Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs proerty aclmode gone in 147?
I must admit though, that the new ACL/ACE model in 147 is really nice and slick. Darwin ACL model is nice and slick, the new NFSv4 one in 147 is just braindead. chmod resulting in ACLs being discarded is a bizarre design decision. -- 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] non-ECC Systems and ZFS for home users
On 09/25/10 02:54 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: Honestly, I've said it before, and I'll say it (yet) again: unless you have very stringent power requirement (or some other unusual requirement, like very, very low noise), used (or even new-in-box, previous generation excess inventory) OEM stuff is far superior to any build-it-yourself rig you can come up with. So much so, in fact, that we should really consider the reference recommendation for a ZFS fileserver to be certain configs of brand-name hardware, and NOT try to recommend other things to folks. Unless you live somewhere with a very small used server market that is! -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Dedup relationship between pool and filesystem
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Brad Stone For de-duplication to perform well you need to be able to fit the de- dup table in memory. Is a good rule-of-thumb for needed RAM Size=(pool capacity/avg block size)*270 bytes? Or perhaps it's Size/expected_dedup_ratio? For now, the rule of thumb is 3G ram for every 1TB of unique data, including snapshots and vdev's. After a system is running, I don't know how/if you can measure current mem usage, to gauge the results of your own predictions. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] dedup testing?
Hi all Has anyone done any testing with dedup with OI? On opensolaris there is a nifty feature that allows the system to hang for hours or days if attempting to delete a dataset on a deduped pool. This is said to be fixed, but I haven't seen that myself, so I'm just wondering... I'll get a 10TB test box released for testing OI in a few weeks, but before than, has anyone tested this? Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 r...@karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer på norsk. ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-disc...@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Dedup relationship between pool and filesystem
For de-duplication to perform well you need to be able to fit the de- dup table in memory. Is a good rule-of-thumb for needed RAM Size=(pool capacity/avg block size)*270 bytes? Or perhaps it's Size/expected_dedup_ratio? For now, the rule of thumb is 3G ram for every 1TB of unique data, including snapshots and vdev's. After a system is running, I don't know how/if you can measure current mem usage, to gauge the results of your own predictions. 3 gigs? Last I checked it was a little more than 1GB, perhaps 2 if you have small files. Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 r...@karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer på norsk. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] dedup testing?
AFAIK that part of dedup code is not changed in b147. On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk r...@karlsbakk.net wrote: Hi all Has anyone done any testing with dedup with OI? On opensolaris there is a nifty feature that allows the system to hang for hours or days if attempting to delete a dataset on a deduped pool. This is said to be fixed, but I haven't seen that myself, so I'm just wondering... I'll get a 10TB test box released for testing OI in a few weeks, but before than, has anyone tested this? Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 r...@karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer på norsk. ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-disc...@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Piotr Jasiukajtis | estibi | SCA OS0072 http://estseg.blogspot.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Dedup relationship between pool and filesystem
When I do the calculations, assuming 300bytes per block to be conservative, with 128K blocks, I get 2.34G of cache (RAM, L2ARC) per Terabyte of deduped data. But block size is dynamic, so you will need more than this. Scott -- 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] dedup testing?
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Piotr Jasiukajtis est...@gmail.com wrote: AFAIK that part of dedup code is not changed in b147. I think I remember seeing that there was a change made in 142 that helps, though I'm not sure to what extent. -B -- Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] non-ECC Systems and ZFS for home users
On 9/25/2010 1:57 AM, Ian Collins wrote: On 09/25/10 02:54 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: Honestly, I've said it before, and I'll say it (yet) again: unless you have very stringent power requirement (or some other unusual requirement, like very, very low noise), used (or even new-in-box, previous generation excess inventory) OEM stuff is far superior to any build-it-yourself rig you can come up with. So much so, in fact, that we should really consider the reference recommendation for a ZFS fileserver to be certain configs of brand-name hardware, and NOT try to recommend other things to folks. Unless you live somewhere with a very small used server market that is! But, I hear there's this newfangled thingy, called some darned fool thing like the interanets or some such, that lets you, you know, *order* things from far away places using one of those funny PeeCee dood-ads, and they like, *deliver* to your door. And here I was, just getting used to all those nice things from the Sears catalog. Gonna have to learn me a whole new thing again. Damn kids. wink Of course, living in certain countries it's hard to get the hardware through customs... -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] non-ECC Systems and ZFS for home users
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Dick Hoogendijk d...@nagual.nl wrote: And about what SUN systems are you thinking for 'home use' ? The likeliness of memory failures might be much higher than becoming a millionair, but in the years past I have never had one. And my home sytems are rather cheap. Mind you, not the cheapest, but rather cheap. I do buy good memory though. So, to me, with a good backup I feel rather safe using ZFS. I also had it running for quite some time on a 32bits machine and that also worked out fine. We have correctable memory errors on ECC systems on a monthly basis. It's not if they'll happen but how often. -- Giovanni Tirloni gtirl...@sysdroid.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] dedup testing?
