Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
On 02/10/15 12:28, Harry Putnam wrote: > Later when I finally got over being a tight a__ and put down the > `jack' for a cage 4 big discs and whatever other hardware needed. > > It would be more difficult to move (send/receive) the data filesystems > like rpool/mybig/pileof/data to the new discs than it would be from a > non-rpool disc? No. It's still trivial to do that. At most, you'll want to write a script to copy the important parts over and leave the others behind. -- James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
Doug Hughes writes: > The reason that data volumes on rpool is generally not a good idea is > for recoverability. You can take all of the disks of a given pool and > move them to another system, except rpool. rpool defines the system > itself, so data volumes there are tied to that system. Data volumes in > any other pool can move between systems very easily, which is great > when you have certain classes of hardware failures, or you want to > upgrade your system, or something similar. The data is thus > independent of the current disposition of the OS. > > At some point later on, you'll likely regret having done it. [...] Those comments add to my apprehensions about storing data on rpool. I suspect that last line could easily be woefully true. But one thing isn't clear to me. Should I take your comments to mean something like what follows would be more difficult than usual? Say, I went ahead and put rpool on a 1tb mirrored set and stored 5-600 gb of data with it. Later when I finally got over being a tight a__ and put down the `jack' for a cage 4 big discs and whatever other hardware needed. It would be more difficult to move (send/receive) the data filesystems like rpool/mybig/pileof/data to the new discs than it would be from a non-rpool disc? ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015, Harry Putnam wrote: Michael Hase writes: [...] Thanks for the (snipped suggestion) In the meantime all disks and the 4x2.5" bay migrated to a xeon e3 box (no reinstall necessary), as these old hp boxes are way to expensive to run 24x7 here in germany. Do you mean they just pull to much fire (I mean voltage/amprage)? How do they (xw8600 2x xeon (5400's)) compare to your xeon e3 box. Exactly, 70W idle for the e3 box, 250W idle for the xw8400. Same number of disks, the xeon e3 has 24gb ram, the hp had 16gb. Which results in about EUR 170 per year in electricity bills for the xeon e3, and about EUR 600 per year for the hp. All calculated for small businesses or private users. Single thread performance on the e3 is better. Overall throughput may be a bit better on the hp if you have quad core cpus, I only had dual core ones. But cpu performance never was an issue for my sorts of development. The hp box would still have enough horsepower, and it is nicely engineered, it's just to expensive to run. Including the money factor... (I paid 750 for the xw8600 with 2 1tb discs) Uh, these boxes can be had for EUR 100 or even cheaper around here (excluding disks) - for the above reason ;-) Cheers, Michael ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015, Harry Putnam wrote: But, those comments give me pause. There is an additional reason I should have mentioned. Rpool disks are special because they are boot disks and x86 boot disks need to be partitioned and prepared in a particular way. Replacing a boot disk is an exercise in frustration compared with an ordinary disk that zfs entirely initialized. Compounding frustration levels is not a good idea. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
hm, I've had no problems doing an rpool import to another system by simply running zpool import If you blindly just import by name as "rpool," then yeah, it's a clash. On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Doug Hughes wrote: > The reason that data volumes on rpool is generally not a good idea is for > recoverability. You can take all of the disks of a given pool and move them > to another system, except rpool. rpool defines the system itself, so data > volumes there are tied to that system. Data volumes in any other pool can > move between systems very easily, which is great when you have certain > classes of hardware failures, or you want to upgrade your system, or > something similar. The data is thus independent of the current disposition > of the OS. > > At some point later on, you'll likely regret having done it. > > Sent from my android device. > > -Original Message- > From: Harry Putnam > To: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > Sent: Sat, 07 Feb 2015 7:24 > Subject: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea? > > I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc > that rpool is on. I'm not sure why that is so. > > In my current situation I need more space but to rig up my > `HP xw8600 workstation' with more disc space will require getting a cage > and some new discs, not to mention the huffing and puffing necessary > to get it all installed and usable. > > When I installed oi on this hardware I thought it was a smart idea to > use 2 older 250 GB discs for a 2 disc mirrored setup of rpool. And a > pair of 1tb discs for 2disc mirror of datasets. > > At that time I hadn't really realized what it would take to add > discs. > > But of course I'm now running out of space... and still not flush > enough to pop for the $400 or so to add a cage and 4 2-3 tb discs. > > However I do have 2 1tb discs laying unused. > > So, (finally cutting to chase) how bad of an idea would it be to use > those two 1tb discs for a mirrored rpool and whatever data. > > I would gain about 800-850 GB of mirrored data space but it would > involve putting data on same discs and rpool. > > (I'll leave for another thread to discuss how to get rpool onto the new > discs in the most painless manner) > > So, what are your best thoughts on employing the two 1tb discs as > described above? > > > ___ > openindiana-discuss mailing list > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > ___ > openindiana-discuss mailing list > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
