Re: [zfs-discuss] Opensolaris is apparently dead
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 5:11 AM, Andrej Podzimek and...@podzimek.org wrote: I did not say there is something wrong about published reports. I often read them. (Who doesn't?) However, there are no trustworthy reports on this topic yet, since Btrfs is unfinished. Let's see some examples: (1) http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=zfs_ext4_btrfsnum=1 My little few yen in this massacre: Phoronix usually compares apples with oranges and pigs with candies. So be careful. Disclaimer: I use Reiser4 A Killer FS™. :-) -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Tim Cook t...@cook.ms wrote: Not to mention you've then got full-time staff on-hand to constantly be replacing parts. Maybe I don't understand something, but we also had on-hand full-time staff to constantly replacing Dell's parts..., so what's the problem? Dell or HP or Sun are crashing exactly as same as SuperMicro machines (well, not really: Dell is more horrible, if you ask). Vendor, that sells us SuperMicro boxes offers as same support as we could get from HP or Dell. So all we do is simply pull out off the rack the thing and let vendor takes care of it. Machines are built automatically from the kickstart. What exactly I am missing then? Your model doesn't scale for 99% of businesses out there. Unless they're google, and they can leave a dead server in a rack for years, it's an unsustainable plan. Not sure what you're talking about here, but if I run a cluster, then I am probably OK if some node[s] gone. :) Now, how it does not scales, if the vendor that works with IBM directly (in my case there is no real IBM in the über-country I am living but a third-party company that only merchandizing the name) came and took my hardware for repair. Vendor that works with the Dell (same situation) directly came and took my hardware for repair. Vendor that works with HP directly came and took my hardware for repair. Apple officially NOT repairing their XServe, but give parts to a third-party company that does the same to HP or IBM (!) or Dell or Supermicro — that happens in the country I am living, yes. And now the vendor that works directly with Supermicro took my hardware for repair on the same conditions as others. In any case, no matter what box (white, black, beige, silver, green, red, purple) I still experiencing: 1. A downtime of the box (obviously). 2. A chain of phonecalls to support, language of which could be more censored. 3. A vendor coming and taking a brick with himself. 4. A some time for repair taking a while. 5. A smile from the vendor, when they returning the box back to the DC. This sequence yields to all the vendors I've mentioned. Now, what exactly is the problem other than just scary grandma's stories that my model does not scales and big snow bear will eat me alive? I have to admit that I have no experience running 10K servers in one block like you do, so my respect is to you and I'd like to know the exact problems I might step into and the solution to avoid. Since you running this amount of machines, so you know it and you can share the experience. But from what I do have experience, I can not foresee some additional problems that we have with HP or Dell or Sun or IBM boxes. So could you please elaborate your statements? I would appreciate that (and some other folks here as well would be interested to listen to your lesson). Thank you. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Frank Cusack frank+lists/z...@linetwo.net wrote: Um, there's plenty of things Solaris can do that Linux and FreeBSD can't do, but non-root privileged ports is not one of them. Unfortunately, yes... :( -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Sigbjorn Lie sigbj...@nixtra.com wrote: Using least privileges' net_privaddr allows a process to bind to a port below 1000 without granting full root access to the process owner. Oh, I just wrongly read previous e-mail. Unfortunately, yes — I meant that BSD and Linux lacks of lots of things that Solaris can do. And, yes, net_privaddr allows you to run anything below 1000 port from true non-root. :) -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Tim Cook t...@cook.ms wrote: ... [All BS skipped] Gladly, it's clear you haven't actually ever had a service call with a proper 4-hour support contract from any major vendor. Blah-blah-blah... Mr. Capercaillie, you're not listening to anybody except to yourself. 1. Vendors that works with SuperMicro DOES HAVE four-hour on-site immediate support, if you pay for that — just like any other vendor. We didn't had that since no need. But if you need that — it is not an issue. 2. Support of SuperMicro in our country does not differs from especially IBM that is not even a real IBM, but a third-party company, or HP or Dell or especially Sun, which has even much more quirks and hassles around than SuperMicro support. Besides, before you post a nonsenses here rudely insulting people, do some little homework by trying googling next time. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:01 AM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.com wrote: Ok guys, can we please kill this thread about commodity versus enterprise hardware? Let's agree on one thing: Some people believe commodity hardware is just as good as enterprise systems. Other people do not believe that. In both situations, the conclusion has been reached based on personal experience. (I am one of the latter, and I have specific stories if anybody's interested off-list.) Even if one of them isn't as reliable as the other, it can still be acceptable in farms, where some number of failed systems is acceptable. +1. The only thing that SuperMicro is not what you hurry to call commodity: http://www.supermicro.com/products/nfo/files/SAS2/SAS2_1004.pdf — these boxes works just fine. YMMV though. Cheers. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 3:26 AM, Linder, Doug doug.lin...@merchantlink.com wrote: Hint: enterprise-class support != consumer-class support. You buy consumer hardware, you pay consumer prices, you get consumer support. +1 -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: Not in my neck of the woods, Sun have always been most competitive. You find Sun to be a better deal than Supermicro? Especially, when you're sticking a very large number of disks into it, and can't source the diskless caddies elsewhere? My few little cents here. I am running stuff on Supermicro and OpenSolaris, starting from snv_121 times. Supermicro is a very cheap yet also reliable stuff (which is very strange!!, ha-ha!). Saying Sun hardware is competitive — I would doubt quince. The cheapest available from Sun is SunFire x2270 — http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/x86/sun-fire-x2270-m2-ds-070252.pdf — I have some experience with this machine and I have to say: while it is good machine and built well, yet it is very (I mean VERY) noisy, one non-redundant power supply (what a lose!) and it very-very non-green: will eat your power like a diesel locomotive. :) Now, guts inside are quite cheap, so basically it is just a label Sun on top of an average asian-built hardware. Yes, they are good machines, but at the same time nothing really special. Price is quite big. Supermicro is as same beast, just 10x times (well, maybe less) cheaper and in my case I had to remove DVD drive in order to let the thing boot to install the OpenSolaris — somewhat OSOL could not detect the DVD drive and boot always hangs (at installation phase). So I installed the thing from USB stick. After that everything is OK. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:27 PM, Erik Trimble erik.trim...@oracle.com wrote: But you're not doing an equal comparison. Thanks for the enlightening. I am also working in a datacenter, like you do, so I am also perfectly aware about hardware just like you are — that's for the record. I've picked up hardware and it supposed to assume that *equivalent* machine from SuperMicro is cheaper (because I assume I am talking to pros here?). Besides, I know what is inside that Sun Fire thing, I know the guts, manufacturer and I even know where the factory is located, BTW. Again: nothing special with that machine and it also has one one power supply (which is very convenient BOFH excuse when your Java failed on a trade bid). Other machines from what Snorcle offers — that has better hardware (yes, it has) and also has better supplies etc — but their prices are also damn bigger. Once again: I certainly like that Sun hardware and I think it is good one. But, again, I am saying that it is expensive stuff and Super Micro can easily replace that thing (unless Snorcle going to break Solaris intentionally not to boot on that hardware, which is very possible, because Oracle has less than zero trust among geeks). OEM equipment has a whole bunch of different features that you can't get via a build-it-yourself rig like Supermicro (even if you are having a whitebox vendor assemble the Supermicro and not do it yourself). Not just Sun equipment, but all OEM equipment is in a totally different class. Oh sure it must be so, since it is assembled in Oracle (well, not really, but at least logo is there). :-) And what are that outstanding features we can not get on equivalent Super Micro, I'd like to know? For example, what's so special in that machine, in particular? Can you please tell me exactly, because I'd like to hear it explicitly? Or you want me to tell you a real cost-estimate for the actual parts and tell the actual price of each gut, including a case? It is almost like a cents, it is cheap like mushrooms. And folks @oracle.com perfecly knows that. But price is still huge. Question is for what exactly (I really don't know why the price is so high — maybe Sun logo contains pure platinum or chassis is golden? — I don't know)... Why price is so high? Now, maybe you don't want those extra features, and that's fine. But don't think that you can say well, my Fiat (car) is better than your Peterbuilt (semi-), since it costs 10% of the price, and both can drive down the highway at 100 kph. Up front pricing is but one of many different aspects of