Re: [zfs-discuss] [storage-discuss] Supermicro AOC-SASLP-MV8
myxi...@googlemail.com wrote: Bouncing a thread from the device drivers list: http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=357176 Does anybody know if OpenSolaris will support this new Supermicro card, based on the Marvell 88SE6480 chipset? It's a true PCI Express 8 port JBOD SAS/SATA controller with pricing apparently around $125. If it works with OpenSolaris it sounds pretty much perfect. The Linux support for the 6480 builds on the 6440 mvsas support, so I don't think marvell88sx would work, and there doesn't seem to be a Marvell SAS driver for Solaris at all, so I'd say it's not supported. http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1397855 has a fair few people testing it out, but mostly under Windows. -- James Andrewartha ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Raidz1 faulted with single bad disk. Requesting assistance.
Brad Hill wrote: I've seen reports of a recent Seagate firmware update bricking drives again. What's the output of 'zpool import' from the LiveCD? It sounds like ore than 1 drive is dropping off. r...@opensolaris:~# zpool import pool: tank id: 16342816386332636568 state: FAULTED status: The pool was last accessed by another system. action: The pool cannot be imported due to damaged devices or data. The pool may be active on another system, but can be imported using the '-f' flag. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-EY config: tankFAULTED corrupted data raidz1DEGRADED c6t0d0 ONLINE c6t1d0 ONLINE c6t2d0 ONLINE c6t3d0 UNAVAIL cannot open c6t4d0 ONLINE pool: rpool id: 9891756864015178061 state: ONLINE status: The pool was last accessed by another system. action: The pool can be imported using its name or numeric identifier and the '-f' flag. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-EY config: rpool ONLINE c3d0s0ONLINE 1.) Here's a similar report from last summer from someone running ZFS on FreeBSD. No resolution there either: raidz vdev marked faulted with only one faulted disk http://kerneltrap.org/index.php?q=mailarchive/freebsd-fs/2008/6/15/2132754 2.) This old thread from Dec 2007 for a different raidz1 problem, titled 'Faulted raidz1 shows the same device twice' suggests trying these commands (see the link for the context they were run under): http://www.mail-archive.com/zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org/msg13214.html # zdb -l /dev/dsk/c18t0d0 # zpool export external # zpool import external # zpool clear external # zpool scrub external # zpool clear external 3.) Do you have ECC RAM? Have you verified that your memory, cpu, and motherboard are reliable? 4.) 'Bad exchange descriptor' is mentioned very sparingly across the net, mostly in system error tables. Also here: http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=88486tstart=165 5.) More raidz setup caveats, at least on MacOS: http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2008-March/000346.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [storage-discuss] Supermicro AOC-SASLP-MV8
I'm quite happy so far with my LSI cards, which replaced a couple of the Supermicro Marvell cards: # scanpci ... pci bus 0x0007 cardnum 0x00 function 0x00: vendor 0x1000 device 0x0058 LSI Logic / Symbios Logic SAS1068E PCI-Express Fusion-MPT SAS On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:45 AM, James Andrewartha jam...@daa.com.au wrote: myxi...@googlemail.com wrote: Bouncing a thread from the device drivers list: http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=357176 Does anybody know if OpenSolaris will support this new Supermicro card, based on the Marvell 88SE6480 chipset? It's a true PCI Express 8 port JBOD SAS/SATA controller with pricing apparently around $125. If it works with OpenSolaris it sounds pretty much perfect. The Linux support for the 6480 builds on the 6440 mvsas support, so I don't think marvell88sx would work, and there doesn't seem to be a Marvell SAS driver for Solaris at all, so I'd say it's not supported. http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1397855 has a fair few people testing it out, but mostly under Windows. -- James Andrewartha ___ storage-discuss mailing list storage-disc...@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [storage-discuss] Supermicro AOC-SASLP-MV8
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 02:45, James Andrewartha jam...@daa.com.au wrote: myxi...@googlemail.com wrote: Bouncing a thread from the device drivers list: http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=357176 Does anybody know if OpenSolaris will support this new Supermicro card, based on the Marvell 88SE6480 chipset? It's a true PCI Express 8 port JBOD SAS/SATA controller with pricing apparently around $125. If it works with OpenSolaris it sounds pretty much perfect. The Linux support for the 6480 builds on the 6440 mvsas support, so I don't think marvell88sx would work, and there doesn't seem to be a Marvell SAS driver for Solaris at all, so I'd say it's not supported. http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1397855 has a fair few people testing it out, but mostly under Windows. ... and one testing it under OpenSolaris: http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1034002793postcount=167 . It doesn't appear to work. Will ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] posix_fadvise on ZFS
This is wrt Postgres 8.4 beta1 which has a new effective_io_concurrency tunable which uses posix_fadvice http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/runtime-config-resource.html (Go to the bottom) Quote: synchronous I/O depends on an effective |posix_fadvise| function, which some operating systems lack. If the function is not present then setting this parameter to anything but zero will result in an error. On some operating systems the function is present but does not actually do anything (e.g. Solaris). I am trying to understand if posix_fadvise is useful on ZFS or not? Currently postgres now does not do any fadvise on OpenSolaris since ZFS ignores the advise (after all who takes advise) without letting the app know that it is being ignored. On Linux it uses the POSIX_FADV_WILLNEED flag (example shown below) http://doxygen.postgresql.org/fd_8c-source.html#l01054 But in general I am trying to figure out few things: 1. Is it even worth doing posix_fadvise on zfs 2. How does it impact UFS 3. What should be the equivalent workarounds for zfs and/or UFS? Thanks in advance regards Jignesh ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] What causes slow performance under load?
