[zfs-discuss] Some questions about Intent Log Devices
I finally got some new drives for my Ultra 80. I have two 73gig 10K RPM SCSI disks in it now with 60GB in a ZFS mirror. I am going to be adding 4x500G SATA disks in a RAIDZ, and I was thinking about using the "old" zfs space on the SCSI disks for intent logs. My questions are this: 1) Is it possible to add intent log devices after the fact? (I'll need to build the new array first so I can move the data over to it.) 2) What would be a better use of the two 60G intent log partitions? Mirrored? Striped? 3) How much space is needed for the intent logs? For 1.5TB of data space, would 60G be enough? 120G? 4) What version should I be running? I've got 64a on it now, but have be considering upgrading to the latest SCXE. I guess a lot of this revolves around the answer to #1, since if I can do thing after the fact with regards to intent logs, then I can answer those other questions at a later date. Thanks!! -brian -- "Perl can be fast and elegant as much as J2EE can be fast and elegant. In the hands of a skilled artisan, it can and does happen; it's just that most of the shit out there is built by people who'd be better suited to making sure that my burger is cooked thoroughly." -- Jonathan Patschke ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Kernel panic receiving incremental snapshots
On Aug 25, 2007 8:36 PM, Stuart Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Before I open a new case with Sun, I am wondering if anyone has seen this > kernel panic before? It happened on an X4500 running Sol10U3 while it was > receiving incremental snapshot updates. > > Thanks. > > > Aug 25 17:01:50 ldasdata6 ^Mpanic[cpu0]/thread=fe857d53f7a0: > Aug 25 17:01:50 ldasdata6 genunix: [ID 895785 kern.notice] dangling dbufs > (dn=fe82a3532d10, dbuf=fe8b4e338b90) I saw "dangling dbufs" panics beginning with S10U4 beta and the then current (May '07) nevada builds. If you are running a kernel newer than the x86 equivalent of 125100-10, you may be seeing the same thing. The panics I saw were not triggered by zfs receive, so you may be seeing something different. An IDR was produced for me. If you have Sun support search for my name, you can likely get the same IDR (errr, an IDR with the same fix - mine was SPARC) to see if it addresses your problem. -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Kernel panic receiving incremental snapshots
This kernel panic when running "zfs receive" has been solved with IDR127787-10. Does anyone know when this large set of ZFS bug fixes will be released as a normal/official S10 patch? Thanks. On Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 07:36:25PM -0700, Stuart Anderson wrote: > Before I open a new case with Sun, I am wondering if anyone has seen this > kernel panic before? It happened on an X4500 running Sol10U3 while it was > receiving incremental snapshot updates. > > Thanks. > > > Aug 25 17:01:50 ldasdata6 ^Mpanic[cpu0]/thread=fe857d53f7a0: > Aug 25 17:01:50 ldasdata6 genunix: [ID 895785 kern.notice] dangling dbufs > (dn=fe82a3532d10, dbuf=fe8b4e338b90) ... -- Stuart Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/~anderson ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Home Motherboard
H, well depends on what you are looking for. Is the speed not enough, or the size of RAM? I am thinking people found out the original GLY would actually work with a 2-gig DIMM. So it's possible the GLY2 will accept 2-gig also, which seems plenty for me. YMMV. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Questions from a windows admin - Samba, shares & quotas
Yeah, I'd seen that, but we're only going to be running 100 users so the boot time shouldn't be too bad. :-) This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Home Motherboard
Arcea, nice! Any word on whether 3ware has come around yet? I've been bugging them for months to do something to get a driver made for solaris. -Andy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of James C. McPherson Sent: Thu 11/22/2007 5:06 PM To: mike Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Home Motherboard mike wrote: > I actually have a related motherboard, chassis, dual power-supplies > and 12x400 gig drives already up on ebay too. If I recall Areca cards > are supported in OpenSolaris... At the moment you can download the Areca "arcmsr" driver from areca.com.tw, but I'm in the process of integrating it into OpenSolaris http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6614012 6614012 add Areca SAS/SATA RAID adapter driver James C. McPherson -- Senior Kernel Software Engineer, Solaris Sun Microsystems http://blogs.sun.com/jmcp http://www.jmcp.homeunix.com/blog ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Questions from a windows admin - Samba, shares & quotas
Yes it will work, and quite nicely indeed. But you need to be careful. Currently ZFS mounting is not "instantaneous", if you have like say 3 users, you might be for a rude surprize as system takes its own merry time (~ few hrs) mounting them at next reboot. Even with auto mounter, things won't be so fast. ZFS philosophy of "helluva tons of filesystems" breaks a lot of tools made with assumption of "who would ever need more than 4 filesystems ?". To test it, create $NUM_USERS filesystems, reboot the server and see if everything comes up ok and in acceptable time. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] R/W ZFS on Leopard Question -or- Where's my 40MB?