The reason that data volumes on rpool is generally not a good idea is for recoverability. You can take all of the disks of a given pool and move them to another system, except rpool. rpool defines the system itself, so data volumes there are tied to that system. Data volumes in any other pool can move between systems very easily, which is great when you have certain classes of hardware failures, or you want to upgrade your system, or something similar. The data is thus independent of the current disposition of the OS. At some point later on, you'll likely regret having done it. Sent from my android device. -Original Message- From: Harry Putnam To: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Sent: Sat, 07 Feb 2015 7:24 Subject: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea? I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc that rpool is on. I'm not sure why that is so. In my current situation I need more space but to rig up my `HP xw8600 workstation' with more disc space will require getting a cage and some new discs, not to mention the huffing and puffing necessary to get it all installed and usable. When I installed oi on this hardware I thought it was a smart idea to use 2 older 250 GB discs for a 2 disc mirrored setup of rpool. And a pair of 1tb discs for 2disc mirror of datasets. At that time I hadn't really realized what it would take to add discs. But of course I'm now running out of space... and still not flush enough to pop for the $400 or so to add a cage and 4 2-3 tb discs. However I do have 2 1tb discs laying unused. So, (finally cutting to chase) how bad of an idea would it be to use those two 1tb discs for a mirrored rpool and whatever data. I would gain about 800-850 GB of mirrored data space but it would involve putting data on same discs and rpool. (I'll leave for another thread to discuss how to get rpool onto the new discs in the most painless manner) So, what are your best thoughts on employing the two 1tb discs as described above? ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
Michael Hase writes: [...] Thanks for the (snipped suggestion) > In the meantime all disks and the 4x2.5" bay migrated to a xeon e3 box > (no reinstall necessary), as these old hp boxes are way to expensive > to run 24x7 here in germany. Do you mean they just pull to much fire (I mean voltage/amprage)? How do they (xw8600 2x xeon (5400's)) compare to your xeon e3 box. Including the money factor... (I paid 750 for the xw8600 with 2 1tb discs) ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
Bob Friesenhahn writes: [...] It was good to hear from other posters that there is nothing wrong with, in my use case, putting data sets on same disc as rpool. > The main reason why is that then you can't just blow away the OS > install pool and reinstall from scratch without needing to do > something with the data. For example, you might want to install > another OS for which there is no current upgrade path. With zfs on a > pool separate from rpool, then you could install a different > OpenIndiana, Linux with ZFS, FreeBSD, OmniOS, Tribblix, etc., and just > import the existing data pool. You could also multi-boot the system > with different OSs which support ZFS and each could import your data > pool. But, those comments give me pause. I'm thinking my original setup which is in about the exact situation you mention, is maybe still a better way to go. I'm on OI, and it seems a good chance that either the day will come where OI is upgradable to hipster, and hipster developers start regular updates etc, or I will be faced with upgrading manually to something else. And in that case, as you say, I would be very glad I didn't have piles of data on my OS/rpool discs. ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
On 2/7/2015 7:38 AM, Volker A. Brandt wrote: > Harry Putnam writes: > [...] >> However I do have 2 1tb discs laying unused. >> >> So, (finally cutting to chase) how bad of an idea would it be to use >> those two 1tb discs for a mirrored rpool and whatever data. > > There should not be any problem whatsoever. For a home setup, having > additional data directories in the rpool is perfectly fine. True. Even if you want to switch OSes and import your data, nothing really stops you from installing a new drive, installing that new OS, and then doing an import on the old rpool to get at your data. The reason I don't do it is that with the root pool you're limited to just simple mirroring for the boot devices. If you have a larger configuration and want to use something more complex (such as RAIDZ3), you'll need to have a separate pool for that. -- James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
