Frank Cusack wrote:
On September 13, 2006 7:07:40 PM -0700 Richard Elling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
With ZFS however the in-between cache is obsolete, as individual disk
caches can be used directly.
The statement needs to be qualified.
Storage cache, if protected, works great to reduce critical
op latency. ZFS when it writes to disk cache, will flush
data out before return to
On 9/14/06, Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Dickens wrote:
On 9/13/06, Eric Schrock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 02:29:55PM -0500, James Dickens wrote:
this would not be the first time that Solaris overrided an administive
command, because its just not
Luke Scharf wrote:
The problem is that when I mount from a client, I can only mount if I
specify the IP address 1st network interface. If I use the 2nd or 3rd
interface (both also on the internal network), then I get the
following error:
kernel: nfs server 10.1.5.10:/xr7/group/ntnt: not
The OP was just showing a test case. On a real system your HA software
would exchange a heartbeat and not do a double import. The problem with
zfs is that after the original system fails and the second system imports
the pool, the original system also tries to import on [re]boot, and the OP
Anton B. Rang wrote:
You need to rewrite/extend that to deal with the fact that ZFS doesn't use vfstab
and instead express it in terms of ZFS import/export.
The problem (as I see it) is that ZFS import is (by default) implicit at
startup, while UFS mount is (by default) only performed when
If you *never* want to import a pool automatically on reboot you just have to
delete the
/etc/zfs/zpool.cache file before the zfs module is being loaded.
This could be integrated into SMF.
Or you could always use import -R / create -R for your pool management. Of
course, there's no way to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Ahrens wrote:
Out of curiosity, what would you guys think about addressing this same
problem by having the option to store some filesystems unreplicated on
an mirrored (or raid-z) pool? This would have the same issues of
unexpected space
I have run zpool scrub again, and I now see checksum errors again. Wouldn't
the checksum errors gotten fixed with the first zpool scrub?
Can anyone recommend actions I should do at this point?
Thanks,
David
This message posted from opensolaris.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil A. Wilson wrote:
This is unfortunate. As a laptop user with only a single drive, I was
looking forward to it since I've been bitten in the past by data loss
caused by a bad area on the disk. I don't care about the space
consumption because
If you *never* want to import a pool automatically on reboot you just have
to delete the
/etc/zfs/zpool.cache file before the zfs module is being loaded.
This could be integrated into SMF.
Or you could always use import -R / create -R for your pool management. Of
course, there's no
Darren Dunham wrote:
Exactly. What method could such a framework use to ask ZFS to import a
pool *now*, but not also automatically at next boot? (How does the
upcoming SC do it?)
I don't know how Sun Cluster does it and I don't know where the source is.
As others have pointed out you could
As others have pointed out you could use the fully supported alternate
root support for this.
The zpool create -R and zpool import -R commands allow
Yes. I tried that. It should work well.
In addition, I'm happy to note that '-R /' appears to be valid, allowing
all the filenames
I was running solaris 10 6/06 with latest kernel patch on ultra 20 (x86) with
two internal disks, the root with the OS (c1d0) as UFS and the userland data on
c2d0s7 formatted as ZFS. An update made the system unusable and required
reinstallation of the OS on c1d0 (solaris 6/06).
I cannot
James Dickens wrote:
eric was allready talking about printing the last time a disk was
accessed when a disk was about to be imported, my idea would be run
that check twice, once initially and if it looks like it could be
still in use, like the pool wasn't exported and last write occurred in
the
I figured this out. Was way too simple.
zpool import fitz
thanks,
On Thursday, September 14, 2006, at 12:16PM, Aric Gregson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I was running solaris 10 6/06 with latest kernel patch on ultra 20 (x86) with
two internal disks, the root with the OS (c1d0) as UFS and the
Hello David,
Tuesday, September 12, 2006, 11:41:27 PM, you wrote:
DS I currently have a system which has two ZFS storage pools. One
DS of the pools is coming from a faulty piece of hardware. I would
DS like to bring up our server mounting the storage pool which is
DS okay and NOT mounting the
Title: Access to ZFS checksums would be nice and very useful feature
I am working in the area of archiving (in the true send of the word - e.g. using the OAIS reference model) electronic data for long term preservation and access. ZFS now makes magnetic disk arrays a bit more suitable for
On Sep 14, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Henk Langeveld wrote:
Bady, Brant RBCM:EX wrote:
Part of the archiving process is to generate checksums (I happen
to use
MD5), and store them with other metadata about the digital object in
order to verify data integrity and demonstrate the authenticity of
the
Bady, Brant RBCM:EX wrote:
I am working in the area of archiving (in the true send of the word -
e.g. using the OAIS reference model) electronic data for long term
preservation and access. ZFS now makes magnetic disk arrays a bit more
suitable for that.
Part of the archiving process is to
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 08:09:07AM -0700, David Smith wrote:
I have run zpool scrub again, and I now see checksum errors again.
Wouldn't the checksum errors gotten fixed with the first zpool scrub?
Can anyone recommend actions I should do at this point?
After running the first scrub, did
Actually to clarify - what I want to do is to be able to read the
associated checksums ZFS creates for a file and then store them in an
external system e.g. an oracle database most likely
Its just a way of avoiding having to do MD5's on everything when ZFS is
doing checksums as well.
If ZFS does
On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 13:55 -0700, Bill Moore wrote:
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 08:09:07AM -0700, David Smith wrote:
I have run zpool scrub again, and I now see checksum errors again.
Wouldn't the checksum errors gotten fixed with the first zpool scrub?
Can anyone recommend actions I
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 10:32:59PM +0200, Henk Langeveld wrote:
Bady, Brant RBCM:EX wrote:
Part of the archiving process is to generate checksums (I happen to use
MD5), and store them with other metadata about the digital object in
order to verify data integrity and demonstrate the
On 9/14/06, Chad Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Better still would be the forthcoming cryptographic extensions in some
kind of digital-signature mode.
When I first saw extended attributes I thought that would be a great
place to store a digital signature of the file. I'm not saying that
it is
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 06:26:46PM -0500, Mike Gerdts wrote:
On 9/14/06, Chad Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Better still would be the forthcoming cryptographic extensions in some
kind of digital-signature mode.
When I first saw extended attributes I thought that would be a great
place to
Bady, Brant RBCM:EX wrote:
Actually to clarify - what I want to do is to be able to read the
associated checksums ZFS creates for a file and then store them in an
external system e.g. an oracle database most likely
Rather than storing the checksum externally, you could simply let ZFS
verify
Folks, before I start delving too deeply into this crashdump, has anyone
seen anything like it?
The background is that I'm running a non-debug open build of b49 and was
in the process of running the zoneadm -z redlx install
After a bit, the machine panics, initially looking at the
I know, bad form replying to myself, but I am wondering if it might be
related to
6438702 error handling in zfs_getpage() can trigger page not
locked
Which is marked fix in progress with a target of the current build.
alan.
Alan Hargreaves wrote:
Folks, before I start delving too
29 matches
Mail list logo
