Re: [zfs-discuss] [OpenIndiana-discuss] format dumps the core
After making zfs filesystems on the bunch, rebooting into OI makes format no-longer dump the core - it works. Seems there might have been something on those drives after all. roy - Original Message - > also, this last test was with two 160gig drives only, the 2TB drives > and the SSD are all disconnected... > > - Original Message - > > I somehow doubt the problem is the same - looks more like cfgadm > > can't > > see my devices. I first tried with directly attached storage (1 SAS > > cable to each disk). Now, that has been replaced with a SAS expander > > (4xSAS to the expander, 12 drives on the expander). Format still > > dumps > > the core, and cfgadm doesn't seem to like my drives somehow. > > > > Any ideas? > > > > r...@tos-backup:~# format > > Searching for disks...Arithmetic Exception (core dumped) > > r...@tos-backup:~# ls -l /dev/rdsk/core > > -rw--- 1 root root 2463431 2010-11-04 17:41 /dev/rdsk/core > > r...@tos-backup:~# pstack /dev/rdsk/core > > core '/dev/rdsk/core' of 1217: format > > fee62e4a UDiv (4, 0, 8046c80, 80469a0, 8046a30, 8046a50) + 2a > > 08079799 auto_sense (4, 0, 8046c80, 0) + 281 > > 080751a6 add_device_to_disklist (80479c0, 80475c0, fefd995b, > > feffb140) > > + 62a > > 080746ff do_search (0, 1, 8047e28, 8066576) + 273 > > 0806658d main (1, 8047e58, 8047e60, 8047e4c) + c1 > > 0805774d _start (1, 8047f00, 0, 8047f07, 8047f0b, 8047f1f) + 7d > > r...@tos-backup:~# zpool status > > pool: rpool > > state: ONLINE > > scan: none requested > > config: > > > > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > > rpool ONLINE 0 0 0 > > c4t5000C50019891202d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0 > > > > errors: No known data errors > > r...@tos-backup:~# cfgadm -a > > Ap_Id Type Receptacle Occupant Condition > > c6 scsi-sas connected configured unknown > > c6::es/ses0 ESI connected configured unknown > > c6::smp/expd0 smp connected configured unknown > > c6::w5000c50019891202,0 disk-path connected configured unknown > > c6::w5000c50019890fed,0 disk-path connected configured unknown > > c7 scsi-sas connected unconfigured unknown > > usb8/1 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb8/2 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb9/1 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb9/2 usb-device connected configured ok > > usb10/1 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb10/2 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb10/3 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb10/4 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb11/1 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb11/2 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb12/1 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb12/2 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb13/1 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb13/2 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/1 usb-hub connected configured ok > > usb14/1.1 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/1.2 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/1.3 usb-hub connected configured ok > > usb14/1.3.1 usb-device connected configured ok > > usb14/1.3.2 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/1.3.3 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/1.3.4 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/1.4 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/2 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/3 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/4 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/5 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > usb14/6 unknown empty unconfigured ok > > r...@tos-backup:~# > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > Moazam, > > > > > > Thanks for the update. I hope this is Roy's issue too. > > > > > > I can see that format would freak out over ext3, but it > > > shouldn't core dump. > > > > > > Cindy > > > > > > On 11/02/10 17:00, Moazam Raja wrote: > > > > Fixed! > > > > > > > > It turns out the problem was that we pulled these two disks from > > > > a > > > > Linux box and they were formatted with ext3 on partition 0 for > > > > the > > > > whole disk, which was somehow causing 'format' to freak out. > > > > > > > > So, we fdisk'ed the p0 slice to delete the Linux partition and > > > > then > > > > created a SOLARIS2 type partition on it. It worked and no more > > > > crash > > > > during format command. > > > > > > > > Cindy, please let the format team know about this since I'm sure > > > > others will also run into this problem at some point if they > > > > have > > > > a > > > > mixed Linux/Solaris environment. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Moazam > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Cindy Swearingen > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Moazam, > > > >> > > > >> The initial diagnosis is that the LSI controller is reporting > > > >> bogus > > > >> information. It looks like Roy is using a similar controller. > > > >> > > > >> You might report this problem to LSI, but I will pass this > > > >> issue > > > >> along to the format folks. > > > >> > > > >> Thanks, > > > >> > > > >> Cindy > > > >> > > > >> On 11/02/10 15:26, Moazam Raja wrote: > > > >>> I'm having the same problem after adding 2 SSD disks to my > > > >>> machine. > > > >>> The controller is LSI SAS9211-8i PCI Express. > > > >>> > > > >>> # format > > > >>> Searching for disks...