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Piotr Jasiukajtis est...@gmail.com wrote: AFAIK that part of dedup code is not changed in b147. I think I remember seeing that there was a change made in 142 that helps, though I'm not sure to what extent. -B OI seemed to behave much better than 134 in low disk space situation with dedup turned on after server crashed during (terabytes of) snapshot destroy. import took some time but it did not block IO and most time consuming part was mounting datasets, already mounted datasets could be used during import too. Also performance is a lot better. Yours Markus Kovero ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] non-ECC Systems and ZFS for home users
On 09/26/10 07:25 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: On 9/25/2010 1:57 AM, Ian Collins wrote: On 09/25/10 02:54 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: Honestly, I've said it before, and I'll say it (yet) again: unless you have very stringent power requirement (or some other unusual requirement, like very, very low noise), used (or even new-in-box, previous generation excess inventory) OEM stuff is far superior to any build-it-yourself rig you can come up with. So much so, in fact, that we should really consider the reference recommendation for a ZFS fileserver to be certain configs of brand-name hardware, and NOT try to recommend other things to folks. Unless you live somewhere with a very small used server market that is! But, I hear there's this newfangled thingy, called some darned fool thing like the interanets or some such, that lets you, you know, *order* things from far away places using one of those funny PeeCee dood-ads, and they like, *deliver* to your door. Have you ever had to pay international shipping to the other side of the world on a second hand server?! Not all sellers will ship internationally. I do bring in a lot of system components, but chassis aren't worth the cost. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zfs send/receive?
hi all I'm using a custom snaopshot scheme which snapshots every hour, day, week and month, rotating 24h, 7d, 4w and so on. What would be the best way to zfs send/receive these things? I'm a little confused about how this works for delta udpates... Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 r...@karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer på norsk. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] non-ECC Systems and ZFS for home users
Erik Trimble sez: Honestly, I've said it before, and I'll say it (yet) again: unless you have very stringent power requirement (or some other unusual requirement, like very, very low noise), used (or even new-in-box, previous generation excess inventory) OEM stuff is far superior to any build-it-yourself rig you can come up with. It's horses for courses, I guess. I've had to live with server fan noise and power requirements and it's not pleasant. I very much like the reliability characteristics of older servers, but they eat a lot of power and are noisy as you say. On the other hand, I did the calculation of the difference in cost of electricity over two years at my local rates (central Texas) and it's easy to save a few hundred dollars over two years of 24/7 operation with low power systems. I am NOT necessarily saying that my system is something to emulate, nor that my choices are right for everyone, particularly hardware building amateurs. My past includes a lot of hardware design and build. So putting together a Frankenserver is not something that is daunting. I also have a history which includes making educated guesses about failure rates and the cost of losing data. So I made choices based on my experience and skills. For **me**, putting together a server out of commercial parts is a far better bet than running a server in a virtual machine on desktop parts of any vintage, which was the original question - whether a virtual server on top of Windows running on some hardware was advisable for a beginner. For me, it's not. The relative merits will vary from user to user according to their skills and experience level. I was willing to learn Solaris to get zfs. Given what's happened with Oracle since I started that, that may have been a bad bet, but my server and data do now live and breathe for better or worse. But I have no fears of breathing life into new hardware and copying the old data over. Nor is it a trial to me to fire up a last-generation server, install a new OS and copy the data over. To me, that's all a cost/benefit calculation. So much so, in fact, that we should really consider the reference recommendation for a ZFS fileserver to be certain configs of brand-name hardware, and NOT try to recommend other things to folks. I personally would have loved to have that when I started the zfs/Opensolaris trek a year ago. It was not available, and I paid my dues learning the OS and zfs. I'm not sure, given where Oracle is taking Solaris, that there is any need to recommend any particular hardware to folks in general. I think the number of people following the path I took, using OpenSolaris to get zfs, and buying/building a home machine to do it, are going to nosedive dramatically, by Oracle's design. To me the data stability issues dictated zfs, and Opensolaris was where I got that. I put up with the labyrinthine mess of figuring out what would and would not run OS to get zfs, and it worked OK. To me, data integrity was what I was after. I had sub issues. It's silly (in my estimation) to worry about data integrity on disks and not in memory. That made ECC an issue. Hence my burrowing through the most cost-efficient way to get ECC. Oh, yeah, cost. I wanted it to be as cheap as possible, given the other constraints. Then hardware reliability. I actually bought an off-duty server locally because of the cost advantages