[zfs-discuss] Pogo Linux ships NexentaStor pre-installed boxes
Hi folks, wanted to share some exciting news with you. Pogo Linux shipping NexentaStor pre-installed boxes, like this one 16TB - 24TB: http://www.pogolinux.com/quotes/editsys?sys_id=3989 And here is announce: http://www.nexenta.com/corp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=129&Itemid=56 Pogo says: "Managed Storage – NetApp features without the price"... Go OpenSolaris, Go! ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Disabling disks' write-cache in J4200 with ZFS?
Todd E. Moore wrote: > > I want to disable write cache on the disk drives in our J4200 JBODs so > that fsync() actually writes to disk, not just to the cache on the drive. > ZFS will do this for you, via the way the ZIL works. Neil explains it pretty well at http://blogs.sun.com/perrin/entry/the_lumberjack > I did this using 'format -e', but it displays a warning about the > drive being part of a zpool and also it says that the change is not > permanent. > > Is 'format -e' the right way to do this with ZFS? Is there no way to > make it permanent? In general, you don't need to do this. ZFS will send the cache flush command to the disks as needed. -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Booting from a USB HD
> W. Wayne Liauh wrote: > > I installed OS 2008.05 onto a USB HD (WD Passport), > and was able to boot from it (knock on wood!). > > > > However, when plugged into a different machine, I > then am unable to boot from it. > > > > Is there any permission issue that I must address > on this ZFS HD before I can boot from it? > > > Could you provide a bit more information as to where > it fails ? Does the > new system discover it ? Do you see the grub menu ? > > -Sanjay > Thanks a whole bunch for responding to my question. After trying it on another desktop machine (and failed), I was led to suspect that the problem may be caused by the system (computer) not delivering enough juice (electrical current) to the USB HD. This is one of the first generation portable USB HDs and it may need more current to operate than the later models. So, before going thru the whole process of re-installing OS 08.05 on a newer version of the WD Passport, I decided to give this old portable disc another try. After canceled my dinner appointment, I plugged this OS 08.05 installed USB HB into an IBM ThinkPad R61i. This time it worked beautifully. (The squeaking noise never sounded so pleasant. :-) ) I always believe that using a customized USB HD will be one of the best ways to effectively (and more convincingly) propagate OpenSolaris. More investigations are necessary, but, in short, the problem I experienced definitely has nothing to do with ZFS permission issues. Thanks again for the response. 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] Booting from a USB HD
W. Wayne Liauh wrote: > I installed OS 2008.05 onto a USB HD (WD Passport), and was able to boot from > it (knock on wood!). > > However, when plugged into a different machine, I then am unable to boot from > it. > > Is there any permission issue that I must address on this ZFS HD before I can > boot from it? > Could you provide a bit more information as to where it fails ? Does the new system discover it ? Do you see the grub menu ? -Sanjay > > > 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
[zfs-discuss] Booting from a USB HD
I installed OS 2008.05 onto a USB HD (WD Passport), and was able to boot from it (knock on wood!). However, when plugged into a different machine, I then am unable to boot from it. Is there any permission issue that I must address on this ZFS HD before I can boot from it? This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] How to get a file's crtime attribute from a znode?
I'm used to using fstat() and other calls to get atime, ctime, and mtime values, but I understand that the znode also stores a files creation time in crtime attribute. Which system call can I use to retrieve this information? -- Todd E. Moore Sun Microsystems Incorporated 443.516.4002 AIM: toddmoore72462 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Can I trust ZFS?