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow root vdevs?
On 11/10/10 04:11 PM, Peter Taps wrote: Folks, I am trying to understand if there is a way to increase the capacity of a root-vdev. After reading zpool man pages, the following is what I understand: 1. If you add a new disk by using "zpool add," this disk gets added as a new root-vdev. The existing root-vdevs are not changed. The root device can only be a single drive or a mirror. 2. You can also add a new disk by using "zpool attach" on any existing disk of the pool. However, the existing disk cannot be part of a raidz vdev. Also, if the existing disk is part of a mirror, all we are doing is increasing redundancy but not growing the capacity of the vdev. The only option to grow a root-vdev seems to be to use "zpool replace" and replace an existing disk with a bigger disk.\ The easiest way to grow the root pool is to mirror to a bigger drive and then detach the original. Don't forget to install grub on the new drive. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] How to grow root vdevs?
Folks, I am trying to understand if there is a way to increase the capacity of a root-vdev. After reading zpool man pages, the following is what I understand: 1. If you add a new disk by using "zpool add," this disk gets added as a new root-vdev. The existing root-vdevs are not changed. 2. You can also add a new disk by using "zpool attach" on any existing disk of the pool. However, the existing disk cannot be part of a raidz vdev. Also, if the existing disk is part of a mirror, all we are doing is increasing redundancy but not growing the capacity of the vdev. The only option to grow a root-vdev seems to be to use "zpool replace" and replace an existing disk with a bigger disk. Is my understanding correct? Thank you in advance for your help. Regards, Peter -- 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] Any limit on pool hierarchy?
Maurice Volaski wrote: I think my initial response got mangled. Oops. creating a ZFS pool out of files stored on another ZFS pool. The main reasons that have been given for not doing this are unknown edge and corner cases that may lead to deadlocks, and that it creates a complex structure with potentially undesirable and unintended performance and reliability implications. Computers are continually encountering unknown edge and corner cases in the various things they do all the time. That's what we have testing for. I agree. The earlier discussions of this topic raised the issue that this is not a well tested area and is an unsupported configuration. Some the of problems that arise in nested pool configurations may also arise in supported pool configurations; nested pools may significantly aggravate the problems. The trick is to find test cases in supported configurations so the problems can't simply be swept under the rug of "unsupported configuration". Deadlocks may occur in low resource conditions. If resources (disk space and RAM) never run low, the deadlock scenarios may not arise. It sounds like you mean any low resource condition. Presumably, utilizing complex pool structures like these will tax resources, but there are many other ways to do that. We have seen ZFS systems lose stability under low resource conditions. They don't always gracefully degrade/throttle back performance as resources run very low. I see a parallel in the 64 bit vs 32 bit ZFS code...the 32 bit code has much tighter resource constraints put on it due to memory addressing limits, and we see notes in many places that the 32 bit code is not production ready and not recommended unless you have no other choice. The machines the 32 bit code is run on also tend to have tighter physical resource limits, which compounds the problems. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to decrease the zfs file system size
On 11/10/10 10:29 AM, bhanu prakash wrote: Hi , Currently the file system is with the capacity 50 GB. I want to reduce that to 30 Gb. Quota or physical limit? When I am trying to set the quota as #zfs set quota=30G it's giving error like " cannot set property for ;size is less than current used or reserved space. Please suggest me the steps how to resolve it... Remove some stuff so the used space is less than the new quota. -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send/receive?