Bob Friesenhahn writes: > > I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc > > that rpool is on. I'm not sure why that is so. > > The main reason why is that then you can't just blow away the OS > install pool and reinstall from scratch without needing to do > something with the data. Theoretically, yes. But in his use case, he has config info on the box as well (users, hosts, maybe his mail spool, etc.). So he will need to salvage data from the rpool manually anyway. If you are in a data center where you have DNS and LDAP, everything is auto-mounted and nodes are provisioned automatically, then a data-free rpool is certainly a prerequisite. Regards -- Volker -- Volker A. Brandt Consulting and Support for Oracle Solaris Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/ Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim, GERMANYEmail: v...@bb-c.de Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513 Schuhgröße: 46 Geschäftsführer: Rainer J.H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt "When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead" ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015, Harry Putnam wrote: I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc that rpool is on. I'm not sure why that is so. In my current situation I need more space but to rig up my `HP xw8600 workstation' with more disc space will require getting a cage and some new discs, not to mention the huffing and puffing necessary to get it all installed and usable. I'd recommend one of these 4x2.5" sata/sas bays and an additional cheap lsi sas hba. I use 2 2.5" 36gb sas disks as rpool, 4 3.5" data disks, and an additional ssd for zil. Some spare laptop sata disks can be used for rpool, too. Fitted nicely in my old hp xw8400. In the meantime all disks and the 4x2.5" bay migrated to a xeon e3 box (no reinstall necessary), as these old hp boxes are way to expensive to run 24x7 here in germany. Cheers, Michael When I installed oi on this hardware I thought it was a smart idea to use 2 older 250 GB discs for a 2 disc mirrored setup of rpool. And a pair of 1tb discs for 2disc mirror of datasets. At that time I hadn't really realized what it would take to add discs. But of course I'm now running out of space... and still not flush enough to pop for the $400 or so to add a cage and 4 2-3 tb discs. However I do have 2 1tb discs laying unused. So, (finally cutting to chase) how bad of an idea would it be to use those two 1tb discs for a mirrored rpool and whatever data. I would gain about 800-850 GB of mirrored data space but it would involve putting data on same discs and rpool. (I'll leave for another thread to discuss how to get rpool onto the new discs in the most painless manner) So, what are your best thoughts on employing the two 1tb discs as described above? ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015, Harry Putnam wrote: I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc that rpool is on. I'm not sure why that is so. The main reason why is that then you can't just blow away the OS install pool and reinstall from scratch without needing to do something with the data. For example, you might want to install another OS for which there is no current upgrade path. With zfs on a pool separate from rpool, then you could install a different OpenIndiana, Linux with ZFS, FreeBSD, OmniOS, Tribblix, etc., and just import the existing data pool. You could also multi-boot the system with different OSs which support ZFS and each could import your data pool. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
Harry Putnam writes: [...] > However I do have 2 1tb discs laying unused. > > So, (finally cutting to chase) how bad of an idea would it be to use > those two 1tb discs for a mirrored rpool and whatever data. There should not be any problem whatsoever. For a home setup, having additional data directories in the rpool is perfectly fine. Best regards -- Volker -- Volker A. Brandt Consulting and Support for Oracle Solaris Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/ Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim, GERMANYEmail: v...@bb-c.de Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513 Schuhgröße: 46 Geschäftsführer: Rainer J.H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt "When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead" ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc that rpool is on. I'm not sure why that is so. In my current situation I need more space but to rig up my `HP xw8600 workstation' with more disc space will require getting a cage and some new discs, not to mention the huffing and puffing necessary to get it all installed and usable. When I installed oi on this hardware I thought it was a smart idea to use 2 older 250 GB discs for a 2 disc mirrored setup of rpool. And a pair of 1tb discs for 2disc mirror of datasets. At that time I hadn't really realized what it would take to add discs. But of course I'm now running out of space... and still not flush enough to pop for the $400 or so to add a cage and 4 2-3 tb discs. However I do have 2 1tb discs laying unused. So, (finally cutting to chase) how bad of an idea would it be to use those two 1tb discs for a mirrored rpool and whatever data. I would gain about 800-850 GB of mirrored data space but it would involve putting data on same discs and rpool. (I'll leave for another thread to discuss how to get rpool onto the new discs in the most painless manner) So, what are your best thoughts on employing the two 1tb discs as described above? ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