I have done a bit of testing, and so far so good really. I have a Dell 1800 with a Perc4e and a 14 drive Dell Powervault 220S. I have a RaidZ2 volume named 'tank' that spans 6 drives. I have made 1 drive available as a spare to ZFS. Normal array: # zpool status pool: tank state: ONLINE scrub: scrub completed with 0 errors on Fri Aug 1 19:37:33 2008 config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM tankONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c0t13d0 AVAIL errors: No known data errors One drive removed: # zpool status pool: tank state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices could not be opened. Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state. action: Attach the missing device and online it using 'zpool online'. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-D3 scrub: resilver completed with 0 errors on Fri Aug 1 20:30:39 2008 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM tank DEGRADED 0 0 0 raidz2 DEGRADED 0 0 0 c0t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spare DEGRADED 0 0 0 c0t3d0 UNAVAIL 0 0 0 cannot open c0t13d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c0t13d0 INUSE currently in use errors: No known data errors Now lets remove the hot spare ;) # zpool status pool: tank state: DEGRADED status: One or more devices could not be opened. Sufficient replicas exist for the pool to continue functioning in a degraded state. action: Attach the missing device and online it using 'zpool online'. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-D3 scrub: resilver completed with 0 errors on Fri Aug 1 20:30:39 2008 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM tank DEGRADED 0 0 0 raidz2 DEGRADED 0 0 0 c0t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spare UNAVAIL 0 656 0 insufficient replicas c0t3d0 UNAVAIL 0 0 0 cannot open c0t13d0 UNAVAIL 0 0 0 cannot open c0t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c0t13d0 INUSE currently in use errors: No known data errors Now, this Perc4e doesn't support JBOD, so each drive is a standalone Raid0 (how annoying). With that, I cannot plug the drives back in with the system running, controller will keep them offline until I enter the bios. But in my scenario, this does demonstrate ZFS tolerates hot removal of drives, without issuing a graceful removal of the device. I was copying MP3s to the volume the whole time, and the copy continued uninterrupted, without error. I verified all data was written as well. All data should be online when I reboot and put the pool back in normal state. I am very happy with the test. I don't know many hardware controllers that'll loose 3 drives out of an array of 6 (with spare), and still function normally (even if the controller supports Raid6, I've seen major issues where writes were not committed). I'll add my results to your forum thread as well. Regards Brent Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Ross Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey Brent, > > On the Sun hardware like the Thumper you do get a nice bright blue "ready > to remove" led as soon as you issue the "cfgadm -c unconfigure xxx" > command. On other hardware it takes a little more care, I'm labelling our > drive bays up *very* carefully to ensure we always remove the right drive. > Stickers are your friend, mine will probably be labelled "sata1/0", > "sata1/1", "sata1/2", etc. > > I know Sun are working to improve the LED support, but I don't know whether > that support will ever be extended to 3rd party hardware: > http://blogs.sun.com/eschrock/entry/external_storage_enclosures_in_solaris > > I'd love to use Sun hardware for this, but while things like x2200 servers > are great value for money, Sun don't have anything even remotely competative > to a standard 3U server with 16 SATA bays. The x4240 is probably closest, > but is at least double the price. Even the J4200 arrays are more expensive > than this entire server. > > Ros
[zfs-discuss] Disabling disks' write-cache in J4200 with ZFS?
I want to disable write cache on the disk drives in our J4200 JBODs so that fsync() actually writes to disk, not just to the cache on the drive. I did this using 'format -e', but it displays a warning about the drive being part of a zpool and also it says that the change is not permanent. Is 'format -e' the right way to do this with ZFS? Is there no way to make it permanent? -- Todd E. Moore Sun Microsystems Incorporated 443.516.4002 AIM: toddmoore72462 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] 'legacy' mount after installing B95
Lori Alt wrote: > Basically, it means that we don't want it mounted at all > because it's a placeholder dataset. It's just a container for > all the boot environments on the system. > Though, now that I think about it, we should have > made it "none". Ok, thanks for the explanation :-) -- Alan Burlison -- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] 'legacy' mount after installing B95
Alan Burlison wrote: > NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT > pool/ROOT 5.58G 53.4G18K legacy > > What's the legacy mount for? Is it related to zones? > > > Basically, it means that we don't want it mounted at all because it's a placeholder dataset. It's just a container for all the boot environments on the system. Though, now that I think about it, we should have made it "none". Lori ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] 'legacy' mount after installing B95
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT pool/ROOT 5.58G 53.4G18K legacy What's the legacy mount for? Is it related to zones? thanks, -- Alan Burlison -- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Announcing the OpenSolaris Storage Summit
