Re: [zfs-discuss] [RFC] Improved versioned pointer algorithms
On Monday 14 July 2008 08:29, Akhilesh Mritunjai wrote: Writable snapshots are called clones in zfs. So infact, you have trees of snapshots and clones. Snapshots are read-only, and you can create any number of writable clones from a snapshot, that behave like a normal filesystem and you can again take snapshots of the clones. So if I snapshot a filesystem, then clone it, then delete a file from both the clone and the original filesystem, the presence of the snapshot will prevent the file blocks from being recovered, and there is no way I can get rid of those blocks short of deleting both the clone and the snapshot. Did I get that right? Regards, Daniel ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Adding my own compression to zfs
Robert Milkowski wrote: During christmass I managed to add my own compression to zfs - it as quite easy. Great to see innovation but unless your personal compression method is somehow better (very fast with excellent compression) then would it not be a better idea to use an existing (leading edge) compression method ? 7-Zip's (http://www.7-zip.org/) 'newest' methods are LZMA and PPMD (http://www.7-zip.org/7z.html). There is a proprietary license for LZMA that _might_ interest Sun but PPMD is no explicit license see this link: Using PPMD for compression http://www.codeproject.com/KB/recipes/ppmd.aspx Rob 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] How to delete hundreds of emtpy snapshots
I got overzealous with snapshot creation. Every 5 mins is a bad idea. Way too many. What's the easiest way to delete the empty ones? zfs list takes FOREVER You might enjoy reading: ZFS snapshot massacre http://blogs.sun.com/chrisg/entry/zfs_snapshot_massacre. (Yes, the . is part of the URL (NMF) - so add it or you'll 404). Rob 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] install opensolaris on raidz
r == Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: r the benefit of mirroring that CF drive would be minimal. rather short-sighted. What if you want to replace the CF with a bigger or faster one without shutting down? pgpSx47yLusSx.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ? SX:CE snv_91 - ZFS - raid and mirror - drive
-Peter Tribble wrote: On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Rob Clark wrote: I have eight 10GB drives. ... I have 6 remaining 10 GB drives and I desire to raid 3 of them and mirror them to the other 3 to give me raid security and integrity with mirrored drive performance. I then want to move my /export directory to the new drive. ... You can't do that. You can't layer raidz and mirroring. You'll either have to use raidz for the lot, or just use mirroring: zpool create temparray mirror c1t2d0 c1t4d0 mirror c1t5d0 c1t3d0 mirror c1t6d0 c1t8d0 -Peter Tribble Solaris may not allow me to do that but the concept is not unheard of: Quoting: Proceedings of the Third USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/fast04/tech/corbett/corbett.pdf Mirrored RAID-4 and RAID-5 protect against higher order failures [4]. However, the efficiency of the array as measured by its data capacity divided by its total disk space is reduced. [4] Qin Xin, E. Miller, T. Schwarz, D. Long, S. Brandt, W. Litwin, ”Reliability mechanisms for very large storage systems”, 20th IEEE/11th NASA Boddard Conference on Mass Storage Systems and Technologies, San Diego, CA, pgs. 146-156, Apr. 2003. Rob 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] How to delete hundreds of emtpy snapshots
Also http://blogs.sun.com/chrisg/entry/a_faster_zfs_snapshot_massacre which I run every night. Lots of snapshots are not a bad thing it is keeping them for a long time that takes space. I'm still snapping every 10 minutes and it is great. The thing I discovered was that I really wanted to be able to find distinct verstons fo a file so that I could see which one was the version I wanted to get back. To that end I wrote http://blogs.sun.com/chrisg/entry/zfs_versions_of_a_file and filed this RFE to help with this: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6719101 This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] copying a ZFS
Is there an optimal method of making a complete copy of a ZFS, aside from the conventional methods (tar, cpio)? We have an existing ZFS that was not created with the optimal recordsize. We wish to create a new ZFS with the optimal recordsize (8k), and copy all the data from the existing ZFS to the new ZFS. Obviously, we know how to do this using conventional utilities and commands. Is there a ZFS-specific method for doing that beats the heck of out tar, etc? (RTFM indicates there is not; I R'd the FM :^). This may or may not be a copy to the same zpool, and I'd also be interested in knowing of that makes a difference (I do not think it does)? Thanks, /jim 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] copying a ZFS
2008/7/20 James Mauro [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Is there an optimal method of making a complete copy of a ZFS, aside from the conventional methods (tar, cpio)? We have an existing ZFS that was not created with the optimal recordsize. We wish to create a new ZFS with the optimal recordsize (8k), and copy all the data from the existing ZFS to the new ZFS. Obviously, we know how to do this using conventional utilities and commands. Is there a ZFS-specific method for doing that beats the heck of out tar, etc? (RTFM indicates there is not; I R'd the FM :^). Use zfs send | zfs receive if you wish to keep your snapshots or if you will be doing the copy several times. You can send just the changes between two snapshots. (zfs send is in the FM :-) This may or may not be a copy to the same zpool, and I'd also be interested in knowing of that makes a difference (I do not think it does)? It does not. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] install opensolaris on raidz
