I fully agree. This needs fixing. I can think of so many situations, where
device names change in OpenSolaris (especially with movable pools). This
problem can lead to serious data corruption.
Besides persistent L2ARC (which is much more difficult I would say) - Making
L2ARC also rely on
On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 12:22:55PM -0800, Lutz Schumann wrote:
Created a pool on head1 containing just the cache
device (c0t0d0).
This is not possible, unless there is a bug. You
cannot create a pool
with only a cache device. I have verified this on
b131:
# zpool create
I tested some more and found that Pool disks are picked UP.
Head1: Cachedevice1 (c0t0d0)
Head2: Cachedevice2 (c0t0d0)
Pool: Shared, c1tXdY
I created a pool on shared storage.
Added the cache device on Head1.
Switched the pool to Head2 (export + import).
Created a pool on head1 containing
On Feb 1, 2010, at 5:53 AM, Lutz Schumann wrote:
I tested some more and found that Pool disks are picked UP.
Head1: Cachedevice1 (c0t0d0)
Head2: Cachedevice2 (c0t0d0)
Pool: Shared, c1tXdY
I created a pool on shared storage.
Added the cache device on Head1.
Switched the pool to Head2
Created a pool on head1 containing just the cache
device (c0t0d0).
This is not possible, unless there is a bug. You
cannot create a pool
with only a cache device. I have verified this on
b131:
# zpool create norealpool cache /dev/ramdisk/rc1
1
invalid vdev
Actuall I tested this.
If I add a l2arc device to the syspool it is not used when issueing I/O to the
data pool (note: on root pool it must no be a whole disk, but only a slice of
it otherwise ZFS complains that root disks may not contain some EFI label).
So this does not work -
On Jan 28, 2010, at 10:54 AM, Lutz Schumann wrote:
Actuall I tested this.
If I add a l2arc device to the syspool it is not used when issueing I/O to
the data pool (note: on root pool it must no be a whole disk, but only a
slice of it otherwise ZFS complains that root disks may not
Thanks for the feedback Richard.
Does that mean that the L2ARC can be part of ANY pool and that there is only
ONE L2ARC for all pools active on the machine ?
Thesis:
- There is one L2ARC on the machine for all pools
- all Pools active share the same L2ARC
- the L2ARC can be part of any
Hi,
i found some time and was able to test again.
- verify with unique uid of the device
- verify with autoreplace = off
Indeed autoreplace was set to yes for the pools. So I disabled the autoreplace.
VOL PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE
nxvol2 autoreplaceoff default
AIUI, this works as designed.
I think the best practice will be to add the L2ARC to syspool (nee rpool).
However, for current NexentaStor releases, you cannot add cache devices
to syspool.
Earlier I mentioned that this made me nervous. I no longer hold any
reservation against it. It should
On Jan 20, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:20:20PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote:
Though the ARC case, PSARC/2007/618 is unpublished, I gather from
googling and the source that L2ARC devices are considered auxiliary,
in the same category as spares. If so,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 09:36:06AM -0800, Richard Elling wrote:
On Jan 20, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:20:20PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote:
Though the ARC case, PSARC/2007/618 is unpublished, I gather from
googling and the source that L2ARC devices
[Richard makes a hobby of confusing Dan :-)]
more below..
On Jan 21, 2010, at 1:13 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 09:36:06AM -0800, Richard Elling wrote:
On Jan 20, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:20:20PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 03:33:28PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote:
[Richard makes a hobby of confusing Dan :-)]
Heh.
Lutz, is the pool autoreplace property on? If so, god help us all
is no longer quite so necessary.
I think this is a different issue.
I agree. For me, it was the main
On Jan 21, 2010, at 4:32 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
I propose a best practice of adding the cache device to rpool and be
happy.
It is *still* not that simple. Forget my slow disks caching an even
slower pool (which is still fast enough for my needs, thanks to the
cache and zil).
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 05:52:57PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote:
I agree with this, except for the fact that the most common installers
(LiveCD, Nexenta, etc.) use the whole disk for rpool[1].
Er, no. You certainly get the option of whole disk or make
partitions, at least with the opensolaris
Hi Lutz,
On Jan 20, 2010, at 3:17 AM, Lutz Schumann wrote:
Hello,
we tested clustering with ZFS and the setup looks like this:
- 2 head nodes (nodea, nodeb)
- head nodes contain l2arc devices (nodea_l2arc, nodeb_l2arc)
This makes me nervous. I suspect this is not in the typical QA
On 20 January, 2010 - Richard Elling sent me these 2,7K bytes:
Hi Lutz,
On Jan 20, 2010, at 3:17 AM, Lutz Schumann wrote:
Hello,
we tested clustering with ZFS and the setup looks like this:
- 2 head nodes (nodea, nodeb)
- head nodes contain l2arc devices (nodea_l2arc,
Though the ARC case, PSARC/2007/618 is unpublished, I gather from
googling and the source that L2ARC devices are considered auxiliary,
in the same category as spares. If so, then it is perfectly reasonable to
expect that it gets picked up regardless of the GUID. This also implies
that it is
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:20:20PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote:
Though the ARC case, PSARC/2007/618 is unpublished, I gather from
googling and the source that L2ARC devices are considered auxiliary,
in the same category as spares. If so, then it is perfectly reasonable to
expect that it gets
20 matches
Mail list logo
