[zfs-discuss] Aaron Toponce: Install ZFS on Debian GNU/Linux
fyi
Sent to you by David E. via Google Reader: Aaron Toponce: Install ZFS
on Debian GNU/Linux via Planet Ubuntu on 4/17/12
Quick post on installing ZFS as a kernel module, not FUSE, on Debian
GNU/Linux. The documents already exist for getting this going, I’m just
hoping to spread this to a larger audience, in case you are unaware
that it exists.
First, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has been working on
porting the native Solaris ZFS source to the Linux kernel as a kernel
module. So long as the project remains under contract by the Department
of Defense in the United States, I’m confident there will be continuous
updates. You can track the progress of that porting at
http://zfsonlinux.org.
Now, download the SPL and ZFS sources. I’m running the latest RC, which
seems to be quite stable:
$ mkdir ~/src/{spl,zfs} $ cd ~/src/spl $ wget
http://github.com/downloads/zfsonlinux/spl/spl-0.6.0-rc8.tar.gz $ cd
~/src/zfs $ wget
http://github.com/downloads/zfsonlinux/zfs/zfs-0.6.0-rc8.tar.gz
At this point, you will need to install the dependencies for SPL, then
go ahead and compile and make the necessary .deb files:
$ sudo aptitude install build-essential gawk alien fakeroot
linux-headers-$(uname -r) $ cd ~/src/spl $ tar -xf spl-0.6.0-rc8.tar.gz
$ cd spl-0.6.0-rc8 $ ./configure $ make deb
Now do the same for ZFS:
$ sudo aptitude install zlib1g-dev uuid-dev libblkid-dev libselinux-dev
parted lsscsi $ cd ~/src/zfs $ tar -xf zfs-0.6.0-rc8.tar.gz $ cd
zfs-0.6.0-rc8 $ ./configure $ make deb
You should have built both the SPL and ZFS Debian packages, at which
point you can install:
$ sudo dpkg -i ~/src/{spl,zfs}/*.deb
If you’re running Ubuntu, which I know most of you are, you can install
the packages from the Launchpad PPA https://launchpad.net/~zfs-native.
A word of note: the manpages get installed to /share/man/. I found this
troubling. You can modify your $MANPATH variable to
include /share/man/man8/, or by creating symlinks, which is the
approach I took:
# cd /usr/share/man/man8/ # ln -s /share/man/man8/zdb.8 zdb.8 # ln
-s /share/man/man8/zfs.8 zfs.8 # ln -s /share/man/man8/zpool.8 zpool.8
Now, make your zpool, and start playing:
$ sudo zpool create test raidz sdd sde sdf sdg sdh sdi
It is stable enough to run a ZFS root filesystem on a GNU/Linux
installation for your workstation as something to play around with. It
is copy-on-write, supports compression, deduplication, file atomicity,
off-disk caching, encryption, and much more. At this point,
unfortunately, I’m convinced that ZFS as a Linux kernel module will
become “stable” long before Btrfs will be stable in the mainline
kernel. Either way, it doesn’t matter to me. Both are Free Software,
and both provide the long needed features we’ve needed with today’s
storage needs. Competition is healthy, and I love having choice. Right
now, that choice might just be ZFS.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Planet Ubuntu using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your
favorite sites
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Drive upgrades
On 2012-Apr-17 17:25:36 +1000, Jim Klimov wrote: >For the sake of archives, can you please post a common troubleshooting >techinque which users can try at home to see if their disks honour the >request or not? ;) I guess it would involve random-write bandwidths in >two cases? 1) Issue "disable write cache" command to drive 2) Write several MB of data to drive 3) As soon as drive acknowledges completion, remove power to drive (this will require a electronic switch in the drive's power lead) 4) Wait until drive spins down. 5) Power up drive and wait until ready 6) Verify data written in (2) can be read. 7) Argue with drive vendor that drive doesn't meet specifications :-) A similar approach can also be used to verify that NCQ & cache flush commands actually work. -- Peter Jeremy pgp4WNXKBfWaW.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import [UPDATE]
Hi Carsten, Am 17.04.12 17:40, schrieb Carsten John: Hello everybody, just to let you know what happened in the meantime: I was able to open a Service Request at Oracle. The issue is a known bug (Bug 6742788 : assertion panic at: zfs:zap_deref_leaf) The bug has bin fixed (according to Oracle support) since build 164, but there is no fix for Solaris 11 available so far (will be fixed in S11U7?). There is a workaround available that works (partly), but my system crashed again when trying to rebuild the offending zfs within the affected zpool. At the moment I'm waiting for a so called "interim diagnostic relief" patch cu Carsten Afaik, bug 6742788 is fixed in S11 FCS (release) but you might be hitting this bug: 7098658. This bug, according to MOS, is still unresolved. My solution is to mount the affected zfs fs in read-only mode upon importing the zpool and setting it to rw afterwards. Cheers, budy ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import [UPDATE]
On 17/04/2012 16:40, Carsten John wrote: Hello everybody, just to let you know what happened in the meantime: I was able to open a Service Request at Oracle. The issue is a known bug (Bug 6742788 : assertion panic at: zfs:zap_deref_leaf) The bug has bin fixed (according to Oracle support) since build 164, but there is no fix for Solaris 11 available so far (will be fixed in S11U7?). There is a workaround available that works (partly), but my system crashed again when trying to rebuild the offending zfs within the affected zpool. At the moment I'm waiting for a so called "interim diagnostic relief" patch so are you on s11, can I see pkg info entire this bug is fixed in FCS s11 release, as that is 175b, and it got fixed in build 164. So if you have solaris 11 that CR is fixed. In solaris 10 it is fixed in 147440-14/147441-14 ( sparc/x86 ) Enda cu Carsten ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool split failing
Hi Matt, Regarding this issue: >As an aside, I have noticed that on the old laptop, it would not boot >if the USB part of the mirror was not attached to the laptop, >successful boot could only be achieved when both mirror devices were >online. Is this a know issue with ZFS ? bug ? Which Solaris release is this? I see related bugs are fixed so I'm not sure what is going on here. I detach mirrored root pool disks and booting is not impacted. The best method is to let ZFS know that the device is detached before the reboot, like this: # zpool detach rpool usb-disk Thanks, Cindy On 04/17/12 04:47, Matt Keenan wrote: Hi Cindy, Tried out your example below in a vbox env, and detaching a device from a pool makes that device simply unavailable. and simply cannot be re-imported. I then tried setting up a mirrored rpool within a vbox env, agreed one device is not USB however, when booted into the rpool, split worked, I then tried booting directly into the rpool on the faulty laptop, and split still failed. My only conclusion for failure is - The rpool I'm attempting to split has a LOT of history been around for some 2 years now, so has gone through a lot of upgrades etc, there may be some ZFS history there that's not letting this happen, BTW the version is 33 which is current. - or is it possible that one of the devices being a USB device is causing the failure ? I don't know. My reason for splitting the pool was so I could attach the clean USB rpool to another laptop and simply attach the disk from the new laptop, let it resilver, installgrub to new laptop disk device and boot it up and I would be back in action. As a workaround I'm trying to simply attach my USB rpool to the new laptop and use zfs replace to effectively replace the offline device with the new laptop disk device. So far so good, 12% resilvering, so fingers crossed this will work. As an aside, I have noticed that on the old laptop, it would not boot if the USB part of the mirror was not attached to the laptop, successful boot could only be achieved when both mirror devices were online. Is this a know issue with ZFS ? bug ? cheers Matt On 04/16/12 10:05 PM, Cindy Swearingen wrote: Hi Matt, I don't have a way to reproduce this issue and I don't know why this is failing. Maybe someone else does. I know someone who recently split a root pool running the S11 FCS release without problems. I'm not a fan of root pools on external USB devices. I haven't tested these steps in a while but you might try these steps instead. Make sure you have a recent snapshot of your rpool on the unhealthy laptop. 1. Ensure that the existing root pool and disks are healthy. # zpool status -x 2. Detach the USB disk. # zpool detach rpool disk-name 3. Connect the USB disk to the new laptop. 