Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool remove problem
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Wyllys Ingersoll wrote: That doesn't work either. The zpool replace command didn't work? You wouldn't happen to have a copy of the errors you received, would you? I'd like to see that. Regards, markm ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Moving zfs to an iscsci equallogic LUN
What would be the commands for the three way mirror or an example of what your describing. I thought the 200gb would have to be the same size to attach to the existing mirror and you would have to attach two LUN disks vs one LUN. Once it attaches it automatically reslivers or syncs the disk then if I wanted to I could remove the two 73 GB disks or still keep them in the pool and expand the pool later if I want? 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] Moving zfs to an iscsci equallogic LUN
Use zpool replace to swap one side of the mirror with the iscsi lun. -- mikee - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Tue Jan 15 08:46:40 2008 Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Moving zfs to an iscsci equallogic LUN What would be the commands for the three way mirror or an example of what your describing. I thought the 200gb would have to be the same size to attach to the existing mirror and you would have to attach two LUN disks vs one LUN. Once it attaches it automatically reslivers or syncs the disk then if I wanted to I could remove the two 73 GB disks or still keep them in the pool and expand the pool later if I want? This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] Moving zfs to an iscsci equallogic LUN
Hello Kory, Tuesday, January 15, 2008, 1:46:40 PM, you wrote: KW What would be the commands for the three way mirror or an example KW of what your describing. I thought the 200gb would have to be the KW same size to attach to the existing mirror and you would have to KW attach two LUN disks vs one LUN. Once it attaches it KW automatically reslivers or syncs the disk then if I wanted to I KW could remove the two 73 GB disks or still keep them in the pool KW and expand the pool later if I want? KW KW No, if you are attaching another disk to mirror it doesn't have to be the same size - it can be bigger, however you won't be able to see all the space from the disk as long as it forms N-way mirror with smaller devices. And yes, if you add (attach) another disk to a mirror it will automatically resilver, and you can keep previous two disks - you will get 3-way mirror (you can create N-way mirror in general). Once you happy new disk is working properly you just remove (detach) two old disk and your pool automatically grows. Keep in mind that the reverse is not possible (yet). Below example showing your case. # mkfile 512m disk1 # mkfile 512m disk2 # mkfile 1024m disk3 # zpool create test mirror /root/disk1 /root/disk2 # zpool status pool: test state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM test ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 /root/disk1 ONLINE 0 0 0 /root/disk2 ONLINE 0 0 0 # cp -rp /lib/ /test/ # zpool list NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT test504M 83.2M421M16% ONLINE - # # zpool attach test /root/disk2 /root/disk3 # zpool status pool: test state: ONLINE status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The pool will continue to function, possibly in a degraded state. action: Wait for the resilver to complete. scrub: resilver in progress, 69.59% done, 0h0m to go config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM test ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 /root/disk1 ONLINE 0 0 0 /root/disk2 ONLINE 0 0 0 /root/disk3 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # Waiting for a re-silvering to complete. # zpool status pool: test state: ONLINE scrub: resilver completed with 0 errors on Tue Jan 15 14:41:13 2008 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM test ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 /root/disk1 ONLINE 0 0 0 /root/disk2 ONLINE 0 0 0 /root/disk3 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # # zpool list NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT test504M 83.3M421M16% ONLINE - # # zpool detach test /root/disk1 # zpool detach test /root/disk2 # zpool status pool: test state: ONLINE scrub: resilver completed with 0 errors on Tue Jan 15 14:41:13 2008 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM test ONLINE 0 0 0 /root/disk3 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # # zpool list NAMESIZEUSED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT test 1016M 83.2M933M 8% ONLINE - # so we've migrated data from a 2-way mirror to a just one disk, live without unmounting file systems, etc. If your 3rd disk is already protected if you follow above procedure you will have a protected configuration all the time (however at the end you relay on disk3 built-in redundancy). -- Best regards, Robert Milkowski mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://milek.blogspot.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS versus VxFS as file system inside Netbackup 6.0 DSSU
Veritas products tend to work best with... well... other Veritas products. On 1/11/08, Patrick Herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello experts, We have a large implementation of Symantec Netbackup 6.0 with disk staging. Today, the customer is using VxFS as file system inside Netbackup 6.0 DSSU (disk staging). The customer would like to know if it is best to use ZFS or VxFS as file system inside Netbackup disk staging in order to get the best performance possible. Could you provide some information regarding this topic? Thanks in advance for your help Regards Patrick ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- _/ sengork.blogspot.com / ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS versus VxFS as file system inside Netbackup 6.0 DSSU