The date for the OpenSolaris Storage Summit has been set. We will be hosting the event at the Santa Clara Hyatt Regency hotel on the 21st of September, 2008. This is right before this year's Storage Developer Conference at which Sun is a Platinum sponsor. We already have a couple of keynote speakers lined up: Ben Rockwood and Mike Shapiro. It will take place all day Sunday, so if you are coming to SDC this year, come a day early and participate. We will have the first ever OpenSolaris Storage Community meeting (face to face). A great way to meet some folks that you may only know by their email addresses. Everybody has an opportunity to give a Lightning talk and/or put a poster together about what they are working on or doing with OpenSolaris storage. Registration is via a wiki page here: http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_Developer_Summit_08. Just add your name and contact information into the Attendance List table and you are registered! Attendance is free and we hope many folks from the community will attend this year. Also, you should add yourself to the summit list, even if you are not sure you will be able to go, so you can keep up to date with the planned activities. We may create ways to participate even if you can't make it to Santa Clara this year (if we get people asking for access). Once registered, scroll down to the bottom of the wiki and suggest some topics or volunteer to participate as a poster or lightning talk. Fill in some details about yourself (or someone else) at the bottom of the page. Check it out, get involved, and I hope to see you there! It will be a blast. More details later... -- mark ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Diagnosing problems after botched upgrade - grub busted
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Johan Hartzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > [snip] > I could now just re-install and recover my data (I keep my data far away > from OS disks/pools), or I can try to fix grub. I hope to learn from this > process so my questions are: > > 1. What is up with grub here? I don't get a menu, but it does remember the > old menu entry name for the default entry. This happens even when I try to > boot without the External drive plugged in. > > 2. How can I edit the grub commands? What does "Error 15: File not found" > mean? Is it looking for the grub menu? Or a program to boot? > > 3. Removing the internal disk from the machine may help... I am not sure to > what extent grub uses the BIOS boot disk priority... Maybe that will get the > external disk bootable again? > > 4. Should I try to get the grub menu back (from where I can try options to > edit the boot entries), or should I try to get the grub> prompt back? Or > should I try to get one of the pools to import? Where do I go from here? > > Note: I have been careful not to touch or break anything on the external > disk. However I never tried to reboot since partitioning the new disk with > an ACTIVE partition, the way it is at present. I think this could also > affect grub's perception of what disks are what. > > Thank you, > _Johan > I physically removed the internal disk. I am now able to boot again, at least temporarily. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] 200805 Grub problems
Hello kugutsumen, Did you have any luck in resolving your problems? On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Kugutsumen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > I've just installed 2008.05 on a 500 gig disk... Install went fine... > > I attached an identically partitioned and labeled disk as soon as the > rpool was created during the installation.: > > zpool attach rpool c5t0d0s0 c6t0d0s0 > > Resilver completed right away... and everything seemed to work fine. > > Boot on 1st disk and 2nd disk both worked fine... > > I created a zfs filesystem, enabled samba sharing which worked fine: > > pkg install SUNWsmbs > pkg install SUNWsmbskr > svcadm enable -r smb/server > > echo >>/etc/pam.conf other password required pam_smb_passwd.so.1 nowarn > > zfs create -o casesensitivity=mixed -o nbmand=on -o sharesmb=on rpool/p > zfs set sharesmb=name=p rpool/p > > I copied a bunch of stuff to /rpool/p > > rebooted and problem started: > > Grub drops me to the command prompt without menu... > > Trying bootfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris > kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS > > failed with an inconsistent file system structure... > > Rebooted into install environment and did a 'zpool import -R /mnt -f rpool' > ... rpool seems > to be okay and rebooted. > > Grub drops me again to the command prompt without menu... > > Trying bootfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris > kernel$ /platform/i86pc/kernel/$ISADIR/unix -B $ZFS-BOOTFS > > fails with Error 17: Cannot mount selected partition > > Rebooted with the install CD in text mode... and tried > >zpool import -R /mnt -f rpool >mkdir /mnt2 >mount -F zfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris /mnt2 >bootadm update-archive -R /mnt2 >zpool set bootfs=rpool/ROOT/opensolaris rpool > >installgrub /mnt/boot/grub/stage1 /mnt/boot/grub/stage2 > /dev/rdsk/c5t0d0s0 >installgrub /mnt/boot/grub/stage1 /mnt/boot/grub/stage2 > /dev/rdsk/c6t0d0s0 > > What am I doing wrong? > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Arthur C. Clarke Afrikaanse Stap Website: http://www.bloukous.co.za My blog: http://initialprogramload.blogspot.com ICQ = 193944626, YahooIM = johan_hartzenberg, GoogleTalk = [EMAIL PROTECTED], AIM = JohanHartzenberg ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Diagnosing problems after botched upgrade - grub busted
