Re: [zfs-discuss] Opensolaris is apparently dead
On 08/13/2010 01:39 PM, Tim Cook wrote: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/13/opensolaris_is_dead/ I'm a bit surprised at this development... Oracle really just doesn't get it. The part that's most disturbing to me is the fact they won't be releasing nightly snapshots. It appears they've stopped Illumos in its tracks before it really even got started (perhaps that explains the timing of this press release) Wrong. Be patient, with the pace of current Illumos development it soon will have all the closed binaries liberated and ready to sync up with promised ON code drops as dictated by GPL and CDDL licenses. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
In 3.0.3+ new option would list appliance changelog going forward: nmc$ show version -c On 07/04/2010 05:58 PM, Bohdan Tashchuk wrote: Where can I find a list of these? This leads to the more generic question of: where are *any* release notes? I saw on Genunix that Community Edition 3.0.3 was replaced by 3.0.3-1. What changed? I went to nexenta.org and looked around. But it wasn't immediately obvious where to find release notes. Also, as Tim Cook noted, the Nexenta forums aren't exactly "lively". For a simple, easily understood and easily navigated web site, you can't beat www.openbsd.org. Both Sun/Oracle and Nexenta could learn a lot from it. And I can also follow very clean, simple instructions for running the "stable" OpenBSD branch (which is mostly security fixes). ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Interesting experience with Nexenta - anyone seen it?
Hi Kyle, very likely that you hit driver bug in isp. After the reboot, take a look on /var/adm/messages file - anything related might shed some light. I wouldn't suspect Intel GigE card - fairly good one and driver is very stable. Also, some upgrades posted, make sure the kernel displays 134e after the reboot into the new upgrade checkpoint. The upgrade command: nmc$ setup appliance upgrade On 05/20/2010 08:05 AM, Kyle McDonald wrote: Hi all, I recently installed Nexenta Community 3.0.2 on one of my servers: IBM eSeries X346 2.8Ghz Xeon 12GB DDR2 RAM 1 builtin BGE interface for management 4 port Intel GigE card aggregated for Data IBM ServRAID 7k with 256MB BB Cache with (isp driver) 6 RAID0 single drive LUNS (so I can use the Cache) 1 18GB LUN for the rpool 5 300GB LUN for the data pool 1 RAIDZ1 pool from the 5 300GB drives. 4 test filesystems 1 No Dedup, No Compression 1 DeDup, No Compression 1 No DeDup, Compression 1 DeDup, Compression This is pretty old hardware, so I wasn't expecting miracles, but I thought I'd give it a shot. My work load is NFS service to software build servers (cvs checkouts, un tarring files, compiling, etc.) I'm hoping the many CVS checkout trees will lend themselves to DeDup well, and I know source code should compress easily. I setup one client with a single GigE connection, mounted the four file systems (plus one from the netapp we have here) and proceeded to write a loop to time both un-tarring the gcc-4.3.3 sources to those 5 filesystems, and to 1 local directory, and to rm -rf the sources too. The tar took 28 seconds and 10 seconds to remove in the local dir, then on the first ZFS/NFS filesystem mount, it took basically forever and hung the Nexenta server. I was watching it go on the web admin page and it all looked fine for a while, then the client started reporting 'NFS Server not responding, still trying...' For a while, there were Also 'NFS Server OK' messages too, and the Web GUI remained responsive. Eventually The OK messages stopped, and the Web GUI froze. I went an rebooted the NFS client thinking that id the requests stopped the Server might catch up, but it never started responding again. I was only untarring a file.. How did this bring the machine down? I hadn't even gotten to the FS's that had SeSup or Compression turned on, so those shouldn't have affected things - yet. Any ideas? -Kyle ___ 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] Co-creator of ZFS, Bill Moore joins Nexenta advisory board
Good news for Nexenta and OpenSolaris community in general: http://www.nexenta.com/corp/blog/2010/04/06/bill-moore-joins-nexenta-advisory-board/ Nexenta invites talents and hiring OpenSolaris Kernel/API engineers. If you are in SF bay area and you think you are qualified, send your resume by following the instructions below: http://www.nexenta.com/corp/nexenta-careers ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs code and fishworks "fork"
Eric D. Mudama wrote: On Wed, Oct 28 at 13:40, "C. Bergström" wrote: Tim Cook wrote: PS: Not having enough engineers to support a growing and paying customer base is a *good* problem to have. The opposite is much, much worse. So use Nexenta? Got data you care about? Verify extensively before you jump to that ship.. :) I am not aware of any data issues, but simply when I investigated nexenta they lagged far enough behind OpenSolaris that I was concerned they didn't have enough critical mass to keep up. High quality distros are a ton of work. That, and the supported NexentaStor pricing exceeded our $2k ceiling. As far as I know Developer Edition is free of charge for up to 4TB: http://www.nexentastor.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs code and fishworks "fork"