buying a server, and for many of us, it's not even the most important. No-no, your Fiat is actually much worse, it is like a russian LADA. :) Because with SuperMicro for the same price I've got more RAM, better CPU, larger storage and TWO power supplies. And yes, it is more silent and takes less power, so more greener. Support is also very good: parts are replaced very quickly, if failed (we don't have only just one box in our DC, you know). We also got hardware-only support (unlike Snorcle offers) and also price is much much smaller. But to be fair enough, I have to admit that LED indicators blinks better on Sun machines — the color is more vivid, cool and an aluminum case is more look like it is an Apple XServe. :-) When doing price comparison, you have to compare within the same class. Right. You need an explicit drill-down, fine. So the Sun Fire X2270 M2 Server on pure list price costs $3,962, one year warranty. And now identical Supermicro 6016T-TF with exactly the same config/warranty for the full price what I have to pull out my wallet is $2,190 — which is mostly as twice as cheaper. I think red Oracle logo label (or blue Sun's) must cost the rest — must be made from a chunk of platinum... :) -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 5:57 AM, Paul B. Henson hen...@acm.org wrote: ZFS is great. It's pretty much the only reason we're running Solaris. Well, if this is the the only reason, then run FreeBSD instead. I run Solaris because of the kernel architecture and other things that Linux or any BSD simply can not do. For example, running something on a port below 1000, but as a true non-root (i.e. no privileges dropping, but straight-forward run by a non-root). No new version of OpenSolaris (which we were about to start migrating to). No new update of Solaris 10. *Zero* information about what the hell's going on... Snorcle is simply killing the community. That's what just happening. They think they will be like an Apple or Microsoft to compete with IBM: if you want Solaris, then buy it. Business plan is pretty clear: screw you, community, we don't need ya. Well, not surprising — they always was dumb towards the community, since they don't really understands its importance. The main problem is that Solaris will be not popular anymore. Just for a record: Solaris popularity grew because of OpenSolaris. If you give it to geeks, they will play with it, build stuff, build tools, conquer infrastructures and then spread proprietary software, like Oracle DB, for example. That would lead to more knowledge base, to more experience and brains availability. But what will happen: geeks will dump OpenSolaris into the trash and will never make it any better. Just for a record: Solaris 9 and 10 from Sun was a plain crap to work with, and still is inconvenient conservative stagnationware. They won't build a free cool tools for Solaris, hence the whole thing will turned to be a dry job for trained monkeys wearing suits in a corporations. Nothing more. That's a philosophy of last decade, but IT now is very changing and is very different. That is why Oracle's idea to kill community is totally stupid. And that's why IBM will win, because you run the same Linux on their hardware as you run at your home. Yes, Oracle will run good for a while, using the inertia of a hype (and latest their financial report proves that), but soon people will realize that Oracle is just another evil mean beast with great marketing and the same sh*tty products as they always had. Buy Solaris for any single little purpose? No way ever! I may buy support and/or security patches, updates. But not the OS itself. If that is the only option, then I'd rather stick to Linux from other vendor, i.e. RedHat. That will lead me to no more talk to Oracle about software at OS level, only applications (if I am an idiot enough to jump into APEX or something like that). Hence, if all I can do is talk only about hardware (well, not really, because no more hardware-only support!!!), then I'd better talk to IBM, if I need a brand and I consider myself too dumb to get SuperMicro instead. IBM System x3550 M3 is still better by characteristics than equivalent from Oracle, it is OEM if somebody needs that at first place and is still cheaper than Oracle's similar class. And IBM stuff just works great (at least if we talk about hardware). I think Oracle is simply screwing themselves here. They don't realize and understand that yet, but they will. That reminds me the same story about G1 garbage collector in Java which Sun wanted you to buy. ZFS will surely live on as the filesystem under the hood in the doubtlessly forthcoming Oracle database appliances, and I'm sure they'll keep selling their NAS devices. To be honest, if I have to sell my soul to the Oracle, I'd rather will stay with ext4 on Linux. Screw ZFS as well, Oracle can choke down itself with it. Yes, ext is pain in a butt, requires more dance around, but Google lives with it very well (as well as thousands of other companies) and also ext still it gives you a freedom. But for home users? I doubt it. I was about to build a big storage box at home running OpenSolaris, I froze that project. Same here. A lot of nice ideas and potential open-source tools basically frozen and I think gonna be dumped. We (geeks) won't build stuff for Larry just for free. We need OS back opened in reward. So I think OpenSolaris is pretty much game over, thanks to the Oracle. Some Oracle fanboys might call it a plain FUD, hope to get updates etc, but the reality is that Oracle to OpenSolaris is pretty much the same what Palm did for BeOS. Enjoy your last svn_134 build. P.S. At least Java won't die that easy, hopefully. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.com wrote: I'll second that. And I think this is how you can tell the difference: With supermicro, do you have a single support number to call and a 4hour onsite service response time? Yes. BTW, just for the record, people potentially have a bunch of other supermicros in a stock, that they've bought for the rest of the money that left from a budget that was initially estimated to get shiny Sun/Oracle hardware. :) So normally you put them online in a cluster and don't really worry that one of them gone — just power that thing down and disconnect from the whole grid. When you pay for the higher prices for OEM hardware, you're paying for the knowledge of parts availability and compatibility. And a single point vendor who supports the system as a whole, not just one component. What exactly kind of compatibility you're talking about? For example, if I remove my broken mylar air shroud for X8 DP with a MCP-310-18008-0N number because I step on it accidentally :-D, pretty much I think I am gonna ask them to replace exactly THAT thing back. Or you want to let me tell you real stories how OEM hardware is supported and how many emails/phonecalls it involves? One of the very latest (just a week ago): Apple Support reported me that their engineers in US has no green idea why Darwin kernel panics on their XServe, so they suggested me replace mother board TWICE and keep OLDER firmware and never upgrade, since it will cause crash again (although identical server works just fine with newest firmware)! I told them NNN times that traceback of Darwin kernel was yelling about ACPI problem and gave them logs/tracebacks/transcripts etc, but they still have no idea where is the problem. Do I need such support? No. Not at all. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Garrett D'Amore garr...@nexenta.com wrote: The *code* is probably not going away (even updates to the kernel). Even if the community dies, is killed, or commits OGB induced suicide. 1. You used correct word: probably. 2. No community = stale outdated code. There is another piece I'll add: even if Oracle were to stop releasing ZFS or OpenSolaris source code, there are enough of us with a vested interest (commercial!) in its future that we would continue to develop it outside of Oracle. It won't just go stagnant and die. So you're saying let's fork it. Let's imagine some red-eyed zealots decided to do so and did that. They have a shiny new Mercurial repo. Now what? Yet another very dead GNU/Hurd? Let's think through: to fork is to hope for the new product will take off and will be popular in the hackerdom, so the geeks can make new stuff for that, use it, fix it, build knowledge base how to fix foobar when it happens, some best practices etc. The hackerdom IS the place where new real specialists are made. So if Solaris will be not any free, then nobody gives a shell about this OS and it will be as popular as AIX from IBM, where you simply can not find any specialists that could support it. Why? Because nobody knows AIX and does not want to know that. There is no much enhancements to AIX other than done by IBM in their Frankenstein's way. But hey, why to fork ZFS and mess with a stale Solaris code, if the entire future of Solaris is a closed proprietary payware anyway? And opposite to ZFS, we have totally free BTRFS that has been moved to the kernel.org and is *free* and is for Linux that is *already* popular AND *free*? Yes, Linux is not the best OS, if you compare to Solaris in some technical parts that would make things just more sophisticated. But on the other hand Linux is totally free, cheap and you can live with these inconveniences perfectly (just drink more water and breath more deeply). You can curse these inconveniences, but at the end it still works cheap and reliable and is just OK to get things done. Well, BTRFS sucks at some points (software RAID at kernel level comes to mind), but it is still better FS for Linux in many places than extN, but it is still free and more popular. Maybe today BTRFS is not the right answer as ZFS is to the market, but tomorrow it probably will be just as opposite, I think: geeks will use BTRFS and Linux and soon Oracle will deeply regret they're killed Solaris, but no one will throw their energy to make Solaris at least as strong as Linux is now. I believe I can safely say that Nexenta is committed to the continued development and enhancement of this code base -- and to doing so in the open. Yeah, and Nexenta is also committed to backport newest updates from 140 and younger builds just back to snv_134. So I can imagine that soon new OS from Nexenta will be called Super Nexenta Version 134. :-) Currently from what I see, I think Nexenta will also die eventually. Because of BTRFS for Linux, Linux's popularity itself and also thanks to the Oracle's help. Sorry telling this to you, working @nexenta.com though... You, guys, are doing a very good job, but in fact, your days are also doomed, I think. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Garrett D'Amore garr...@nexenta.com wrote: That said, as you appear to be so firmly convinced that there is no possible positive way forward for ZFS or Solaris, I recommend you go elsewhere instead of apparently wasting your time here. Thanks a lot for recommendation, but I think I will figure out where to go without your help. :) You seem to be totally convinced in the future of Linux and BTRFS, so I recommend you leave this community and join that one. Neither I convinced or not. All I say is: 1. There is no new builds. 2. There is no communication from Oracle and they ignore OpenSolaris. 3. OGB decided to suicide and they, actually, says the same. 4. There is no newer Nexenta either — it is all built on top of old build. 5. I want to believe I am wrong and all this above is also BS. But unlikely... In short, I'm not interested in hearing any more of the whining about how terrible things are. However, if you want to work on a positive solution, contact me out of band and I'll talk with you more. As long as Oracle will restore OpenSolaris almost dead community. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: latest (just a week ago): Apple Support reported me that their engineers in US has no green idea why Darwin kernel panics on their Stop it... You did *not* just use apple and support in the same sentence, did you?? ;-) You almost made me spray beer out my nose! Yes, I did. ;) But at least now I know what means number one customer satisfaction in Apple way — it is when the birdbrained dopey will finally understand your concern and will stop repeat the same question about Snow Leopard serial number correctness quince. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Edward Ned Harvey solar...@nedharvey.com wrote: ZFS was the sole factor in my decision to buy a Sun server with solaris this year, to replace my netapp. In addition, I bought some dell machines and paid for solaris on those, to keep around as backup destinations for the production sun file server. I absolutely do believe ZFS is a huge selling point for sun hardware and solaris. Especially for file servers. Yes, as long as you're buying that OS from Oracle. :-) But don't forget that Oracle looks like killing OpenSolaris and entire community after all: there are no latest builds at genunix.org (latest is 134 and seems like that's it), Oracle stopped build OSOL after build 135 (I have no idea where this build is) and Oracle is building Solaris Next or something like that — I have no idea where to get that thing either. So no more free Solaris that you can use in a business, supporting by yourself, no more chance to build a reliable free storage or something like that (Nexenta is building their stuff on top of *outdated* 134 build). Latest checkout won't build OS either (I tried and it fails). So the repository might be intentionally broken, in order you not to build stuff yourself, but actually go and buy Oracle product. Also no more free security updates and no more hardware-only support. That means that community soon will shrink to zero. Oracle basically lied about Fedora/RHEL model analogy (which would be great if that would happen). I wish I am wrong, but looks to me pretty much game over, folks: Oracle appeared to be complete idiots towards the community. Same probably will happen to Java. :-( -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Loss of L2ARC SSD Behaviour
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:57 AM, Brandon High bh...@freaks.com wrote: I believe that the L2ARC behaves the same as a pool with multiple top-level vdevs. It's not typical striping, where every write goes to all devices. Writes may go to only one device, or may avoid a device entirely while using several other. The decision about where to place data is done at write time, so no fixed width stripes are created at allocation time. That's nothing to believe or not to believe much. Each write access to the L2ARC devices are grouped and sent in-sequence. Queue is used to sort them out like to larger or fewer chunks to write. L2ARC behaves in a rotor fashion, simply sweeping writes through available space. That's all the magic, nothing very special... Answering to Mike's main question, behavior on failure is quite simple: once some L2ARC device[s] gone, the others will continue to function. Impact: a little performance losing, some time needs to warm them up and sort things out. No serious consequences or data loss here. Take care, folks. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Oracle to no longer support ZFS on OpenSolaris?