I tried to be clever and botched my upgrade. Now I don't get a grub menu, only an error like this: = Booting 'BE3 Solaris xVM' findroot (BE_BE3,1,a) Error 15: File not found Press any key to continue = I do not see a grub menu prior to this error, only the Stage1 Stage2 message which goes past very fast. Prior to this error I booted from a CD to single-user mode and ran installgrub stage1 stage2 /dev/rdsk/Xs0 I did this because at that point grub just gave me a grub prompt and I don't know grub well enough to boot from there. I rather suspect that if I manage to boot the system there will be a way to fix it permanently. But now rather let me give the sequence of events that led up to this in the order they happened. 1. I took the disk out of the laptop, and made it bootable in an external enclosure. This was a couple of days ago - I posted about the fun I had with that previously, but essentially booting to safemode and importing the rpool caused the on-disk device-path to be updated, making the disk once more bootable. 2. I partitioned the new disk, creating a solaris2 partition and on that a single hog-slice layout. s0 is the whole partition, minus slice 8 and 9. 3. I create a new future root pool, like this zpool create RPOOL -f c0d0s0 Note: -f required because s2 overlaps. 4. Ran lucreate, like this lucreate -p RPOOL -n BE4 This finished fine. I used upper-case RPOOL to distinguish it from the BE3 rpool. 5. mounted new Nevada build ISO on /mnt and ran upgraded the live-upgrade packages. 6. luupgrade -s /mnt -n BE4 7. lumount BE4 and peeked around in there a little. After this I rebooted, and got no grub menu, just a grub> prompt. I then booted from the CD and ran installgrub. Not being able to get to man pages, I have tried it two times with different options, with reboots in between, like this: > installgrub zfs_stage1_5 stage2 /dev/rds/s0 > installgrub -m stage1 stage2 /dev/rdsk/xxs2 This at least got me the error above (Am I now worse off or better off than I were when I had the grub> prmpt?). I then booted from the CD again and tried /boot/solaris/bin/update_grub as I found that in these forums, but it does not seem to have made any difference. I don't know if the command takes any options, I just ran it and it finished very quickly and without errors. Note: Due to past editing of the menu.lst file, the default item points to the BE3 xVM entry. I just tap the up-arrow and enter to load the "non-xVM" entry. Note: I never ran luactivate during the above procedure. Note: When booting to single-user shell from the install CD, it tells me that it finds both rpool (BE3) and RPOOL (BE4), allowing me to select one to mount on /a, however they do not mount, I get an error but I forgot to write that down. I get the same error for both. I could now just re-install and recover my data (I keep my data far away from OS disks/pools), or I can try to fix grub. I hope to learn from this process so my questions are: 1. What is up with grub here? I don't get a menu, but it does remember the old menu entry name for the default entry. This happens even when I try to boot without the External drive plugged in. 2. How can I edit the grub commands? What does "Error 15: File not found" mean? Is it looking for the grub menu? Or a program to boot? 3. Removing the internal disk from the machine may help... I am not sure to what extent grub uses the BIOS boot disk priority... Maybe that will get the external disk bootable again? 4. Should I try to get the grub menu back (from where I can try options to edit the boot entries), or should I try to get the grub> prompt back? Or should I try to get one of the pools to import? Where do I go from here? Note: I have been careful not to touch or break anything on the external disk. However I never tried to reboot since partitioning the new disk with an ACTIVE partition, the way it is at present. I think this could also affect grub's perception of what disks are what. Thank you, _Johan ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ZFS with Samba and the "previous versions"-tab under Windows explorer
Hello, I'm testing Ed Plese's Samba patches. As far as I understood his comments on http://www.edplese.com/samba-with-zfs.html I should see a "previous version" tab in the Windows explorer (explained on: http://www.petri.co.il/how_to_use_the_shadow_copy_client.htm) on my Samba/ZFS-share. But actually I don't have a previous version tab :( Samba is working, I can connect from my Windows to my samba share and even browse in the .zfs/snapshot directory. Here's my smb.conf: cat /usr/local/samba/lib/smb.conf [global] workgroup = sambatest security = user [sambatest] comment = samba_with_shadowcopies testing area path = /export/sambatest read only = no vfs objects = shadow_copy shadow_copy: sort = desc shadow_copy: path = /export/sambatest/renny/.zfs/snapshot shadow_copy: format = $Y.$m.$d-$H.$M.$S shadow_copy: sort = desc Here's how the /export/sambatest/renny/.zfs/snaphot directtory looks like: ls -lhart /export/sambatest/renny/.zfs/snapshot total 18 drwxr-xr-x 2 root sys2 Jun 30 12:07 GMT-2008.06.30-10.08.56 dr-xr-xr-x 3 root root 3 Jun 30 12:07 .. dr-xr-xr-x 8 root root 8 Jun 30 12:07 . drwxr-xr-x 2 rennystaff 3 Jun 30 12:31 GMT-2008.06.30-10.32.26 drwxr-xr-x 3 rennystaff 5 Jun 30 14:36 GMT-2008.06.30-12.40.03 drwxr-xr-x 3 rennystaff 5 Jun 30 14:36 GMT-2008.06.30-12.39.01 drwxr-xr-x 3 rennystaff 6 Jul 2 10:58 GMT-2008.07.13-18.21.24 drwxr-xr-x 3 rennystaff 6 Jul 2 10:58 GMT-2008.07.13-18.19.00 So, I have a sambauser named renny and I can connect from Windows to the share, can brows in the snapshot directory, but I don't have a "previous version" tab in my Window explorer. I've tried it with Windows XP Home and Pro and even with the ShadowCopyClient from Microsoft (you can get it from here: http://download.microsoft.com/download/4/9/d/49d18272-7622-42f7-85a5-7b01609e8d64/ShadowCopyClient.msi). So it works "basically" but with the tab it would be perfect ;) Does anyone have an idea how I get this tab if possibly anyway... Greetings, René 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] Terrible zfs performance under NFS load