with zfs you can compress data on disk ...that is a grat advantage when doing backup to disk also, for DSSU you need to multiply number of filesystem (1 fs per stu), the advantage of zfs is that you don't need to fix the size of the fs upfront (the space is shared among all the fs) s- On Jan 10, 2008 2:12 PM, Patrick Herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello experts, We have a large implementation of Symantec Netbackup 6.0 with disk staging. Today, the customer is using VxFS as file system inside Netbackup 6.0 DSSU (disk staging). The customer would like to know if it is best to use ZFS or VxFS as file system inside Netbackup disk staging in order to get the best performance possible. Could you provide some information regarding this topic? Thanks in advance for your help Regards Patrick ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- -- Blog: http://fakoli.blogspot.com/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS versus VxFS as file system inside Netbackup 6.0 DSSU
On 1/15/08, Selim Daoud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
with zfs you can compress data on disk ...that is a grat advantage
when doing backup to disk
also, for DSSU you need to multiply number of filesystem (1 fs per
stu), the advantage of zfs is that you don't need to fix the size
of the fs upfront (the space is shared among all the fs)
But ... NBU (at least version 6.0) attempts to estimate the
size of the backup and make suer there is enough room on the DSSU to
handle it. What happens when the free space reported by ZFS isn't
really the free space ?
We are using NBU DSSU against both UFS and ZFS (but not
against VxFS) and have not noticed any FS related performance
limitations. The clients and the network are all slower.
--
{1-2-3-4-5-6-7-}
Paul Kraus
- Sound Designer, Noel Coward's Hay Fever
@ Albany Civic Theatre, Feb./Mar. 2008
- Facilities Coordinator, Albacon 2008
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ?REFER in zfs list
Hello Kevin, Tuesday, January 15, 2008, 7:53:47 PM, you wrote: KR What does the REFER column represent in zfs list. How much data given dataset is referring to - in other words its a disk usage for that file system (not counting snapshots iirc). -- Best regards, Robert Milkowskimailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://milek.blogspot.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS versus VxFS as file system inside Netbackup 6.0 DSSU
Regarding the question asked below namely What happens when the free space reported by ZFS isn't really the free space ?, is there an open bug for this ? Thanks, Sri Paul Kraus wrote: On 1/15/08, Selim Daoud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: with zfs you can compress data on disk ...that is a grat advantage when doing backup to disk also, for DSSU you need to multiply number of filesystem (1 fs per stu), the advantage of zfs is that you don't need to fix the size of the fs upfront (the space is shared among all the fs) But ... NBU (at least version 6.0) attempts to estimate the size of the backup and make suer there is enough room on the DSSU to handle it. What happens when the free space reported by ZFS isn't really the free space ? We are using NBU DSSU against both UFS and ZFS (but not against VxFS) and have not noticed any FS related performance limitations. The clients and the network are all slower. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS versus VxFS as file system inside Netbackup 6.0 DSSU
Sri Sudarsan wrote: Regarding the question asked below namely What happens when the free space reported by ZFS isn't really the free space ?, is there an open bug for this ? Not a bug. It is a result of the dynamic nature of ZFS. For example, when compression is enabled, we cannot tell in advance how well the data will compress, so how could we say how much space is available? Other items to consider: dynamically allocated, redundant, and compressed metadata; snapshots; multiple file systems in a pool, each with potentially different features including compression algorithms and data redundancy; clones; failed media; failed devices; etc. Kinda reminds me of the old question: how much stuff can you put into a hole in your pocket? -- richard Thanks, Sri Paul Kraus wrote: On 1/15/08, Selim Daoud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: with zfs you can compress data on disk ...that is a grat advantage when doing backup to disk also, for DSSU you need to multiply number of filesystem (1 fs per stu), the advantage of zfs is that you don't need to fix the size of the fs upfront (the space is shared among all the fs) But ... NBU (at least version 6.0) attempts to estimate the size of the backup and make suer there is enough room on the DSSU to handle it. What happens when the free space reported by ZFS isn't really the free space ? We are using NBU DSSU against both UFS and ZFS (but not against VxFS) and have not noticed any FS related performance limitations. The clients and the network are all slower. ___ 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] ZFS versus VxFS as file system inside Netbackup 6.0 DSSU
