Re: [zfs-discuss] Storage 7000
Just to clarify that last answer, we are planning on releasing SSDs for many of our existing systems and storage. They may be a little different than what's used in the 7000, but they're intended for the same purpose. Your sales rep should be able to give you a better idea of when, but they're not that far off. Here's a list of what existing products we're currently targeting in the near term: http://www.sun.com/storage/flash/products.jsp Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Storage 7000 From: Adam Leventhal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mika Borner [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: ZFS discuss zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Mon Nov 17 13:49:24 2008 Would be interesting to hear more about how Fishworks differs from Opensolaris, what build it is based on, what package mechanism you are using (IPS already?), and other differences... I'm sure these details will be examined in the coming weeks on the blogs of members of the Fishworks team. Keep an eye on blogs.sun.com/fishworks. A little off topic: Do you know when the SSDs used in the Storage 7000 are available for the rest of us? I don't think the will be, but it will be possible to purchase them as replacement parts. Adam ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] OpenStorage GUI
There is no inbox/field upgrade available for the x4500 - x4540. The upgrades mentioned are in the form of discounted box swaps. Sorry about that. It would be nice though. Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] OpenStorage GUI From: Andy Lubel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Chris Greer [EMAIL PROTECTED], zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Wed Nov 12 13:18:15 2008 The word Module makes it sound really easy :) Has anyone ever swapped this module out, and if so - was it painful? Since our 4500's went from the pallet to the offsite datacenter I never did really get a chance to look closely at it. I found a picture of one and it looks like you could take out the whole guts in one tray (from the bottom rear?). -Andy -Original Message- From: Chris Greer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 3:57 PM To: Andy Lubel; zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] OpenStorage GUI I was hoping for a swap out of the system board module. Chris G. - Original Message - From: Andy Lubel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Chris Greer; zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Wed Nov 12 14:38:03 2008 Subject: RE: [zfs-discuss] OpenStorage GUI -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Greer Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 3:20 PM To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] OpenStorage GUI Do you have any info on this upgrade path? I can't seem to find anything about this... I would also like to throw in my $0.02 worth that I would like to see the software offered to existing sun X4540 (or upgraded X4500) customers. Chris G. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ 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] continuous replication
As an aside, replication has been implemented as part of the new Storage 7000 family. Here's a link to a blog discussing using the 7000 Simulator running in two separate VMs and replicating w/ each other: http://blogs.sun.com/pgdh/entry/fun_with_replicating_the_sun I'm not sure of the specifics of how, but it might provide ideas of how it can be accomplished. Regards. Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] continuous replication From: Brent Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Ian Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED], zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Wed Nov 12 16:46:37 2008 On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 3:40 PM, River Tarnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ian Collins: I doubt zfs receive would be able to keep pace with any non-trivial update rate. one could consider this a bug in zfs receive :) Mirroring iSCSI or a dedicated HA tool would be a better solution. i'm not sure how to apply iSCSI here; the pool needs to be mounted at least read-only on both hosts at the same time. (also suggested was AVS, which doesn't allow keeping the pool mounted on the slave.) at least Solaris Cluster, from what i've seen, doesn't allow this either; the failover is handled by importing the pool during failover. - river. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFJG2ltIXd7fCuc5vIRAv5PAJ4lrVLcWuQlJkY05fxCYkLn8kgtxQCgo/CX Ae17uVMuX1FABt73hmeULmM= =OZZa -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss It sounds like you need either a true clustering file system or to draw back your plans to see changes read-only instantly on the secondary node. What kind of link do you plan between these nodes? Would the link keep up with non-trivial updates? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs boot / root in Nevada build 101
Hi Peter, It's there, you just can't use the GUI installer. You have to choose the text interactive installer. It'll give you the choice there. Regards. Original Message Subject: [zfs-discuss] zfs boot / root in Nevada build 101 From: Peter Baer Galvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Wed Oct 29 09:28:46 2008 This seems like a n00b question but I'm stuck. Nevada build 101. Doing fresh install (in vmware fusion). I don't see any way to select zfs as the root file system. Looks to me like UFS is the default, but I don't see any option box to allow that to be changed to zfs. What am I missing?! Thanks. begin:vcard fn:Daryl Doami n:Doami;Daryl org:Sun Microsystems Federal, Inc.;DoD, Intel, NASA West Regions adr;dom:;;222 N. Sepulveda Blvd. 10th Floor;El Segundo;CA;90245 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Systems Engineer tel;work:310-242-6463 tel;fax:310-242-6463 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.sun.com/government/ version:2.1 end:vcard ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs boot / root in Nevada build 101
Hi Peter, It's mentioned here under Annoucements: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/boot/ It's just not very obvious. Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs boot / root in Nevada build 101 From: Peter Baer Galvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Wed Oct 29 11:25:20 2008 Hi Cindy, I googled quite a lot before posting my question. This issue isn't mentioned in the ZFS boot FAQ for example or anywhere (that I saw) on the Opensolaris ZFS pages. Of course I could have read the ZFS Admin book at docs. sun.com... ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Strategies to avoid single point of failure w/ X45x0 Servers?