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Miles Nordin wrote: r == Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: r the benefit of mirroring that CF drive would be minimal. rather short-sighted. What if you want to replace the CF with a bigger or faster one without shutting down? Assuming that you are using zfs root, you just snapshot the filesystem and send it to some other system where you build the replacement CF card. Of course the bit of data which changes before the CF card is replaced will be lost unless you take special care. A shutdown is required in order to replace the card. Presuming that the card is easily reached, a tech should be able to swap it out in a few minutes. Regardless, I can't imagine any reason why you would want to install a larger or faster card. Ideally the card should be just big enough to serve the purpose since larger cards will be less reliable. The boot/root filesystems should be fairly static. The only time you should notice card performance is when the system is booting. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ? SX:CE snv_91 - ZFS - raid and mirror - drive
Rob Clark wrote: -Peter Tribble wrote: On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Rob Clark wrote: I have eight 10GB drives. ... I have 6 remaining 10 GB drives and I desire to raid 3 of them and mirror them to the other 3 to give me raid security and integrity with mirrored drive performance. I then want to move my /export directory to the new drive. ... You can't do that. You can't layer raidz and mirroring. You'll either have to use raidz for the lot, or just use mirroring: zpool create temparray mirror c1t2d0 c1t4d0 mirror c1t5d0 c1t3d0 mirror c1t6d0 c1t8d0 -Peter Tribble Solaris may not allow me to do that but the concept is not unheard of: Solaris will allow you to do this, but you'll need to use SVM instead of ZFS. Or, I suppose, you could use SVM for RAID-5 and ZFS to mirror those. -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] copying a ZFS
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Mattias Pantzare wrote: Is there a ZFS-specific method for doing that beats the heck of out tar, etc? (RTFM indicates there is not; I R'd the FM :^). Use zfs send | zfs receive if you wish to keep your snapshots or if you will be doing the copy several times. You can send just the changes between two snapshots. The problem is that 'zfs send' likely preserves the existing block size even if the target pool uses a different block size since it operates at a low level which intends to preserve the original zfs blocks. I would use 'find . -depth -print | cpio -pdum destdir' to do the copy. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] copying a ZFS
So I'm really exposing my ignorance here, but... You wrote /... if you wish to keep your snapshots.../... I never mentioned snapshots, thus you introduced the use of a ZFS snapshot as a method of doing what I wish to do. And yes, snapshots and send are in the manual, and I read about them. I intially (and perhaps incorrectly) rejected the use of snapshots for my purposes since a snapshot is, by definition, a read-only copy of the file system. What I need to do is copy the file system in it's entirety, so I can mount the new file system read/write for online, production use. Perhaps I should have been clearer about that. I will investigate using ZFS snapshots with ZFS send as a method for accomplishing my task. I'm not convinced it's the best way to acheive my goal, but if it's not, I'd like to make sure I understand why not. Thanks for your interest. /jim Mattias Pantzare wrote: 2008/7/20 James Mauro [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Is there an optimal method of making a complete copy of a ZFS, aside from the conventional methods (tar, cpio)? We have an existing ZFS that was not created with the optimal recordsize. We wish to create a new ZFS with the optimal recordsize (8k), and copy all the data from the existing ZFS to the new ZFS. Obviously, we know how to do this using conventional utilities and commands. Is there a ZFS-specific method for doing that beats the heck of out tar, etc? (RTFM indicates there is not; I R'd the FM :^). Use zfs send | zfs receive if you wish to keep your snapshots or if you will be doing the copy several times. You can send just the changes between two snapshots. (zfs send is in the FM :-) This may or may not be a copy to the same zpool, and I'd also be interested in knowing of that makes a difference (I do not think it does)? It does not. ___ 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] checksum errors on root pool after upgrade to snv_94