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/15/2008 03:04:15 PM: Sri Paul Kraus wrote: On 1/15/08, Selim Daoud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: with zfs you can compress data on disk ...that is a grat advantage when doing backup to disk also, for DSSU you need to multiply number of filesystem (1 fs per stu), the advantage of zfs is that you don't need to fix the size of the fs upfront (the space is shared among all the fs) But ... NBU (at least version 6.0) attempts to estimate the size of the backup and make suer there is enough room on the DSSU to handle it. What happens when the free space reported by ZFS isn't really the free space ? We are using NBU DSSU against both UFS and ZFS (but not against VxFS) and have not noticed any FS related performance limitations. The clients and the network are all slower. Regarding the question asked below namely What happens when the free space reported by ZFS isn't really the free space ?, is there an open bug for this ? I do not believe it is a ZFS bug. Consider: The NetBackup server scans a backup client system, It determines it will need 600gb of disk space on the disk store. It stats the zfs volume and sees there is 700 gb free (enough for the backup) Starts writing 600gb over multiple hours. in the meantime, 500gb is used elsewhere in the pool. NetBackup Fails differently that on vmfs+vxvm in this case? Isn't it NetBackups issue to make sure that it has reserved diskspace or at least checks for space _as_ it writes? -Wade ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS versus VxFS as file system inside Netbackup 6.0 DSSU
AFAIK , nbu does of estimated the size of backup prior starting the job.
as the backup job is split in fixed-size segments , if a segment does
not fit, it will try to backup into
another disk or will wait for more space
On Jan 15, 2008 8:42 PM, Paul Kraus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/15/08, Selim Daoud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
with zfs you can compress data on disk ...that is a grat advantage
when doing backup to disk
also, for DSSU you need to multiply number of filesystem (1 fs per
stu), the advantage of zfs is that you don't need to fix the size
of the fs upfront (the space is shared among all the fs)
But ... NBU (at least version 6.0) attempts to estimate the
size of the backup and make suer there is enough room on the DSSU to
handle it. What happens when the free space reported by ZFS isn't
really the free space ?
We are using NBU DSSU against both UFS and ZFS (but not
against VxFS) and have not noticed any FS related performance
limitations. The clients and the network are all slower.
--
{1-2-3-4-5-6-7-}
Paul Kraus
- Sound Designer, Noel Coward's Hay Fever
@ Albany Civic Theatre, Feb./Mar. 2008
- Facilities Coordinator, Albacon 2008
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
--
--
Blog: http://fakoli.blogspot.com/
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Removing An Errant Drive From Zpool
I made a really stupid mistake... having trouble removing a hot spare marked as failed I was trying several ways to put it back in a good state. One means I tried was to 'zpool add pool c5t3d0'... but I forgot to use the proper syntax zpool add pool spare c5t3d0. Now I'm in a bind. I've got 4 large raidz2's and now this punty 500GB drive in the config: ... raidz2ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t3d0ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c5t3d0FAULTED corrupted data c4t7d0AVAIL ... Detach and Remove won't work. Does anyone know of a way to get that c5t3d0 out of the data configuration and back to hot-spare where it belongs? However if I understand the layout properly, this should not have an adverse impact on my existing configuration I think. If I can't dump it, what happens when that disk fills up? I can't believe I made such a bone headed mistake. This is one of those times when a Are you sure you...? would be helpful. :( benr. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Removing An Errant Drive From Zpool
There's really no way to recover from this, since we don't have device removal. However, I'm suprised that no warning was given. There are at least two things that should have happened: 1. zpool(1M) should have warned you that the redundancy level you were attempting did not match that of your existing pool. This doesn't apply if you already have a mixed level of redundancy. 2. zpool(1M) should have warned you that the device was in use as an active spare and not let you continue. What bits were you running? - Eric On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 06:25:50PM -0800, Ben Rockwood wrote: I made a really stupid mistake... having trouble removing a hot spare marked as failed I was trying several ways to put it back in a good state. One means I tried was to 'zpool add pool c5t3d0'... but I forgot to use the proper syntax zpool add pool spare c5t3d0. Now I'm in a bind. I've got 4 large raidz2's and now this punty 500GB drive in the config: ... raidz2ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c6t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t3d0ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c5t3d0FAULTED corrupted data c4t7d0AVAIL ... Detach and Remove won't work. Does anyone know of a way to get that c5t3d0 out of the data configuration and back to hot-spare where it belongs? However if I understand the layout properly, this should not have an adverse impact on my existing configuration I think. If I can't dump it, what happens when that disk fills up? I can't believe I made such a bone headed mistake. This is one of those times when a Are you sure you...? would be helpful. :( benr. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Eric Schrock, FishWorkshttp://blogs.sun.com/eschrock ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Re: Cheap ZFS homeserver.