> "cs" == Chris Siebenmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: cs> (Some versions of syslog let you turn this off for specific cs> log files, which is very useful for high volume, low cs> importance ones.) To ensure that kernel messages are written to disk promptly, syslogd(8) calls fsync(2) after writing messages from the kernel. Other messages are not synced explcitly. You may disable syncing of files specified to receive kernel messages by prefixing the pathname with a minus sign `-'. That's from BSD, which fsync's kernel messages only, not messages from libc. try adding a '-' to the start of your log filename. It probably won't work with your syslog variant, though. If your syslog is calling fsync on all messages not just kernel messages, then moving to the syslog protocol between client and ZFS server instead of NFS might not help. If you test more, let us know what happens. pgprnyhndg2fR.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ButterFS
Once upon a time I ran a lab with a whole bunch of SGI workstations. A company that barely exists now. This ButterFS may be the Next Big Thing. But I recall one time how hot everyone was for Reiser. Look how that turned out. 3 years is an entire production lifecycle for the systems in this datacenter. So in 3 years I may re-evaluate ZFS. Until then this is just an interesting newsbit. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] What's the best way to get pool vdev structure information?
For various sorts of manageability reasons[*], I need to be able to extract information about the vdev and device structure of our ZFS pools (partly because we're using iSCSI and MPXIO, which create basically opaque device names). Unfortunately Solaris 10 U5 doesn't seem to currently provide any script/machine readable output form for this information, so I need to build something to do it myself. I can think of three different ways to do this: * parse the output of 'zpool status' * write a C program that directly uses libzfs to dump the information in a more script-readable format * use Will Murnane's recently announced 'pyzfs' module to dump the information (conveniently I am already writing some of the management programs in Python) Each approach has its own set of drawbacks, so I'm curious if people have opinions on which one will probably be the best/most stable over time/etc. And if anyone already has code (or experience of subtle things to watch out for), I would love to hear from you. Thanks in advance. - cks [*: for example, we need to be able to generate a single list of all of the iSCSI target+LUNs that are in use on all of the fileservers, and how the usage is distributed among fileservers and ZFS pools. ] ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ButterFS
dick hoogendijk wrote: > I read this just now in the Unix Guardian: > > > BTRFS, pronounced ButterFS: > BTRFS was launched in June 2007, and is a POSIX-compliant file system > that will support very large files and volumes (16 exabytes) and a > ridiculous number of files (two to the power of 64 files, to be > precise). The file system has object-level mirroring and striping, > checksums on data and metadata, online file system check, incremental > backup and file system mirroring, subvolumes with their own file system > roots, writable snapshots, and index and file packing to conserve > space, among many other features. BTRFS is not anywhere near primetime, > and Garbee figures it will take at least three years to get it out the > door. > > > I thought that ZFS was/is the way to the future, but reading this it > seems there are compatitors out there ;-) > Not yet :-) Wait three years, if they are on time For today, this hour, you can actually use ZFS. Also, no problem, choice is good. It keep up the motivation for ongoing innovation. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Terrible zfs performance under NFS load
| Syslog is funny in that it does a lot of open/write/close cycles so | that rotate can work trivially. I don't know of any version of syslog that does this (certainly Solaris 10 U5 syslog does not). The traditional syslog(d) performance issue is that it fsync()'s after writing each log message, in an attempt to maximize the chances that the log message will make it to disk and survive a system crash, power outage, etc. (Some versions of syslog let you turn this off for specific log files, which is very useful for high volume, low importance ones.) I've heard that at one point, NFS + ZFS was known to have performance issues with fsync()-heavy workloads. I don't know if that's still true today (in either Solaris 10U5 or current OpenSolaris builds), or if all of the issues have been fixed. - cks ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] The best motherboard for a home ZFS fileserver