and the perceived hardware realiability. I can't get OS to work on it - yet at least. I'm sure that it's my problems with being an Open Solaris neophyte. But it sure is noisy. What **my** compromise was is - new hardware to stay inside the shallow end of the failure-rate bathtub - burn in to get past the infant mortality issues - ECC as cheaply as possible, given that I actually wanted it to work - modern SATA controllers for the storage, which dragged in PCIe and compatible controllers under Opensolaris - as low a power as possible, as that can save about $100 a year *for me* - as low a noise factor as possible because I've spent too much of my life listening to machines desperately try to stay cool. What I could trade for this was not caring whether the hardware was particularly fast; it was a layer of data backup, not a mission critical server. And it had to run zfs, which is why I started this mess. Also, I don't have huge data storage problems. I enforce the live backup data to be under 4TB. Yep, that's tiny by comparison. I have small problems. 8-) Result: a new-components server that runs zfs, works on my house network, uses under 100W as measured at the wall socket, and stores 4TB. I got what I set out to get, so I'm happy with it. This is not the system for everybody, but it works for me. Writing down what you're trying to do is a great tool. People used to get really mad at me for saying, in Very Serious Business Meetings If we were completely successful, what would that look like? It almost always happened
Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] zfs send/receive?
From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris- discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk I'm using a custom snaopshot scheme which snapshots every hour, day, week and month, rotating 24h, 7d, 4w and so on. What would be the best way to zfs send/receive these things? I'm a little confused about how this works for delta udpates... Out of curiosity, why custom? It sounds like a default config. Anyway, as long as the present destination filesystem matches a snapshot from the source system, you can incrementally send any newer snapshot. Generally speaking, you don't want to send anything that's extremely volatile such as hourly... because if the snap of the source disappears, then you have nothing to send incrementally from anymore. Make sense? I personally send incrementals once a day, and only send the daily incrementals. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Dedup relationship between pool and filesystem
From: Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk [mailto:r...@karlsbakk.net] For now, the rule of thumb is 3G ram for every 1TB of unique data, including snapshots and vdev's. 3 gigs? Last I checked it was a little more than 1GB, perhaps 2 if you have small files. http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=131761 The true answer is it varies depending on things like block size, etc, so if you want to say 1G or 3G, despite sounding like a big difference, it's in the noise. We're only talking rule of thumb here, based on vague (vague) and widely variable estimates of your personal usage characteristics. It's just a rule of thumb, and slightly over 1G ~= slightly under 3G in this context. Hence, the comment: After a system is running, I don't know how/if you can measure current mem usage, to gauge the results of your own predictions. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] zfs send/receive?
On Sep 25, 2010, at 7:42 PM, Edward Ned Harvey sh...@nedharvey.com wrote: From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris- discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk I'm using a custom snaopshot scheme which snapshots every hour, day, week and month, rotating 24h, 7d, 4w and so on. What would be the best way to zfs send/receive these things? I'm a little confused about how this works for delta udpates... Out of curiosity, why custom? It sounds like a default config. Anyway, as long as the present destination filesystem matches a snapshot from the source system, you can incrementally send any newer snapshot. Generally speaking, you don't want to send anything that's extremely volatile such as hourly... because if the snap of the source disappears, then you have nothing to send incrementally from anymore. Make sense? It is relatively easy to find the latest, common snapshot on two file systems. Once you know the latest, common snapshot, you can send the incrementals up to the latest. I personally send incrementals once a day, and only send the daily incrementals. For NexentaStor customers, the auto-sync service manages this rather well. -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] dedup testing?
On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:54 AM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk r...@karlsbakk.net wrote: Hi all Has anyone done any testing with dedup with OI? On opensolaris there is a nifty feature that allows the system to hang for hours or days if attempting to delete a dataset on a deduped pool. This is said to be fixed, but I haven't seen that myself, so I'm just wondering... Yes, there is at least one fix that improves this scenario over b134. I'll get a 10TB test box released for testing OI in a few weeks, but before than, has anyone tested this? Yes. -- richard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Growing a root ZFS mirror on b134?
Thank you very much to Casper for his help. I now have a rpool with 2 x 2TB HDD's and it's all good : # zpool list rpool NAMESIZE ALLOC FREECAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT rpool 1.82T 640G 1.19T34% 1.09x ONLINE - It gets quite unhappy if you don't use detach (offline isn't so useful!) and booting with -m milestone=none is a lifesaver! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