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Ken Gunderson kgund...@teamcool.net wrote: Greetings All: Granted there has been much fear, uncertainty, and doubt following Oracle's take over of Sun, but I ran across this on a FreeBSD mailing list post dated 4/20/2010 ...Seems that Oracle won't offer support for ZFS on opensolaris Link here to full post here: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2010-April/215269.html I am not surprised it comes from FreeBSD mail list. :) I am amazed of their BSD conferences when they presenting all this *BSD stuff using Apple Macs (they claim it is a FreeBSD, just very bad version of it), Ubuntu Linux (not yet BSD) or GNU/Microsoft Windows (oh, everybody does that sin, right?) with a PowerPoint running on it (sure, who wants ugly OpenOffice if there no brain enough to use LaTeX). As for a starter, please somebody read this: http://developers.sun.ru/techdays2010/reports/OracleSolarisTrack/TD_STP_OracleSolarisFuture_Roberts.pdf ...and thus better I suggest to refrain people broadcasting a complete garbage from a trash dump places to spread this kind of FUD to the public and thus just shaking an air with no meaning behind. Take care. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Moving a pool from FreeBSD 8.0 to opensolaris
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Mattias Pantzare pant...@ludd.ltu.se wrote: On a PC EFI is very OS specific as most OS on that platform does not support EFI. What you mean by most OS on PC does not support EFI and what is PC platform anyway? There is some crappy i386 hardware that does not supports EFI booting — this part is true, but so what? — e.g. ACPI is also often screwed (remembering 0.5 year ago shouting on a Slashdot how one dude was trying to boot FreeBSD and it rendered that hardware was designed only for Windows and remembering that OpenSolaris pretends to be Windows in this case). EFI is a label, that differs from the VTOC mainly by supporting larger than 2GB disks (exceptions are SCSI and SSD drives), no information about cylinders, head or sectors is stored there and it is supported on x86 as well. The label is created by default when you format your drive in Solaris, using entire disk. Label is not any OS dependent. The only thing that if it comes to Linux, you have to enable GPT/EFI support in the kernel, because in x86 and amd64 kernels usually it is disabled by default. As of FreeBSD I have no idea about the status (because it is chronical challenge to FreeBSD community when nobody has any idea when things is gonna be done/released there anyway), but you might contact Rui Paulo (rpaulo@) on this topic. Although I don't know how things are moving forward in order to support ZFS on Windows. :-) Take care. -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Moving a pool from FreeBSD 8.0 to opensolaris
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 9:24 AM, BM wrote: EFI is a label, that differs from the VTOC mainly by supporting larger than 2GB disks (exceptions are SCSI and SSD drives) I mean, TB. :-) -- Kind regards, BM Things, that are stupid at the beginning, rarely ends up wisely. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
