On Feb 6, 2008, at 5:23 AM, Jim Dunham wrote:

In the posting below I incorrectly stated the build numbers for the  
forthcoming iSCSI Target fixes. They're targeting builds snv_83,  
snv_84 & snv_85.

My 5:23 AM posting, must have happened before the coffee actually  
started to work. :-o

Jim

>
> On Feb 5, 2008, at 4:34 PM, John Tracy wrote:
>
>> The problem happened again (as expected). I did apply an IDR patch
>> as recommended by Sun, patch IDR137189-02 for those who may be
>> interested. After issuing a reboot, I then started hammering away at
>> the iSCSI targets on this box again. These patches seem to primarily
>> have to do with ZFS items. I'm thinking that this may be off the
>> mark, as even while the performance is terrible with iSCSI mounted
>> volumes, local IO operations on the box utilizing the same ZFS pool
>> are as quick as should be expected.
>>
>> Just out of curiosity, I generated a core of the iscsitgtd and then
>> ran mdk against it. This is the result. I'm not sure where to go
>> from here:
>
> Targeted for builds 63, 64 & 65, are a set of fixes that address
> issues covering memory leaks, unexpected asserts() and better
> interaction with ZFS and zvols.
>
>>
>> I found a few recent bugs noted for iscsitgt mentioning memory
>> leaks: 6657591 6652170. Perhaps this is related?
>>
>> -John
>>
>>
>> This message posted from opensolaris.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> storage-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss

Reply via email to