and survive if a few disks crash. To me, it's well worth it to pony up with the money for 5-10 extra disks if I know that that many disks can fail before I

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS related (probably) hangs due to memory exhaustion(?) with snv53

2007-01-03 Thread Richard Elling
Tomas Ă–gren wrote: df (GNU df) says there are ~850k inodes used, I'd like to keep those in memory.. There is currently 1.8TB used on the filesystem.. The probability of a cache hit in the user data cache is about 0% and the probability that an rsync happens again shortly is about 100%.. Also,

Re: [zfs-discuss] RAIDZ2 vs. ZFS RAID-10

2007-01-03 Thread Richard Elling
Jason J. W. Williams wrote: Hello All, I was curious if anyone had run a benchmark on the IOPS performance of RAIDZ2 vs RAID-10? I'm getting ready to run one on a Thumper and was curious what others had seen. Thank you in advance. I've been using a simple model for small, random reads. In

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Solid State Drives?

2007-01-05 Thread Richard Elling
Al Hopper wrote: On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Anton B. Rang wrote: If [SSD or Flash] devices become more prevalent, and/or cheaper I'm curious what ways ZFS could be made to bast take advantage of them? The intent log is a possibility, but this would work better with SSD than Flash; Flash

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs recv

2007-01-05 Thread Richard Elling
Matthew Ahrens wrote: Robert Milkowski wrote: Hello zfs-discuss, zfs recv -v at the end reported: received 928Mb stream in 6346 seconds (150Kb/sec) I'm not sure but shouldn't it be 928MB and 150KB ? Or perhaps we're counting bits? That's correct, it is in bytes and should use capital B.

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: RAIDZ2 vs. ZFS RAID-10

2007-01-05 Thread Richard Elling
Darren Dunham wrote: That would be useless, and not provide anything extra. I think it's useless if a (disk) block of data holding RAIDZ parity never has silent corruption, or if scrubbing was a lightweight operation that could be run often. The problem is that you will still need to

Re: [zfs-discuss] RAIDZ2 vs. ZFS RAID-10

2007-01-05 Thread Richard Elling
Peter Schuller wrote: I've been using a simple model for small, random reads. In that model, the performance of a raidz[12] set will be approximately equal to a single disk. For example, if you have 6 disks, then the performance for the 6-disk raidz2 set will be normalized to 1, and the

Re: [zfs-discuss] RAIDZ2 vs. ZFS RAID-10

2007-01-08 Thread Richard Elling
Peter Schuller wrote: Is this expected behavior? Assuming concurrent reads (not synchronous and sequential) I would naively expect an ndisk raidz2 pool to have a normalized performance of n for small reads. q.v. http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=20942tstart=0 where

[zfs-discuss] ZFS on my iPhone?

2007-01-09 Thread Richard Elling
So, does anyone know if I can run ZFS on my iPhone? ;-) -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Solid State Drives?

2007-01-11 Thread Richard Elling
Erik Trimble wrote: Just a thought: would it be theoretically possible to designate some device as a system-wide write cache for all FS writes? Not just ZFS, but for everything... In a manner similar to which we currently use extra RAM as a cache for FS read (and write, to a certain

[zfs-discuss] blog: space vs MTTDL

2007-01-11 Thread Richard Elling
I've got a few articles in my blog backlog which you should find useful as you think about configuring ZFS. I just posted one on space vs MTTDL which should appear shortly. http://blogs.sun.com/relling Enjoy. -- richard ___ zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] optimal zpool layout?

2007-01-12 Thread Richard Elling
Patrick P Korsnick wrote: hi, i just set up snv_54 on an old p4 celeron system and even tho the processor is crap, it's got 3 7200RPM HDs: 1 80GB and 2 40GBs. so i'm wondering if there is an optimal way to lay out the ZFS pool(s) to make this old girl as fast as possible as it stands

Re: [zfs-discuss] optimal zpool layout?

2007-01-12 Thread Richard Elling
[attempt to clean up the text, sorry if I miss something] James Dickens wrote: On 1/12/07, Kyle McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Patrick P Korsnick wrote: i just set up snv_54 on an old p4 celeron system and even tho the processor is crap, it's got 3 7200RPM HDs: 1 80GB and 2 40GBs. so i'm

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >