Re: [zfs-discuss] Ooops - did it again... Moved disks without export first.
I think the 'corruption' is caused by the shuffling and mismatch of the disks. One 1.5TB is now believed to be part of a mirror with a 2TB, a 1TB part of a mirror with a 1.5TB and so on. It would be better if zfs would try to find the second disk of each mirror instead of relying on what controller/channel/port it was previously connected to. So, my best action would be to delete the zpool.cache and then do a zpool import? Should I try to match disks with cables as it was previously connected before I do the import? Will that make any difference? BTW, ZFS version is 22. Thanks, Jan -- 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] Ooops - did it again... Moved disks without export first.
On Oct 28, 2010, at 04:44, Jan Hellevik wrote: So, my best action would be to delete the zpool.cache and then do a zpool import? Should I try to match disks with cables as it was previously connected before I do the import? Will that make any difference? BTW, ZFS version is 22. I'd say export, rename zpool.cache, and then try importing it. ZFS should scan all the devices and figure out what's there. If that still doesn't work, try the -F option to go back a few transactions to a known-good state. Most file systems don't take well to having disks pulled on them, and ZFS is no different there. It's just with ZFS it can tell when there are (potentially) corrupted blocks because of the checksumming. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Good write, but slow read speeds over the network
Hi all, I am running Netalk on OSol snv134 on a Dell R610, 32 GB RAM server. I am experiencing different speeds when when writing to and reading from the pool. The pool itself consists of two FC LUNs that each build a vdev (no comments on that please, we discussed that already! ;) ). Now, I am having a couple of AFP clients that access this pool either via FastEthernet or even GiBitEthernet. The point is: write to these AFP shares are pretty fast. Due to the fairly hight amount of RAM I am getting transfer speeds of up to 90 MB/sec for a 5 GB file, which is not bad. But reading from the pool seems to pan out at 40 to 50 MB/sec. no matter what I am trying. When I run zpool iostat pool 1 while reading a big file from the share, I can see that the pool has continous reads of about 50 to 60 MB/sec. and I am getting approx. 30 MB/sec on the client. Afterwards the files must reside in the ZFS file cache, since readint he same file again, will not show any read activity on the pool at all, but the transfer rate is still quite slow - a max. of 45 to 50 MB/sec. When I use dd on the host itself to copy the file from the pool to /dev/null I am getting approx. 120 MB/sec, which is still way more than the 30 to 50 MB/sec I am getting over the network. If I use nc on the server, I will get approx 200 MB/sec, so the pool seems to be fast enough. I was wondering if there's anything related to ZFS, that could help here, or is it more likely a network related issue? Cheers, budy -- Stephan Budach Jung von Matt/it-services GmbH Glashüttenstraße 79 20357 Hamburg Tel: +49 40-4321-1353 Fax: +49 40-4321-1114 E-Mail: stephan.bud...@jvm.de Internet: http://www.jvm.com Geschäftsführer: Ulrich Pallas, Frank Wilhelm AG HH HRB 98380 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Ooops - did it again... Moved disks without export first.
Thanks! I will try later today and report back the result. -- 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] PowerEdge R510 with PERC H200/H700 with ZFS
Hi. I install solaris 10 x86 on PowerEdge R510 with PERC H700 without problem. 8HDD configured with RAID 6. Only question is how to monitor this controller? Do you have any tools which allow you to monitor this controller? Get HDD status. Thank you for help. PS. I know this is OpenSolaris not solaris group but maybe I get help here. -- 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] PowerEdge R510 with PERC H200/H700 with ZFS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 8/7/2010 4:11 PM, Terry Hull wrote: It is just that lots of the PERC controllers do not do JBOD very well. I've done it several times making a RAID 0 for each drive. Unfortunately, that means the server has lots of RAID hardware that is not utilized very well. Doing that lets you use the cache, which is the only part of the RAID HW that I'd worry about wasting. Also, ZFS loves to see lots of spindles, and Dell boxes tend not to have lots of drive bays in comparison to what you can build at a given price point. I've found the R515 (the R510's cousing with AMD processors) to be very interesting in this regard. It has many more drive bays than most Dell boxes. I've also priced out the IBM x3630 M3, even more drive bays in this one. for about %20 more. Of course then you have warranty / service issues to consider. I don't know what you're needs are, but I found dell's 5yr onsite 10x5 NBD support to be priced very attractively. But I can live with a machine being down till the next day, or through a weekend. -Kyle -- Terry Hull Network Resource Group, Inc. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMyZFEAAoJEEADRM+bKN5wTr4IAIh1LzIcm346TVcRZdKwkbgW EkFux2ZT8uzk/v1lXqgiDCkO0zQ/Bwpk9SsSa0KOblOxKRWPYQwj2pO30syX/QnR 82aFfhcJaWmf0H3aphoowqTTDhKRefYXgbPINaVafDV8JY8tN9d0+Tcnhv03n3pq 7Eafg+RbjaZPceZxDuNQ0xJFw+cpXvOYSFAcCB+E49actOqDIErf4A2xGL96PK7k POu1bHN5qyIsca6t76nvuR7w8+yq6FfM4HY0KahyPhx/MXjp01N7vFyQKdLF5rGU ByliQedo7r8OsLl6BxeMwv+SBNxab4sjqWpWfTzniLk1Ng6aG3mm5YQ7/iAUZ+0= =FDkN -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] sharesmb should be ignored if filesystem is not mounted