Casper Dik wrote on 2010-09-26: > A incremental backup: > > zfs snapshot -r exp...@backup-2010-07-13 > zfs send -R -I exp...@backup-2010-07-12 exp...@backup-2010-07-13 | > zfs receive -v -u -d -F portable/export Unfortunately "zfs receive -F" does not skip existing snapshots and thus if the "zfs send -R | zfs receive -F" process is somewhat interrupted (e.g. network downtime) it can't be simply retried, as some recursively-reached sub-filesystem will have some latest snapshot and some others would have a different latest snapshot. The code comments around libzfs_sendrecv.c:1885 seems to indicate that existing data should be properly skipped, using a call to recv_skip(), but the "zfs receive" process dies just after having warned about ignored data, and thus "zfs send" dies of a broken pipe. Also refer to: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.devel.file-systems/6490 In your opinion is this intentional (ignoring as in "stopping now") or really a bug (if my interpretation of the intent of recv_skip() is correct this should be the case, but I wonder...). -- Lapo Luchini - http://lapo.it/ “UNIX is user-friendly, it just chooses its friends.” (Andreas Bogk) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] How to decrease the zfs file system size
Hi , Currently the file system is with the capacity 50 GB. I want to reduce that to 30 Gb. When I am trying to set the quota as #zfs set quota=30G it's giving error like " cannot set property for ;size is less than current used or reserved space. Please suggest me the steps how to resolve it... Regards, bhanu ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to create a checkpoint?
* Peter Taps (ptr...@yahoo.com) wrote: > Thank you all for your help. Looks like "beadm" is the utility I was > looking for. > > When I run "beadm list," it gives me the complete list and indicates > which one is currently active. It doesn't tell me which one is the > "default" boot. Can I assume that whatever is "active" is also the > "default?" As outlined in beadm(1M): beadm list [-a | -ds] [-H] [beName] Lists information about the existing boot environment named beName, or lists information for all boot environ- ments if beName is not provided. The Active field indi- cates whether the boot environment is active now, represented by N; active on reboot, represented by R; or SunOS 5.11 Last change: 21 Jul 20103 System Administration Commands beadm(1M) both, represented by NR. Cheers, -- Glenn ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to create a checkpoint?
Thank you all for your help. Looks like "beadm" is the utility I was looking for. When I run "beadm list," it gives me the complete list and indicates which one is currently active. It doesn't tell me which one is the "default" boot. Can I assume that whatever is "active" is also the "default?" Regards, Peter -- 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] X4540 RIP
On Nov 9, 2010, at 12:24 PM, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/4U/?chs=847 >> >> Stay away from the 24 port expander backplanes. I've gone thru several >> and they still don't work right - timeout and dropped drives under load. >> The 12-port works just fine connected to a variety of controllers. If you >> insist on the 24-port expander backplane, use a non-expander equipped LSI >> controller to drive it. > > I was wondering if you can clarify. Isn't the case that all 24-port > backplane utilize expander chips directly on the backplane to support > their 24 ports or are they utilized only when something else, such as > another 12-port backplane, is connected to one of the cascade ports in the > back? I think he is referring to the different flavors of the 847, namely the one that uses expanders (E1, E2, E16, E26) vs. the one that does not (the 847A). This page about a storage server build does a very good job of detailing all the different versions of the 847: http://www.natecarlson.com/2010/05/07/review-supermicros-sc847a-4u-chassis-with-36-drive-bays/ --Ware ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] zfs roolback
I'm trying to rollback from a bad patch install on Solaris 10. From the failsafe BE I tried to rollback, but zfs is asking me to provide allow rollback permissions. It's hard for me to tell exactly because the messages are scrolling off the screen before I can read them. Any help would be appreciated. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] is opensolaris support ended?
Hi, I have downloaded and using opensolaris virtual box image which shows below versions zfs version 3 zpool version 14 cat /etc/release shows 2009.06 snv_111b X86 Is this final build available ?? Can i upgrade it to higher version of zfs/zpool ? can i get any updage vdi image to seek zfs/zpool having zpool split support? please help Regards, sridhar. -- 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] rename zpool
zfs close is at zfs file system level. what i am look here is rebuild the file system stack from bottom to top. Once i took the snapshot ( hardware) the snapshot devices carry same copy of data and meta data. If my snapshot device is dev2 then, the metadata will have smpoolsnap. If I need to use dev2 on the same machine since smpoolsnap is already present on dev1 which throws error. what I am looking for is if I can modify this metadata, I can use dev2 with an alternate name so that all file systems would be available with an alternate zpool name. As I mentioned below, I can do it for HPLVM or AIXLVM ( recreatevg command) if i create a snapshot at array level. Thanks & Regards, sridhar -- 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] Any limit on pool hierarchy?
>On 09/11/10 11:46 AM, Maurice Volaski wrote: >> ... >> > >Is that horrendous mess Outlook's fault? If so, please consider not >using it. Yes, it is. :-( Outlook 2011 on the Mac, which just came out, so perhaps I'll get lucky and they will fix it..eventually. -- Maurice Volaski, maurice.vola...@einstein.yu.edu Computing Support Dominick P. Purpura Department of Neuroscience Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] X4540 RIP
>http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/4U/?chs=847 > >Stay away from the 24 port expander backplanes. I've gone thru several >and they still don't work right - timeout and dropped drives under load. >The 12-port works just fine connected to a variety of controllers. If you >insist on the 24-port expander backplane, use a non-expander equipped LSI >controller to drive it. I was wondering if you can clarify. Isn't the case that all 24-port backplane utilize expander chips directly on the backplane to support their 24 ports or are they utilized only when something else, such as another 12-port backplane, is connected to one of the cascade ports in the back? What do you mean by a non-expander equipped LSI controller? BTW, I have three SuperMicro SC846 systems, which 24-port backplanes, and haven't any problem with them. -- Maurice Volaski, maurice.vola...@einstein.yu.edu Computing Support Dominick P. Purpura Department of Neuroscience Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Any limit on pool hierarchy?
I think my initial response got mangled. Oops. >creating a ZFS pool out of files stored on another ZFS pool. The main >reasons that have been given for not doing this are unknown edge and >corner cases that may lead to deadlocks, and that it creates a complex >structure with potentially undesirable and unintended performance and >reliability implications. Computers are continually encountering unknown edge and corner cases in the various things they do all the time. That's what we have testing for. >Deadlocks may occur in low resource >conditions. If resources (disk space and RAM) never run low, the >deadlock scenarios may not arise. It sounds like you mean any low resource condition. Presumably, utilizing complex pool structures like these will tax resources, but there are many other ways to do that. -- Maurice Volaski, maurice.vola...@einstein.yu.edu Computing Support Dominick P. Purpura Department of Neuroscience Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Any limit on pool hierarchy?
On 09/11/10 11:46 AM, Maurice Volaski wrote: > ... > Is that horrendous mess Outlook's fault? If so, please consider not using it. --Toby ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Any limit on pool hierarchy?
creating a ZFS pool out of files stored on another ZFS pool. The mainreasons that have been given for not doing this are unknown edge andcorner cases that may lead to deadlocks, and that it creates a complexstructure with potentially undesirable and unintended performance andreliability implications.Computers are continually encountering unknown edge and corner cases in the various things they do all the time. That's what we have testing for.Deadlocks may occur in low resourceconditions. If resources (disk space and RAM) never run low, thedeadlock scenarios may not arise.It sounds like you mean any low resource condition. Presumably, utilizing complex pool structures like these will tax resources, but there are many other ways to do that.--Maurice Volaski, mailto:maurice.vola...@einstein.yu.edu";>maurice.vola...@einstein.yu.eduComputing SupportDominick P. Purpura Department of NeuroscienceAlbert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] X4540 RIP
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 11:51:02PM -0800, matthew patton wrote: > > I have this with 36 2TB drives (and 2 separate boot drives). > > > > http://www.colfax-intl.com/jlrid/SpotLight_more_Acc.asp?L=134&S=58&B=2267 > > That's just a Supermicro SC847. > > http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/4U/?chs=847 > > Stay away from the 24 port expander backplanes. I've gone thru > several and they still don't work right - timeout and dropped drives > under load. The 12-port works just fine connected to a variety of > controllers. If you insist on the 24-port expander backplane, use a > non-expander equipped LSI controller to drive it. What do you mean by non-expander equipped LSI controller? > > I got fed up with the 24-port expander board and went with -A1 (all > independent) and that's worked much more reliably. Ray ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to create a checkpoint?