4. Force import the pool on the USB disk. # zpool import -f rpool rpool2 5. Device cleanup steps, something like: Boot from media and import rpool2 as rpool. Make sure the device info is visible. Reset BIOS to boot from this disk. On 04/16/12 04:12, Matt Keenan wrote: Hi Attempting to split a mirrored rpool and fails with error : Unable to split rpool: pool already exists I have a laptop with main disk mirrored to an external USB. However as the laptop is not too healthy I'd like to split the pool into two pools and attach the external drive to another laptop and mirror it to the new laptop. What I did : - Booted laptop into an live DVD - Import the rpool: $ zpool import rpool - Attempt to split : $ zpool split rpool rpool-ext" - Error message shown and split fails : Unable to split rpool: pool already exists - So I tried exporting the pool and re-importing with a different name and I still get the same error. There are no other zpools on the system, both zpool list and zpool export return nothing other than the rpool I've just imported. I'm somewhat stumped... any ideas ? cheers Matt ___ 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
Re: [zfs-discuss] kernel panic during zfs import [UPDATE]
Hello everybody, just to let you know what happened in the meantime: I was able to open a Service Request at Oracle. The issue is a known bug (Bug 6742788 : assertion panic at: zfs:zap_deref_leaf) The bug has bin fixed (according to Oracle support) since build 164, but there is no fix for Solaris 11 available so far (will be fixed in S11U7?). There is a workaround available that works (partly), but my system crashed again when trying to rebuild the offending zfs within the affected zpool. At the moment I'm waiting for a so called "interim diagnostic relief" patch cu Carsten -- Max Planck Institut fuer marine Mikrobiologie - Network Administration - Celsiustr. 1 D-28359 Bremen Tel.: +49 421 2028568 Fax.: +49 421 2028565 PGP public key:http://www.mpi-bremen.de/Carsten_John.html ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Drive upgrades
On Apr 17, 2012, at 12:25 AM, Jim Klimov wrote: > 2012-04-17 5:15, Richard Elling wrote: >> For the archives... >> >> Write-back cache enablement is toxic for file systems that do not issue >> cache flush commands, such as Solaris' UFS. In the early days of ZFS, >> on Solaris 10 or before ZFS was bootable on OpenSolaris, it was not > > uncommon to have ZFS and UFS on the same system. >> >> NB, there are a number of consumer-grade IDE/*ATA disks that ignore >> disabling >> the write buffer. Hence, it is not always a win to enable the write >> buffer that cannot >> be disabled. >> -- richard > > For the sake of archives, can you please post a common troubleshooting > techinque which users can try at home to see if their disks honour the > request or not? ;) I guess it would involve random-write bandwidths in > two cases? I am aware of only one method that is guaranteed to work: contact the manufacturer, sign NDA, read the docs. -- richard -- ZFS Performance and Training richard.ell...@richardelling.com +1-760-896-4422 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool split failing
On 04/17/12 01:00 PM, Jim Klimov wrote: 2012-04-17 14:47, Matt Keenan wrote: - or is it possible that one of the devices being a USB device is causing the failure ? I don't know. Might be, I've got little experience with those beside LiveUSB imagery ;) My reason for splitting the pool was so I could attach the clean USB rpool to another laptop and simply attach the disk from the new laptop, let it resilver, installgrub to new laptop disk device and boot it up and I would be back in action. If the USB disk split-off were to work, I'd rather try booting the laptop off the USB disk, if BIOS permits, or I'd boot off a LiveCD/LiveUSB (if Solaris 11 has one - or from installation media and break out into a shell) and try to import the rpool from USB disk and then attach the laptop's disk to it to resilver. This is exactly what I am doing, booted new laptop into LiveCD, imported USB pool, and zpool replacing the old laptop disk device which is in degraded state, with the new laptop disk device (after I partitioned to keep windows install). As a workaround I'm trying to simply attach my USB rpool to the new laptop and use zfs replace to effectively replace the offline