On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 10:28 -0700, Jürgen Keil wrote: I ran a scrub on a root pool after upgrading to snv_94, and got checksum errors: Hmm, after reading this, I started a zpool scrub on my mirrored pool, on a system that is running post snv_94 bits: It also found checksum errors # zpool status files pool: files state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices has experienced an unrecoverable error. An attempt was made to correct the error. Applications are unaffected. action: Determine if the device needs to be replaced, and clear the errors using 'zpool clear' or replace the device with 'zpool replace'. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-9P scrub: scrub completed after 0h46m with 9 errors on Fri Jul 18 13:33:56 2008 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM files DEGRADED 0 018 mirror DEGRADED 0 018 c8t0d0s6 DEGRADED 0 036 too many errors c9t0d0s6 DEGRADED 0 036 too many errors errors: No known data errors out of curiosity, is this a root pool? A second system of mine with a mirrored root pool (and an additional large multi-raidz pool) shows the same symptoms on the mirrored root pool only. once is accident. twice is coincidence. three times is enemy action :-) I'll file a bug as soon as I can (I'm travelling at the moment with spotty connectivity), citing my and your reports. - Bill ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] checksum errors on root pool after upgrade to snv_94
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 11:26:16 -0700 Bill Sommerfeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: once is accident. twice is coincidence. three times is enemy action :-) I have no access to b94 yet, but as it is, it probably is better to skip this one when it comes out then. -- Dick Hoogendijk -- PGP/GnuPG key: 01D2433D ++ http://nagual.nl/ + SunOS sxce snv91 ++ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Formatting Problem of ZFS Adm Guide (pdf)
ZFS Administration Guide (in PDF format) does not look very professional (at least on Evince/OS2008.05). Please see attached screenshot. Looks like this is a display problem. It seems that certain fonts (monospace fonts) were not displayed by the version of Evince included in OS 2008.05. Please ignore this thread. I am re-posting it in the Indiana forum. 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] copying a ZFS
Jim Mauro wrote: So I'm really exposing my ignorance here, but... You wrote /... if you wish to keep your snapshots.../... I never mentioned snapshots, thus you introduced the use of a ZFS snapshot as a method of doing what I wish to do. And yes, snapshots and send are in the manual, and I read about them. I intially (and perhaps incorrectly) rejected the use of snapshots for my purposes since a snapshot is, by definition, a read-only copy of the file system. What I need to do is copy the file system in it's entirety, so I can mount the new file system read/write for online, production use. Perhaps I should have been clearer about that. I will investigate using ZFS snapshots with ZFS send as a method for accomplishing my task. I'm not convinced it's the best way to acheive my goal, but if it's not, I'd like to make sure I understand why not. Hi Jim, I agree with Mattias - snapshots are the way to achieve this. The bit you might, perhaps, have missed is the _clone_ requirement so you can have read and write access: # zfs snapshot sink/[EMAIL PROTECTED] # zfs clone sink/[EMAIL PROTECTED] sink/newcopyofdata Or if you do want to use zfs send/recv # zfs snapshot sink/[EMAIL PROTECTED] # zfs send -R sink/[EMAIL PROTECTED] | zfs recv -d newzpool/dataset Mattias Pantzare wrote: 2008/7/20 James Mauro [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Is there an optimal method of making a complete copy of a ZFS, aside from the conventional methods (tar, cpio)? We have an existing ZFS that was not created with the optimal recordsize. We wish to create a new ZFS with the optimal recordsize (8k), and copy all the data from the existing ZFS to the new ZFS. Obviously, we know how to do this using conventional utilities and commands. Is there a ZFS-specific method for doing that beats the heck of out tar, etc? (RTFM indicates there is not; I R'd the FM :^). Use zfs send | zfs receive if you wish to keep your snapshots or if you will be doing the copy several times. You can send just the changes between two snapshots. (zfs send is in the FM :-) This may or may not be a copy to the same zpool, and I'd also be interested in knowing of that makes a difference (I do not think it does)? It does not. 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
Re: [zfs-discuss] [RFC] Improved versioned pointer algorithms
On Monday 14 July 2008 08:29, Akhilesh Mritunjai wrote: Writable snapshots are called clones in zfs. So infact, you have trees of snapshots and clones. Snapshots are read-only, and you can create any number of writable clones from a snapshot, that behave like a normal filesystem and you can again take snapshots of the clones. So if I snapshot a filesystem, then clone it, then delete a file from both the clone and the original filesystem, the presence of the snapshot will prevent the file blocks from being recovered, and there is no way I can get rid of those blocks short of deleting both the clone and the snapshot. Did I get that right? Right. Snapshots are immutable. Isn't this the whole point of a snapshot ? FS1(file1) - Snapshot1 (file1) delete FS1-file1 : Snapshot1-File1 is still intact Snapshot1(file1) - CloneFs1(file1) delete CloneFS1-file1 : Snapshot1-File1 is still intact (snapshot is immutable) There is lot of information in zfs docs on zfs community. For low level info, you may refer to ZFS on disc format document. Regards - Akhilesh 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] Formatting Problem of ZFS Adm Guide (pdf)
Evince likes to fuzz a number of PDFs. I too can't seem to nail the problems, but it seems that a number of PDFs from SUN have this problem (very wrong character spacing), and they all have been generated using FrameMaker. PDFs generated using TeX/LaTeX are *usually* ok. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