I have sharesmb=on set for a bunch of filesystems, including three that weren't mounted. Nevertheless, all of those are advertised. Needless to say, the one that isn't mounted can't be accessed remotely, even though since advertised, it looks like it could be. # zfs list -o name,mountpoint,sharesmb,mounted|awk '$(NF-1)!=off $(NF-1)!=- $NF!=yes' NAME MOUNTPOINT SHARESMB MOUNTED rpool/ROOT legacy on no rpool/ROOT/snv_129 / on no rpool/ROOT/snv_93 /tmp/.alt.luupdall.22709on no # So I think that if a zfs filesystem is not mounted, sharesmb should be ignored. This is in snv_97 (SXCE; with a pending LU BE not yet activated, and an old one no longer active); I don't know if it's still a problem in current builds that unmounted filesystems are advertised, but if it is, I can see how it could confuse clients. So I thought I'd mention it. -- 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] sharesmb should be ignored if filesystem is not mounted
PS obviously these are home systems; in a real environment, I'd only be sharing out filesystems with user or application data, and not local system filesystems! But since it's just me, I somewhat trust myself not to shoot myself in the foot. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Mirroring a zpool
I have a raidz2 zpool which I would like to create a mirror of. Is it possible to create a mirror of a zpool? I know I can create multi way mirrors of vdevs, do zfs/send receive etc.. to mirror data. But can I create a mirror at the zpool level? Thanks SR -- 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] Mirroring a zpool
Hi SR, You can create a mirrored storage pool, but you can't mirror an existing raidz2 pool nor can you convert a raidz2 pool to a mirrored pool. You would need to copy the data from the existing pool, destroy the raidz2 pool, and create a mirrored storage pool. Cindy On 10/28/10 11:19, SR wrote: I have a raidz2 zpool which I would like to create a mirror of. Is it possible to create a mirror of a zpool? I know I can create multi way mirrors of vdevs, do zfs/send receive etc.. to mirror data. But can I create a mirror at the zpool level? Thanks SR ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zil behavior
___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] stripes of different size mirror groups
I have a couple drive enclosures: 15x 450gb 15krpm SAS 15x 600gb 15krpm SAS I'd like to set them up like RAID10. Previously, I was using two hardware RAID10 volumes, with the 15th drive as a hot spare, in each enclosure. Using ZFS, it could be nice to make them a single volume, so that I could share L2ARC and ZIL devices, rather than buy two sets. It appears possible to set up 7x450gb mirrored sets and 7x600gb mirrored sets in the same volume, without losing capacity. Is that a bad idea? Is there a problem with having different stripe sizes, like this? Thanks, 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] stripes of different size mirror groups
On 10/29/10 09:40 AM, Rob Cohen wrote: I have a couple drive enclosures: 15x 450gb 15krpm SAS 15x 600gb 15krpm SAS I'd like to set them up like RAID10. Previously, I was using two hardware RAID10 volumes, with the 15th drive as a hot spare, in each enclosure. Using ZFS, it could be nice to make them a single volume, so that I could share L2ARC and ZIL devices, rather than buy two sets. It appears possible to set up 7x450gb mirrored sets and 7x600gb mirrored sets in the same volume, without losing capacity. Is that a bad idea? Is there a problem with having different stripe sizes, like this? The problem would be one of performance once the pool becomes more than 75% full. At this point the smaller vedevs may be full and all new write activity will be restricted to the bigger devices. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] stripes of different size mirror groups
Thanks, Ian. If I understand correctly, the performance would then drop to the same level as if I set them up as separate volumes in the first place. So, I get double the performance for 75% of my data, and equal performance for 25% of my data, and my L2ARC will adapt to my working set across both enclosures. That sounds like all upside, and no downside, unless I'm missing something. Are there any other problems? -- 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] stripes of different size mirror groups
If I understand correctly, the performance would then drop to the same level as if I set them up as separate volumes in the first place. So, I get double the performance for 75% of my data, and equal performance for 25% of my data, and my L2ARC will adapt to my working set across both enclosures. That sounds like all upside, and no downside, unless I'm missing something. Are there any other problems? Not really. You also have the option to replace the smaller drives with bigger ones, one by one, if you set autogrow=on on that pool. 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