device with the new laptop disk device. So far so good, 12% resilvering, so fingers crossed this will work. Won't this overwrite the USB disk with the new laptop's (empty) disk? The way you describe it... No the offline disk in this instance is the old laptop's internal disk, the online device is the USB drive. As an aside, I have noticed that on the old laptop, it would not boot if the USB part of the mirror was not attached to the laptop, successful boot could only be achieved when both mirror devices were online. Is this a know issue with ZFS ? bug ? Shouldn't be as mirrors are to protect against the disk failures. What was your rpool's "failmode" zpool-level attribute? It might have some relevance, but should define kernel's reaction to "catastrophic failures" of the pool, and loss of a mirror's side IMHO should not be one?.. Try failmode=continue and see if that helps the rpool, to be certain. I think that's what the installer should have done. Exactly what I would have thought ZFS should actually help here not hinder. From what I can see the default failmode as set by install is "wait" which is exactly what is happening when I attempt to boot. Just tried setting zpool failmode=continue and unfortunately still fails to boot, failmode=wait is definitely the default. cheers Matt ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool split failing
2012-04-17 14:47, Matt Keenan wrote: - or is it possible that one of the devices being a USB device is causing the failure ? I don't know. Might be, I've got little experience with those beside LiveUSB imagery ;) My reason for splitting the pool was so I could attach the clean USB rpool to another laptop and simply attach the disk from the new laptop, let it resilver, installgrub to new laptop disk device and boot it up and I would be back in action. If the USB disk split-off were to work, I'd rather try booting the laptop off the USB disk, if BIOS permits, or I'd boot off a LiveCD/LiveUSB (if Solaris 11 has one - or from installation media and break out into a shell) and try to import the rpool from USB disk and then attach the laptop's disk to it to resilver. As a workaround I'm trying to simply attach my USB rpool to the new laptop and use zfs replace to effectively replace the offline device with the new laptop disk device. So far so good, 12% resilvering, so fingers crossed this will work. Won't this overwrite the USB disk with the new laptop's (empty) disk? The way you describe it... As an aside, I have noticed that on the old laptop, it would not boot if the USB part of the mirror was not attached to the laptop, successful boot could only be achieved when both mirror devices were online. Is this a know issue with ZFS ? bug ? Shouldn't be as mirrors are to protect against the disk failures. What was your rpool's "failmode" zpool-level attribute? It might have some relevance, but should define kernel's reaction to "catastrophic failures" of the pool, and loss of a mirror's side IMHO should not be one?.. Try failmode=continue and see if that helps the rpool, to be certain. I think that's what the installer should have done. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool split failing
Hi Cindy, Tried out your example below in a vbox env, and detaching a device from a pool makes that device simply unavailable. and simply cannot be re-imported. I then tried setting up a mirrored rpool within a vbox env, agreed one device is not USB however, when booted into the rpool, split worked, I then tried booting directly into the rpool on the faulty laptop, and split still failed. My only conclusion for failure is - The rpool I'm attempting to split has a LOT of history been around for some 2 years now, so has gone through a lot of upgrades etc, there may be some ZFS history there that's not letting this happen, BTW the version is 33 which is current. - or is it possible that one of the devices being a USB device is causing the failure ? I don't know. My reason for splitting the pool was so I could attach the clean USB rpool to another laptop and simply attach the disk from the new laptop, let it resilver, installgrub to new laptop disk device and boot it up and I would be back in action. As a workaround I'm trying to simply attach my USB rpool to the new laptop and use zfs replace to effectively replace the offline