I think you maybe wanting the same kind of thing that NexentaStor does when it upgrade - takes snapshot and marks it a checkpoint in case the upgrade fails - right? I think you may have to snap then clone from that and use beadm thought it's something you should play with... --- W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843 Visit my blog at http://www.khushil.com/ On 9 November 2010 14:43, Oscar del Rio wrote: > On 11/ 9/10 01:47 AM, Peter Taps wrote: > >> My understanding is that there is a way to create a zfs "checkpoint" >> before doing any system upgrade or installing a new software. If there is a >> problem, one can simply rollback to the stable checkpoint. >> >> I am familiar with snapshots and clones. However, I am not clear on how to >> manage checkpoints. I would appreciate your help in how I can create, >> destroy and roll back to a checkpoint, and how I can list all the >> checkpoints. >> >> > Boot environments are managed with beadm > http://dlc.sun.com/osol/docs/content/dev/snapupgrade/create.html > > ___ > 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] changing zpool information
Hi, If I compare zpool is like volume group or disk group, as an example on AIX we have aixlvm. AIX lvm provideds command like recreatevg by providing snashot devices. In case of HPLVM or for Linux LVM, we can create a new vg/lv structure and add the snapshoted devices in that and then we import the vg. I would like to know fo zpool for snapshot devices once array snapshot is taken. Thanks & Regards, sridhar. -- 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] zpool does not like iSCSI ?
>From Oracle Support we got the following info: Bug ID: 6992124 reboot of Sol10 u9 host makes zpool FAULTED when zpool uses iscsi LUNs This is a duplicate of: Bug ID: 6907687 zfs pool is not automatically fixed when disk are brought back online or after boot An IDR patch already exists, but no official patch yet. - Andreas -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to create a checkpoint?
On 11/ 9/10 01:47 AM, Peter Taps wrote: My understanding is that there is a way to create a zfs "checkpoint" before doing any system upgrade or installing a new software. If there is a problem, one can simply rollback to the stable checkpoint. I am familiar with snapshots and clones. However, I am not clear on how to manage checkpoints. I would appreciate your help in how I can create, destroy and roll back to a checkpoint, and how I can list all the checkpoints. Boot environments are managed with beadm http://dlc.sun.com/osol/docs/content/dev/snapupgrade/create.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to create a checkpoint?
Actually he likely means Boot Environments. On OpenSolaris or Solaris 11 you
would use the pkg/ beadm commands. Previous Solaris used Live Upgrade.
See the documentation for IPS.
--
bdha
On Nov 9, 2010, at 2:56, Tomas Ögren wrote:
> On 08 November, 2010 - Peter Taps sent me these 0,7K bytes:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> My understanding is that there is a way to create a zfs "checkpoint"
>> before doing any system upgrade or installing a new software. If
>> there is a problem, one can simply rollback to the stable checkpoint.
>>
>> I am familiar with snapshots and clones. However, I am not clear on
>> how to manage checkpoints. I would appreciate your help in how I can
>> create, destroy and roll back to a checkpoint, and how I can list all
>> the checkpoints.
>
> You probably refer to snapshots, as ZFS does not have checkpoints (and
> is pretty much the same as a snapshot).
>
> /Tomas
> --
> Tomas Ögren, st...@acc.umu.se, http://www.acc.umu.se/~stric/
> |- Student at Computing Science, University of Umeå
> `- Sysadmin at {cs,acc}.umu.se
> ___
> 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