Florin Iucha wrote: > On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 06:37:29AM -0700, Steve wrote: > >> So, better AMD with ECC but not optimal power mgt (and seems cheaper), or >> Intel with NO-ECC but power mgt? >> > > How about we complain enough to shame somebody into adding power > management to the K8 chips? We can start by reminding SUN on how much > it was trumpeting the early Opterons as 'green computing'. > FWIW, the power management discussions on this are held over in the laptop-discuss forum. You can search for the threads there and see the current status. http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=66 -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 hang when drive removed
Hi Andy, answer & pointer below... Andrew Hisgen wrote: > Question embedded below... > > Richard Elling wrote: > ... >> If you surf to http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-HC you'll >> see words to the effect that, >> The pool has experienced I/O failures. Since the ZFS pool property >> 'failmode' is set to 'wait', all I/Os (reads and writes) are >> blocked. See the zpool(1M) manpage for more information on the >> 'failmode' property. Manual intervention is required for I/Os to >> be serviced. >> >>> >>> I would guess that ZFS is attempting to write to the disk in the >>> background, and that this is silently failing. >> >> It is clearly not silently failing. >> >> However, the default failmode property is set to "wait" which will >> patiently >> wait forever. If you would rather have the I/O fail, then you should >> change >> the failmode to "continue" I would not normally recommend a failmode of >> "panic" > > Hi Richard, > > Does failmode==wait cause ZFS itself to retry i/o, that is, to retry an > i/o where an earlier request (of that same i/o) returned from the driver > with an error? If so, that will compound timeouts even further. > > I'm also confused by your statement that wait means wait forever, given > that the actual circumstances here are that zfs (and the rest of the > i/o stack) returned after 9 minutes. The details are in PSARC/2007/567. Externally available at: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2007/567/ With failmode=wait, I/Os will wait until "manual intervention" which is shown as an administrator running zpool clear on the affected pool. I see the need for a document to help people work through these cases as they can be complex at many different levels. -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500
Sorry Ian, I was posting on the forum and missed the word "disks" from my previous post. I'm still not used to Sun's mutant cross of a message board / mailing list. Ross > Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 21:08:08 +1200> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL > PROTECTED]> CC: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] > Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500> > Ross wrote:> > Wipe the snv_70b disks I > meant.> > > > > What disks? This message makes no sense without context.> > > Context free messages are a pain in the arse for those of us who use the> > mail list.> > Ian _ Make a mini you on Windows Live Messenger! http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/107571437/direct/01/___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500
Ross wrote: > Wipe the snv_70b disks I meant. > > What disks? This message makes no sense without context. Context free messages are a pain in the arse for those of us who use the mail list. Ian ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ButterFS
dick hoogendijk wrote: > I read this just now in the Unix Guardian: > > > BTRFS, pronounced ButterFS: > BTRFS was launched in June 2007, and is a POSIX-compliant file system > that will support very large files and volumes (16 exabytes) and a > ridiculous number of files (two to the power of 64 files, to be > precise). The file system has object-level mirroring and striping, > checksums on data and metadata, online file system check, incremental > backup and file system mirroring, subvolumes with their own file system > roots, writable snapshots, and index and file packing to conserve > space, among many other features. BTRFS is not anywhere near primetime, > and Garbee figures it will take at least three years to get it out the > door. > > > I thought that ZFS was/is the way to the future, but reading this it > seems there are compatitors out there ;-) I don't see any contradiction here - even if ZFS is the way to go, there's no objecting to other people trying their own path, right? ;-) Michael -- Michael Schusterhttp://blogs.sun.com/recursion Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion' ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] The best motherboard for a home ZFS fileserver
On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 06:37:29AM -0700, Steve wrote: > So, better AMD with ECC but not optimal power mgt (and seems cheaper), or > Intel with NO-ECC but power mgt? How about we complain enough to shame somebody into adding power management to the K8 chips? We can start by reminding SUN on how much it was trumpeting the early Opterons as 'green computing'. Cheers, florin -- Bruce Schneier expects the Spanish Inquisition. http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/163 pgpYb5mVH6r01.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] The best motherboard for a home ZFS fileserver
I didn't throughly search, but it seems that newegg doesn't have any micro atx mb with the chipset specified on wikipedia that is supporting ECC!... (query: Form Factor[Micro ATX ],North Bridge[Intel 925X ],North Bridge[Intel 975X ],North Bridge[Intel X38 ],North Bridge[Intel X48 ]) So, better AMD with ECC but not optimal power mgt (and seems cheaper), or Intel with NO-ECC but power mgt? 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] Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 hang when drive removed