device with the new laptop disk device. So far so good, 12% resilvering, so fingers crossed this will work. As an aside, I have noticed that on the old laptop, it would not boot if the USB part of the mirror was not attached to the laptop, successful boot could only be achieved when both mirror devices were online. Is this a know issue with ZFS ? bug ? cheers Matt On 04/16/12 10:05 PM, Cindy Swearingen wrote: Hi Matt, I don't have a way to reproduce this issue and I don't know why this is failing. Maybe someone else does. I know someone who recently split a root pool running the S11 FCS release without problems. I'm not a fan of root pools on external USB devices. I haven't tested these steps in a while but you might try these steps instead. Make sure you have a recent snapshot of your rpool on the unhealthy laptop. 1. Ensure that the existing root pool and disks are healthy. # zpool status -x 2. Detach the USB disk. # zpool detach rpool disk-name 3. Connect the USB disk to the new laptop. 4. Force import the pool on the USB disk. # zpool import -f rpool rpool2 5. Device cleanup steps, something like: Boot from media and import rpool2 as rpool. Make sure the device info is visible. Reset BIOS to boot from this disk. On 04/16/12 04:12, Matt Keenan wrote: Hi Attempting to split a mirrored rpool and fails with error : Unable to split rpool: pool already exists I have a laptop with main disk mirrored to an external USB. However as the laptop is not too healthy I'd like to split the pool into two pools and attach the external drive to another laptop and mirror it to the new laptop. What I did : - Booted laptop into an live DVD - Import the rpool: $ zpool import rpool - Attempt to split : $ zpool split rpool rpool-ext" - Error message shown and split fails : Unable to split rpool: pool already exists - So I tried exporting the pool and re-importing with a different name and I still get the same error. There are no other zpools on the system, both zpool list and zpool export return nothing other than the rpool I've just imported. I'm somewhat stumped... any ideas ? cheers Matt ___ 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
Re: [zfs-discuss] Solaris 11/ZFS historical reporting
On 04/16/12 20:18, Anh Quach wrote: Are there any tools that ship w/ Solaris 11 for historical reporting on things like network activity, zpool iops/bandwidth, etc., or is it pretty much roll-your-own scripts and whatnot? For network activity look at flowstat it can read exacct format files. For IO depends what level you want to look at, if it is the device level iostat, if it is how ZFS is using the devices look at 'zpool iostat'. If it is the filesystem level look at fsstat. Also look acctadm(1M). -- Darren J Moffat ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Drive upgrades
2012-04-17 5:15, Richard Elling wrote:
For the archives...
Write-back cache enablement is toxic for file systems that do not issue
cache flush commands, such as Solaris' UFS. In the early days of ZFS,
on Solaris 10 or before ZFS was bootable on OpenSolaris, it was not
> uncommon to have ZFS and UFS on the same system.
NB, there are a number of consumer-grade IDE/*ATA disks that ignore
disabling
the write buffer. Hence, it is not always a win to enable the write
buffer that cannot
be disabled.
-- richard
For the sake of archives, can you please post a common troubleshooting
techinque which users can try at home to see if their disks honour the
request or not? ;) I guess it would involve random-write bandwidths in
two cases?
And for the sake of archives, here's what I do on my home system for
its pools to toggle the cache on disks involved (could be scripted
better to detect disk names from zpool listing, but works-for-me
as-is):
# cat /etc/rc2.d/S95disable-pool-wcache
#!/bin/sh
case "$1" in
start)
for C in 7; do for T in 0 1 2 3 4 5; do
( echo cache; echo write; echo display; echo disable; echo
display ) | format -e -d c${C}t${T}d0 &
done; done
wait
sync
;;
stop)
for C in 7; do for T in 0 1 2 3 4 5; do
( echo cache; echo write; echo display; echo enable; echo
display ) | format -e -d c${C}t${T}d0 &
done; done
wait
sync
;;
*)
for C in 7; do for T in 0 1 2 3 4 5; do
( echo cache; echo write; echo display ) | format -e -d
c${C}t${T}d0 &
done; done
wait
sync
;;
esac
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