So I was hoping that this board would work: [...]GA-M57SLI-S4 I've been looking at that very same board for the very same purpose. It has 2 gb nics, 6 sata ports, supports ECC memory and is passively cooled. And it's very cheap compared to most systems that people recommend for running OpenSolaris on. (A GA-M57SLI-S4, an Athlon64 LE-1620 and 2 * 1GB 800MHz DDR2 ECC all together sum up to a total of only 165-175 € here, which is a lot less than what the recommended SATA cards cost. Add 3 500GB disks and you have a pretty nice raid-z system for only a total of 440 € (assuming you already have a case and PSU, which I do). Or you could use 3 1TB disks instead and add a good UPS and still have the whole package for less than 1000 €.) There are not many reports about the nforce 570 sli chipset, but several people have got the nforce 570 chipset working without problems. Here is a system with the GA-M57SLI-S4 in the HCL: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/data/systems/details/2714.html It says the SATA ports run in Legacy Mode (which means no hotswap or NCQ, but I don't know if it has any other downsides, anyone?) in Solaris Express Developer Edition 05/07. However, there seems to have been new MCP55 (all nf570 are mcp55-based) drivers released since then: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6296435 Has anyone tested the new mcp55 drivers with the sata ports on an nforce 570 sli motherboard? - Marcus ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Removing An Errant Drive From Zpool
Eric Schrock wrote: There's really no way to recover from this, since we don't have device removal. However, I'm suprised that no warning was given. There are at least two things that should have happened: 1. zpool(1M) should have warned you that the redundancy level you were attempting did not match that of your existing pool. This doesn't apply if you already have a mixed level of redundancy. 2. zpool(1M) should have warned you that the device was in use as an active spare and not let you continue. What bits were you running? snv_78, however the pool was created on snv_43 and hasn't yet been upgraded. Though, programatically, I can't see why there would be a difference in the way 'zpool' would handle the check. The big question is, if I'm stuck like the permanently, whats the potential risk? Could I potentially just fail that drive and leave it in a failed state? benr. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] RFE: File revisions on ZFS
Wouldn't it be nice to have file revisions implemented in ZFS? Mainframe FS (e.g. MVS) have this, and I think it should not be too hard to implement this in ZFS. Use Cases: * Simple configuration management, below SCCS etc. * Simple built-in FS trash bin * Set # of revisions high for user homes and /var, even higher for /etc FS, set it low for /usr. * you name it Benefits: * less administrative costs, e.g. cfg mgmt for the average case * trash bin indepentant of GUI * you name it Functionality: * The attibute 'active_revision' allows me to retrieve an old copy of a file. As long I do not alter it's contents, I can retrieve younger revisions. On write, all younger revisions are discarded (keep it simple). * I can label a revision with a tag, similar to well known VS's Discussion topics: * disk space comsumption is ruled by a simple logic: min_revisions overrules min_free_space? * you name it Quick brainsstorm: We would need a few new FS and file attributes, and some functions: revisions=on|off rev:compress=on|off|lzjb|gzip # inherited from the FS compression rev:max_revisions=integer|none (default)|unlimited rev:min_revisions=integer|none (default) rev:min_free=integer[specifier] # spec can the usual b,k,M,G,T, % or none and for convenience a few file attributes alike: rev:max_revisions,rev:min_revisions,rev:revisions (ro), rev:active_revision, rev:tag Any comments? Paul --- $ locate groupsex /opt/gnome/lib/epiphany/1.8/extensions/libtabgroupsextension.so This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