C. Bergström wrote: Eugen Leitl wrote: On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:40:12PM +0800, "C. Bergström" wrote: So use Nexenta? Got data you care about? Verify extensively before you jump to that ship.. :) So you're saying Nexenta have been known to drop bits on the floor, unprovoked? Inquiring minds... I would say this same thing if it was my company or my product.. regardless if it's Sun, Nexenta or any company.. verify the product so you can know the risks.. It's an open source project.. talk with the developers and those in the community who are using it for similar usage as you would.. I 100% agreed. That is the reason why FishWorks with collaboration of their HW team and NexentaStor with collaboration with their HW Partners exists - its all about testing, verification and then testing again. Especially if we are talking about storage software. I think the idea of storage appliance software is just great! It nails down OpenSolaris to the very specific storage purposes. This simplifies testing also because storage appliance don't need to care about things like sound drivers or GUI, etc... I think the Open Storage message is extremely powerful. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs code and fishworks "fork"
As far as I know, its an effort! Not just for x4275 specifically, but in general with any other x86 hardware and storage oriented software. A lot of work required to support a final solution as well. What Nexenta does with its version of NexentaStor is enabling third-party Partners to integrate software into a HW/SW solutions ready for production use. There is even a social network for Nexenta partners, where Partners talks to each other as well as to Nexenta experts and polishing their final NexentaStor solutions. Its a process and it works! List of Partners: http://www.nexenta.com/partners Bruno Sousa wrote: I just curious to see how much effort would it take to put the software of FISH running within a Sun X4275... Anyway..lets wait and see. Bruno On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:29:24 -0500 (CDT), Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Bruno Sousa wrote: I can agree that the software is the one that really has the added value, but to my opinion allowing a stack like Fishworks to run outside the Sun Unified Storage would lead to lower price per unit(Fishwork license) but maybe increase revenue. Why an increase in revenues? Well, i assume that alot of customers would buy the Fishworks to put into they XYZ high-end server. "Fishworks" products (products that the Fishworks team developed) are designed, tweaked, and tuned for particular hardware configurations. It is not like general purpose OpenSolaris where the end user gets to experiment with hardware configurations and tunings to get the best performance (but might not achieve it). Fishworks engineers are even known to "holler" at the drives as part of the rigorous product testing. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] fishworks on x4275?
Frank Cusack wrote: On October 19, 2009 9:53:14 AM +1300 Trevor Pretty wrote: Frank I've been looking into:- http://www.nexenta.com/corp/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection &id=4&Itemid=128 Thanks! I *thought* there was a Nexenta solution but a google search didn't turn anything up for me. I'll definitely be looking into this. The high level documentation is pretty weak, I guess I have to dig in. But while I have the attention of this list, does NexentaStor "natively" support AFP and "bonjour" or can I just add that myself? You can add this yourself via NMS plugin. The developers portal explains API and provides examples on how this can be done: http://www.nexentastor.org/ The Plugin API documentation collected here: http://www.nexentastor.org/projects/site/wiki/PluginAPI I think the closest example to follow would be Amanda Client: http://www.nexentastor.org/projects/amanda-client/repository Or UPS integration plugin: http://www.nexentastor.org/projects/ups/repository The plugin then can be uploaded into NexentaStor public repository and will be available to everyone who wants to use AFP sharing protocol. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] eon or nexentacore or opensolaris