> SUMMARY: > 1) Why the difference between pool size and fs > capacity? With zfs take df output with a grain of salt -- add more if compression is turned on. ZFS being quite complicated, it seems only an "approximate" free space is reported, which won't be too wrong and would suffice for the purpose. But if you're expecting it to be correct to the last block,it won't be. > 2) If this is normal overhead, then how to you > examine these aspects > of the fs (commands to use, background links to read, > etc. (If you say > RTFM then please supply a page number for > "817-2271.pdf"))? No public mechanism currently exists, afaik. Some black magic with dtrace might be possible to look at the FS data structures OR by reading the code and ZFS on-disk format document one /could/ possibly figure it out. > 3) What's the relationship between pools (zpool) and > filesystems (zfs > command)? / Is there a default fs created hwne the > pool is created? Yes. As soon as you create a pool, it can be used as a FS. Nothing else needed. You can of course, create additional filesystems in the pool, but one is always available to you (you may or may not like it... I keep it unmounted). > 4) BONUS QUESTION: Is Sun currently using / promoting > / shipping hardware that *boots* ZFS? (e.g. last I checked even > stuff like "Thumper" did not use ZFS for the 2 mirror'd boot > drives (UFS?) but used ZFS for the 10,000 other drives (OK, maybe there > aren't 10,000 drive but there sure are a lot)). ZFS boot didn't get integrated into even Nevada until very recently, let alone backported to Solaris 10. I doubt it is ready for production use yet. The new "Opensolaris Dev. preview aka. Project Indiana" by default installs ZFS boot (no UFS needed). So, things are moving but we still need to go a long way before all things are stabilized, documented, corner cases identified, recovery tools & OS install/update applications updated etc etc > 5) BONUS QUESTION #2: How does a frustrated yet > extremely seasoned Mac/ > OS X technician with a terrific Solaris background > find happiness by landing a job at his other favorite company, Sun? (My > "friend" wants to know.) WARNING: Zen mode ON! One has to find happiness within. A more correct question might be: Would it be better for you to switch to working for Sun ? Well I personally admire Sun's engineering. It's one of the *few* places left where you are allowed to dream, and of course, build! If that is what you want to do, you might like working for them very much! > 6) FINAL QUESTION (2 parts): (a) When will we see > default booting to > ZFS? You can see it now... download the "OpenSolaris Developer Preview" live CD and install it to HDD. It's there! > (b) [When] will we see ZFS as the default fs > on OS X? Only when uncle Stevie says so! (Don't hold your breath) This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] R/W ZFS on Leopard Question -or- Where's my 40MB?
Howdy, Cross-posted to: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org I am playing around with the latest Read-Write ZFS on Leopard and am confused about why the available size of my admittedly tiny test pool (100 MB) is showing at ~2/3 (63 MB) of the expected capacity. I used mkfile to create test "disks". Is this due to normal ZFS overhead? If so, how can I list / view / examine these properties? I don't think it's compression related (BTW, is compression ON or OFF by default in OS X's current implementation of ZFS?). tcpb:jpool avatar$ uname -a Darwin tcpb.local 9.1.0 Darwin Kernel Version 9.1.0: Wed Oct 31 17:48:21 PDT 2007; root:xnu-1228.0.2~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh tcpb:jpool avatar$ sw_vers ProductName:Mac OS X ProductVersion: 10.5.1 BuildVersion: 9B18 tcpb:aguas avatar$ kextstat | grep zfs 1250 0x3203a000 0xcf0000xce000com.apple.filesystems.zfs (6.0) <7 6 5 2> I created a test pool in the "aguas" directory on an external firewire HDD: cd to my zfs test directory: "aguas" on an external HDD.. cd /Volumes/jDrive/aguas/ Create 5 100MB files to act as "Disks" in my Pool... sudo mkfile 100M disk1 sudo mkfile 100M disk2 sudo mkfile 100M disk3 sudo mkfile 100M disk4 sudo mkfile 100M disk5 Create MIRROR'd Pool, "jpool" using 1st two Disks... sudo zpool create jpool mirror /Volumes/jDrive/aguas/disk1 /Volumes/ jDrive/aguas/disk2 zpool list => NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT jpool 95.5M151K 95.4M 0%ONLINE - zpool status => pool: jpool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM jpoolONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 /Volumes/jDrive/aguas/disk1 ONLINE 0 0 0 /Volumes/jDrive/aguas/disk2 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors = Added a spare: sudo zpool add jpool spare /Volumes/jDrive/aguas/disk5 zpool status => pool: jpool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM jpoolONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 /Volumes/jDrive/aguas/disk1 ONLINE 0 0 0 /Volumes/jDrive/aguas/disk2 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares /Volumes/jDrive/aguas/disk5AVAIL errors: No known data errors = "jpool" NOW SHOWS UP ON THE FINDER... tcpb:aguas avatar$ df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/disk0s3 112Gi 103Gi 8.7Gi93%/ devfs 114Ki 114Ki0Bi 100%/dev fdesc 1.0Ki 1.0Ki0Bi 100%/dev map -hosts 0Bi0Bi0Bi 100%/net map auto_home0Bi0Bi0Bi 100%/home /dev/disk1s14 56Gi 50Gi 5.4Gi91%/Volumes/jDrive ONE /dev/disk1s10 75Gi 68Gi 7.3Gi91%/Volumes/jDrive /dev/disk1s12 55Gi 52Gi 2.5Gi96%/Volumes/Free 55 jpool 63Mi 59Ki 63Mi 1%/Volumes/jpool = OK, GIVEN: zpool list => NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT jpool 95.5M151K 95.4M 0%ONLINE - *WHY* ONLY 63MB?!?: jpool 63Mi 59Ki 63Mi 1%/Volumes/jpool More info (I turned COMPRESSION on after I noticed the discrepancy.) ... tcpb:jpool avatar$ sudo zfs get all jpool => NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE jpool type filesystem - jpool creation Tue Nov 20 14:48 2007 - jpool used 392K - jpool available 63.1M - jpool referenced 59K- jpool compressratio 1.00x - jpool mountedyes- jpool quota none default jpool reservationnone default jpool recordsize 128K default jpool mountpoint /Volumes/jpool default jpool sharenfs offdefault jpool checksum on default jpool compressionon local jpool atime on default jpool deviceson default jpool exec on default jpool setuid on default jpool readonly offdefault jpool zoned offdefault jpool snapdirhidden default jpool aclmodegroupmask default jpool aclinherit secure default jpool canmount on default jpool shareiscsi offdefault jpool xattr on default jpool copies 1 de