Hi, Maybe this might be an option too? http://blogs.sun.com/storage/entry/mike_shapiro_and_steve_o Original Message Subject: [zfs-discuss] Strategies to avoid single point of failure w/ X45x0Servers? From: Solaris [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Thu Oct 9 13:09:28 2008 I have been leading the charge in my IT department to evaluate the Sun Fire X45x0 as a commodity storage platform, in order to leverage capacity and cost against our current NAS solution which is backed by EMC Fiberchannel SAN. For our corporate environments, it would seem like a single machine would supply more than triple our current usable capacity on our NAS, and the cost is significantly less per GB. I am also working to prove the multi-protocol shared storage capabilities of the Thumper significantly out perform those of our current solution (which is notoriously bad from the end user perspective). The EMC solution is completely redundant with no single point of failure. What are some good strategies for providing a Thumper solution with no single point of failure? The storage folks are poo-poo'ing this concept because of the chances for an Operating System failure... I'd like to come up with some reasonable methods to put them in their place :) ___ 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] ZFS and Sun Disk arrays - Opinions?
Hi, It's my understanding that CAM doesn't bundle the new ST6x40 firmware (7.1) at this point. However, the new firmware is available today by request and it does remove the 2TB limitation for the 6140 and 6540. As Andy had suggested, it does require a new version of CAM though, 6.1. The ST25x0 firmware that fixes the 2TB limitation is still coming though. Regards. Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and Sun Disk arrays - Opinions? From: Torrey McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Andy Lubel [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, Kenny [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon May 19 15:18:51 2008 The release should be out any day now. I think its being pushed to the external download site whilst we type/read. Andy Lubel wrote: The limitation existed in every Sun branded Engenio array we tested - 2510,2530,2540,6130,6540. This limitation is on volumes. You will not be able to present a lun larger than that magical 1.998TB. I think it is a combination of both in CAM and the firmware. Can't do it with sscs either... Warm and fuzzy: Sun engineers told me they would have a new release of CAM (and firmware bundle) in late June which would resolve this limitation. Or just do ZFS (or even SVM) setup like Bob and I did. Its actually pretty nice because the traffic will split to both controllers giving you theoretically more throughput so long as MPxIO is functioning properly. Only (minor) downside is parity is being transmitted from the host to the disks rather than living on the controller entirely. -Andy From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Torrey McMahon Sent: Mon 5/19/2008 1:59 PM To: Bob Friesenhahn Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; Kenny Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and Sun Disk arrays - Opinions? Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Mon, 19 May 2008, Kenny wrote: Bob M.- Thanks for the heads up on the 2 (1.998) TN Lun limit. This has me a little concerned esp. since I have 1 TB drives being delivered! Also thanks for the scsi cache flushing heads up, yet another item to lookup! grin I am not sure if this LUN size limit really exists, or if it exists, in which cases it actually applies. On my drive array, I created a 3.6GB RAID-0 pool with all 12 drives included during the testing process. Unfortunately, I don't recall if I created a LUN using all the space. I don't recall ever seeing mention of a 2TB limit in the CAM user interface or in the documentation. The Solaris LUN limit is gone if you're using Solaris 10 and recent patches. The array limit(s) are tied to the type of array you're using. (Which type is this again?) CAM shouldn't be enforcing any limits of its own but only reporting back when the array complains. ___ 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 mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08
Hi Paul, I believe the goal is to come out w/ new Solaris updates every 4-6 months and sometimes are known as quarterly updates. Regards. Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08 From: Paul B. Henson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Robin Guo [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Fri May 16 15:06:02 2008 So, from a feature perspective it looks like S10U6 is going to be in pretty good shape ZFS-wise. If only someone could speak to (perhaps under the cloak of anonymity ;) ) the timing side :). Given U5 barely came out, I wouldn't expect U6 anytime soon :(. Thanks.. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08
Hi again, I sort of take that back, here's the past history: Solaris 10 3/05 = Solaris 10 RR 1/05 Solaris 10 1/06 = Update 1 Solaris 10 6/06 = Update 2 Solaris 10 11/06 = Update 3 Solaris 10 8/07 = Update 4 Solaris 10 5/08 = Update 5 I did say it was a goal though. Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08 From: Daryl Doami [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Paul B. Henson [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Fri May 16 22:59:13 2008 Hi Paul, I believe the goal is to come out w/ new Solaris updates every 4-6 months and sometimes are known as quarterly updates. Regards. Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08 From: Paul B. Henson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Robin Guo [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Fri May 16 15:06:02 2008 So, from a feature perspective it looks like S10U6 is going to be in pretty good shape ZFS-wise. If only someone could speak to (perhaps under the cloak of anonymity ;) ) the timing side :). Given U5 barely came out, I wouldn't expect U6 anytime soon :(. Thanks.. ___ 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