May be what you saying is true wrt. NexentaCore 2.0. But hey, think about open source principals and development process. We do hope that NexentaCore will become an official Debian distribution some day! We evolving and driven completely by the community here. Anyone can participate and fix the bugs and make it happen: https://launchpad.net/distros/nexenta As far commercial bits: 1. NexentaStor is still based off 1.x. Once 2.x branch is more or less polished we will make a safe transition 2. ON patches goes through serious stress testing not only by Nexenta but also by the growing list of Nexenta partners - i.e. to ensure that end solution is absolutely stable and safe: http://www.nexenta.com/partners 3. The development model of NexentaCore is indeed very much Debian-like. However, NexentaStor is developed with different rules in mind - rules of focused testing, conservative principals and partner-wide openness 4. Is Debian helping NexentaStor to integrate stuff? Yes, absolutely! Lots of advantages here. Debian is NOT just package management as one could think of - it is as well a polished distribution foundation. NexentaStor plugins, which are pretty much Debian packages, used to extend NexentaStor capabilities. Learn more: http://www.nexenta.com/corp/index.php?option=com_jreviews&Itemid=112 C. Bergström wrote: Anil Gulecha wrote: On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Bogdan M. Maryniuk wrote: On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 4:56 AM, Joe S wrote: EON ZFS NAS http://eonstorage.blogspot.com/ No idea. NexentaCore Platform (v2.0 RC3) http://www.nexenta.org/os/NexentaCore Personally, I tried it few times. For now, it is still too much broken for me yet and looks scary. Previous version is much more stable but also older. Newer v2.0 looks exactly like bleeding edge Debian old times: each time you run "apt-get upgrade" you have to use shaman's tambourine dancing around the fireplace. I don't remember exactly, but some packages are just broken and can not find dependencies, installation crashes, pollutes your system and can not be restored nicely etc. However, when it will be not that broken anymore, it must be a great distribution with excellent package management and very convenient to use. Hi Bogdan, Which particular packages were these? RC3 is quite stable, and all server packages are solid. If you do face issues with a particular one, we'd appreciate a bug report. All information on this is helpful.. I've done some preliminary patch review on the core on-nexenta patches and I'd concur to put Nexenta pretty low on the trusted list for enterprise storage. This is in addition to the packaging problems you've pointed out. If the issues at hand were not enough when I sent an email to their dev list it was completely ignored. Marketing for Nexenta as Anil points out is strong, but like many other distributions outside Sun there's still a lot of work to go. I'm not sure EON's update delivery, but I believe it's just a minimal repackage of OpenSolaris release. This isn't the advocacy list so if you're interested in other alternatives feel free to email me off list. Cheers, ./Christopher -- OSUNIX - Built from the best of OpenSolaris Technology http://www.osunix.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] Add WORM to OpenSolaris
Something like this? http://www.nexenta.com/corp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=171&Itemid=112 Daniel P. Bath wrote: Has anyone created a opensource plugin for WORM (Write Once, Read Many) for OpenSolaris? Any ideas how hard it would be to create this? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Public ZFS API ?
On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 14:53 -0400, Cherry Shu wrote: > Are any plans for an API that would allow ZFS commands including > snapshot/rollback integrated with customer's application? Sounds like you are looking for abstraction layering on top of integrated solution such as NexentaStor. Take a look on API it provides here: http://www.nexenta.com/nexentastor-api SA-API has bindings for C, C++, Perl, Python and Ruby. This documentation contains examples and samples to demonstrate SA-API applications in C, C++, Perl, Python and Ruby. You can develop and run SA-API applications on both Windows and Linux platforms. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] AVS and ZFS demos - link broken?
James, also there is this demo: http://www.nexenta.com/demos/auto-cdp.html showing how AVS/ZFS integrated in NexentaStor. On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 10:25 -0600, James D. Rogers wrote: > The links to the Part 1 and Part 2 demos on this page > (http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/avs/Demos/) appear to be > broken. > > > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/avs/Demos/AVS-ZFS-Demo-V1/ > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/avs/Demos/AVS-ZFS-Demo-V2/ > > > > James D. Rogers > > NRA, GOA, DAD -- and I VOTE! > > 2207 Meadowgreen Circle > > Franktown, CO 80116 > > > > coyote_hunt...@msn.com > > 303-688-0480 > > 303-885-7410 Cell (Working hours and when coyote huntin'!) > > > > > ___ > 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] Comstar production-ready?