Question embedded below... Richard Elling wrote: ... > If you surf to http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-HC you'll > see words to the effect that, > The pool has experienced I/O failures. Since the ZFS pool property > 'failmode' is set to 'wait', all I/Os (reads and writes) are > blocked. See the zpool(1M) manpage for more information on the > 'failmode' property. Manual intervention is required for I/Os to > be serviced. > >> >> I would guess that ZFS is attempting to write to the disk in the >> background, and that this is silently failing. > > It is clearly not silently failing. > > However, the default failmode property is set to "wait" which will patiently > wait forever. If you would rather have the I/O fail, then you should change > the failmode to "continue" I would not normally recommend a failmode of > "panic" Hi Richard, Does failmode==wait cause ZFS itself to retry i/o, that is, to retry an i/o where an earlier request (of that same i/o) returned from the driver with an error? If so, that will compound timeouts even further. I'm also confused by your statement that wait means wait forever, given that the actual circumstances here are that zfs (and the rest of the i/o stack) returned after 9 minutes. thanks, Andy ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500
Ross wrote: > Not if you don't upgrade the pool it won't. ZFS can import and work with an > old version of the filesystem fine. The manual page for zpool upgrade says: > "Older versions can continue to be used" > > Just import it on Solaris 5/08 without doing the upgrade. Your ZFS pool will > be available and can be served out from the new version. If you do find any > problems (which I wouldn't expect to be honest), you can plug your old > snv_70b boot disk in if necessary. Now/old server is ZFS version 2 zfs. The new boot HDDs/OS, are only ZFS version 1. I do not think zfs version 1 will read version 2. I see no script talking about converting a version 2 to a version 1. -- Jorgen Lundman | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unix Administrator | +81 (0)3 -5456-2687 ext 1017 (work) Shibuya-ku, Tokyo| +81 (0)90-5578-8500 (cell) Japan| +81 (0)3 -3375-1767 (home) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Can I trust ZFS?
Hello Ross, I know personally many environments using ZFS in a production for quite some time. Quite often in business critical environments. Some of them are small, some of them are rather large (hundreds of TBs), some of them are clustered. Different usages like file servers, MySQL on ZFS, Oracle on ZFS, mail on ZFS, virtualization on ZFS, ... So far I haven't seen loosing any data - I hit some issues from time to time but nothing which can't be work-arounded. That being said ZFS is still relatively young technology so if your top priority regardless of anything else is stability and confidence I would go with UFS or VxFS/VxVM which are in the market for many many years proven in a lot of technologies. -- 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] Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500
> > so you can still go back to snv_70b if needed. > > Alas, it would be downgrade. Which is why I think it > will fail. Not if you don't upgrade the pool it won't. ZFS can import and work with an old version of the filesystem fine. The manual page for zpool upgrade says: "Older versions can continue to be used" Just import it on Solaris 5/08 without doing the upgrade. Your ZFS pool will be available and can be served out from the new version. If you do find any problems (which I wouldn't expect to be honest), you can plug your old snv_70b boot disk in if necessary. > zfs send of the /zvol/ufs volume would take 2 days. Currently it panics > at least once a day. There appears to be no way to resume a "half > transfered" zfs send. So, rsyncing smaller bits. Aaah, that makes sense now. I don't think you need to do this though, I really think your idea of swapping the boot disks is the best way of getting this server up & running. The absolute worst case scenario is that Solaris 5/08 also crashes on the old Thumper which means you have faulty hardware. If that happens you'll probably need to move your data drives to the new chassis and hope it's not a bad drive causing the fault. Either way, let me know how you get on. Ross 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] Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500
Ross wrote: > I do think a zfs import after booting from the new drives should > work fine, and it doesn't automatically upgrade the pool, > so you can still go back to snv_70b if needed. Alas, it would be downgrade. Which is why I think it will fail. > > PS. In your first post you said you had no time to copy the filesystem, so > why are you trying to use send/receive? Both rsync and send/receive will > take a long time to complete. > > zfs send of the /zvol/ufs volume would take 2 days. Currently it panics at least once a day. There appears to be no way to resume a "half transfered" zfs send. So, rsyncing smaller bits. zfs send -i only works if you have a full copy already, which we can't get from above. -- Jorgen Lundman | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unix Administrator | +81 (0)3 -5456-2687 ext 1017 (work) Shibuya-ku, Tokyo| +81 (0)90-5578-8500 (cell) Japan| +81 (0)3 -3375-1767 (home) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ButterFS