On Tue, April 21, 2009 14:20, Joerg Schilling wrote: Miles Nordin car...@ivy.net wrote: First, there is plain-GPLv2, Linux-modified-GPLv2 with the ``or any later version'' clause deleted and the suspect ``interpretation'' of kernel modules, and plain-GPLv3: there are three GPL licenses to worry about. You just verified that you don't understand what you are talking about - sorry. The clause or any later version is _not_ part of the GPL. The Linux Kernel of course uses a plain vanilla GPLv2. The clause or any later version is even illegal in many juristrictions as these juristrictions forbid to sign a contract that you don't know at the time you sign. So are you saying you've never previously noticed section 14 of the GPL as displayed at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html? It contains: If the Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU General Public License or any later version applies to it, you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of the GNU General Public License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation. So you're just plain wrong. The GPL contains the exact clause you say it doesn't contain. Furthermore, it does in fact say that (unless otherwise restricted by the license grant) that one may use any version every published by the Free Software Association. That's not limited to versions published after the license grant. -- David Dyer-Bennet, d...@dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] What causes slow performance under load?
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 04:09:03PM -0400, Oscar del Rio wrote: There's a similar thread on hied-emailad...@listserv.nd.edu that might help or at least can get you in touch with other University admins in a similar situation. https://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0904L=HIED-EMAILADMIN Thread: mail systems using ZFS filesystems? Thanks. Those problems do sound similar. I also see positive experiences with T2000 servers, ZFS, and Cyrus IMAP from UC Davis. None of the people involved seem to be active on either the ZFS mailing list or the Cyrus list. -- -Gary Mills--Unix Support--U of M Academic Computing and Networking- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zfs promote/destroy enhancements?
hey all, in both nevada and opensolaris, the zones infrastructure tries to leverage zfs where ever possible. we take advantage of snapshotting and cloning for things like zone cloning and zone be management. because of this, we've recently run into multiple scenarios where a zoneadm uninstall fails. 6787557 zoneadm uninstall fails when zone has zfs clones http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6787557 7491 problems destroying zones with cloned dependents http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=7491 these failures occur when we try to destroy the zfs filesystem associated with a zone, but that filesystem has been snapshotted and cloned. the way we're fixing these problems is by doing a promotion before the destroy. jerry has fixed 6787557 for nevada in zoneadm, but now i'm looking at having to re-implement a similar fix for opensolaris in the ipkg brand for 7491. hence, i'm wondering if it would make more sense just to add this functionality directly into zfs(1m)/libzfs. this would involve enhancements to the zfs promote and destroy subcommands. here's what i'm thinking. the first component would be a new -t template option to zfs promote. this option would instruct zfs promote to check for snapshot naming collisions between the origin and promotion target filesystems, and to rename any origin filesystem snapshots with conflicting names before attempting the promotion. the conflicting snapshots will be renamed to templateXXX, where XXX is an integer used to make the snapshot name unique. today users have to do this renaming manually if they want the promotion to succeed. to illustrate how this new functionality would work, say i have the following filesystems/snapshots: tank/zones/zone1 tank/zones/zo...@sunwzone1 tank/zones/zo...@user1 tank/zones/zone2(clone of tank/zones/zo...@sunwzone1) tank/zones/zo...@sunwzone1 if i do a zfs promote -t SUNWzone tank/zones/zone2, then this would involved a rename of zo...@sunwzone1 to zo...@sunwzone2, and a promotion of tank/zones/zone2. the @user1 snapshot would not be renamed because there was no naming conflict with the filesystem being promoted. hence i would end up with: tank/zones/zone2 tank/zones/zo...@sunwzone1 tank/zones/zo...@sunwzone2 tank/zones/zo...@user1 tank/zones/zone1(clone of tank/zones/zo...@sunwzone2) if i did a zfs promote -t user tank/zones/zone2, then this would this involved a rename of zo...@sunwzone1 to zo...@user2, and then a promotion of tank/zones/zone2. hence i would end up with: tank/zones/zone2 tank/zones/zo...@sunwzone1 tank/zones/zo...@user1 tank/zones/zo...@user2 tank/zones/zone1(clone of tank/zones/zo...@user2) the second component would be two new flags to zfs destroy: zfs destroy [-p [-t template]] the -p would instruct zfs destroy to try to promote the oldest clone of the youngest snapshot of the filesystem being destroyed before doing the destroy. if the youngest filesystem doesn't have a clone, the command will fail unless -r was specified. if -r was specified we will continue to look through snapshot from youngest to oldest looking for the first one with a clone. if a snapshot with a clone is found, the oldest clone will be promoted before the destroy. if a template was specified via -t, this will be passed through to the promote operation. thoughts? ed ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] prstat -Z and load average values in different zones give same numeric results
Folks, Perplexing question about load average display with prstat -Z Solaris 10 OS U4 (08/07) We have 4 zones with very different processes and workloads.. The prstat -Z command issued within each of the zones, correctly displays the number of processes and lwps, but the load average value looks exactly the same on all non-global zones..I mean all 3 values (1,5,15 load averages) are the same which is quasi impossible given the different workloads.. Is there a bug here? Thanks, -Nobel ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