I read this just now in the Unix Guardian: BTRFS, pronounced ButterFS: BTRFS was launched in June 2007, and is a POSIX-compliant file system that will support very large files and volumes (16 exabytes) and a ridiculous number of files (two to the power of 64 files, to be precise). The file system has object-level mirroring and striping, checksums on data and metadata, online file system check, incremental backup and file system mirroring, subvolumes with their own file system roots, writable snapshots, and index and file packing to conserve space, among many other features. BTRFS is not anywhere near primetime, and Garbee figures it will take at least three years to get it out the door. I thought that ZFS was/is the way to the future, but reading this it seems there are compatitors out there ;-) -- Dick Hoogendijk -- PGP/GnuPG key: 01D2433D ++ http://nagual.nl/ + SunOS sxce snv94 ++ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500
But zfs send/receive is very different to zfs import. I'm not sure if zfs send/receive work across different versions of zfs, I vaguely remember reading something about it not working, but can't find anything specific about it right now. I do think a zfs import after booting from the new drives should work fine, and it doesn't automatically upgrade the pool, so you can still go back to snv_70b if needed. After all, if zfs import did change the version, the zfs upgrade command would be redundant. See the following lines from the zfs manual: zpool import [-d dir] [-D] [-f] [-o opts] [-R root] pool | id [newpool] Imports a specific pool. A pool can be identified by its name or the numeric identifier. If newpool is specified, the pool is imported using the name newpool. Otherwise, it is imported with the same name as its exported name. If a device is removed from a system without running “zpool export” first, the device appears as potentially active. It cannot be determined if this was a failed export, or whether the device is really in use from another host. To import a pool in this state, the -f option is required. zpool upgrade Displays all pools formatted using a different ZFS on-disk version. Older versions can continue to be used, but some features may not be available. These pools can be upgraded using “zpool upgrade -a”. Pools that are formatted with a more recent version are also displayed, although these pools will be inaccessible on the system. Ross PS. In your first post you said you had no time to copy the filesystem, so why are you trying to use send/receive? Both rsync and send/receive will take a long time to complete. 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] Can I trust ZFS?
Dave wrote: > > > Enda O'Connor wrote: >> >> As for thumpers, once 138053-02 ( marvell88sx driver patch ) releases >> within the next two weeks ( assuming no issues found ), then the >> thumper platform running s10 updates will be up to date in terms of >> marvel88sx driver fixes, which fixes some pretty important issues for >> thumper. >> Strongly suggest applying this patch to thumpers going forward. >> u6 will have the fixes by default. >> > > I'm assuming the fixes listed in these patches are already committed in > OpenSolaris (b94 or greater)? > > -- > Dave yep. I know this is opensolaris list, but a lot of folk asking questions do seem to be running various update releases. Enda ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs-auto-snapshot 0.11 work (was Re: zfs-auto-snapshot with at schedul
Tim Foster wrote: >>> can roles run cron jobs ?), >> >> No. You need a user who can take on the role. > > Darn, back to the drawing board. I don't have all the context on this but Solaris RBAC roles *can* run cron jobs. Roles don't have to have users assigned to them. Roles normally have passwords and accounts that have valid passwords can run cron jobs. To create an account that can not login but can run cron jobs use: passwd -N username Examples of such accounts are sys,adm,lp,postgres Accounts that are locked (by passwd -l username) can not run cron jobs. Tim feel free to explain to me offline what it was you were trying to use roles for. -- Darren J Moffat ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500
I am currently thinking that it will not work. I found this situation happened : x4500-01# zfs send zpool1/[EMAIL PROTECTED] | nc -v x4500-02 3334 x4500-02# nc -l -p -vvv | zfs recv -v zpool1/www x4500-02# cannot mount 'zpool1/www': Operation not supported Mismatched versions: File system is version 2 on-disk format, which is incompatible with this software version 1!cannot mount 'zpool1/www': Operation not supported Bluntly, we are screwed. It is rsync, or nothing. Lund Ross wrote: > I'd expect that to work personally, although I'd just drop one of your boot > mirrors in myself. That leaves the second drive untouched for your other > server. It also means that if it works you could just wipe the old snv_70b > and re-establish the boot mirrors on each server with them. > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Jorgen Lundman | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unix Administrator | +81 (0)3 -5456-2687 ext 1017 (work) Shibuya-ku, Tokyo| +81 (0)90-5578-8500 (cell) Japan| +81 (0)3 -3375-1767 (home) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500
Wipe the snv_70b disks I meant. 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] Replacing the boot HDDs in x4500
I'd expect that to work personally, although I'd just drop one of your boot mirrors in myself. That leaves the second drive untouched for your other server. It also means that if it works you could just wipe the old snv_70b and re-establish the boot mirrors on each server with them. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