Hi Stephen, NexentaStor v1.1.5+ could be an alternative, I think. And it includes new cool COMSTAR integration, i.e. ZFS shareiscsi property actually implements COMSTAR iSCSI target "share" functionality not available in SXCE. http://www.nexenta.com/nexentastor-relnotes On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 07:07 +, Stephen Nelson-Smith wrote: > Hi, > > I recommended a ZFS-based archive solution to a client needing to have > a network-based archive of 15TB of data in a remote datacentre. I > based this on an X2200 + J4400, Solaris 10 + rsync. > > This was enthusiastically received, to the extent that the client is > now requesting that their live system (15TB data on cheap SAN and > Linux LVM) be replaced with a ZFS-based system. > > The catch is that they're not ready to move their production systems > off Linux - so web, db and app layer will all still be on RHEL 5. > > As I see it, if they want to benefit from ZFS at the storage layer, > the obvious solution would be a NAS system, such as a 7210, or > something buillt from a JBOD and a head node that does something > similar. The 7210 is out of budget - and I'm not quite sure how it > presents its storage - is it NFS/CIFS? If so, presumably it would be > relatively easy to build something equivalent, but without the > (awesome) interface. > > The interesting alternative is to set up Comstar on SXCE, create > zpools and volumes, and make these available either over a fibre > infrastructure, or iSCSI. I'm quite excited by this as a solution, > but I'm not sure if it's really production ready. > > What other options are there, and what advice/experience can you share? > > Thanks, > > S. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS-over-iSCSI performance testing (with low random access results)...
pNFS is NFS-centric of course and it is not yet stable, isn't it? btw, what is the ETA for pNFS putback? On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 12:20 -0700, Marion Hakanson wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > It's interesting how the speed and optimisation of these maintenance > > activities limit pool size. It's not just full scrubs. If the filesystem > > is > > subject to corruption, you need a backup. If the filesystem takes two > > months > > to back up / restore, then you need really solid incremental backup/restore > > features, and the backup needs to be a cold spare, not just a > > backup---restoring means switching the roles of the primary and backup > > system, not actually moving data. > > I'll chime in here with feeling uncomfortable with such a huge ZFS pool, > and also with my discomfort of the ZFS-over-ISCSI-on-ZFS approach. There > just seem to be too many moving parts depending on each other, any one of > which can make the entire pool unavailable. > > For the stated usage of the original poster, I think I would aim toward > turning each of the Thumpers into an NFS server, configure the head-node > as a pNFS/NFSv4.1 metadata server, and let all the clients speak parallel-NFS > to the "cluster" of file servers. You'll end up with a huge logical pool, > but a Thumper outage should result only in loss of access to the data on > that particular system. The work of scrub/resilver/replication can be > divided among the servers rather than all living on a single head node. > > Regards, > > Marion > > > ___ > 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-over-iSCSI performance testing (with low random access results)...
James, all serious ZFS bug fixes back-ported to b85 as well as marvell and other sata drivers. Not everything is possible to back-port of course, but I would say all critical things are there. This includes ZFS ARC optimization patches, for example. On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 22:33 +1000, James C. McPherson wrote: > Gray Carper wrote: > > Hey there, James! > > > > We're actually running NexentaStor v1.0.8, which is based on b85. We > > haven't done any tuning ourselves, but I suppose it is possible that > > Nexenta did. If there's something specific you'd like me to look for, > > I'd be happy to. > > Hi Gray, > So build 85 that's getting a bit long in the tooth now. > > I know there have been *lots* of ZFS, Marvell SATA and iSCSI > fixes and enhancements since then which went into OpenSolaris. > I know they're in Solaris Express and the updated binary distro > form of os2008.05 - I just don't know whether Erast and the > Nexenta clan have included them in what they are releasing as 1.0.8. > > Erast - could you chime in here please? Unfortunately I've got no > idea about Nexenta. > > > James C. McPherson > -- > Senior Kernel Software Engineer, Solaris > Sun Microsystems > http://blogs.sun.com/jmcp http://www.jmcp.homeunix.com/blog > ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexenta/ZFS vs Heartbeat/DRBD
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 19:42 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 19:10 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 18:37 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> >> >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 15:00 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> >> >> >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:36 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> >> >> >> A disadvantage, however, is that Sun StorageTek > >>Availability Suite > >> >> >> >> (AVS), the DRBD equivalent in OpenSolaris, is much less > >> >>flexible than > >> >> >> >> DRBD. For example, AVS is intended to replicate in one > >>direction, > >> >> >> >> from a primary to a secondary, whereas DRBD can switch > >>on the fly. > >> >> >> >> See > >> >> >> >> > >>http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=68881&tstart=30 > >> >> >> >> for details on this. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >I would be curious to see production environments > >>"switching" direction > >> >> >> >on the fly at that low level... Usually some top-level > >>brain does that > >> >> >> >in context of HA fail-over and so on. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> By switching on the fly, I mean if the primary services are taken > >> >> >> down and then brought up on the secondary, the direction of > >> >> >> synchronization gets reversed. That's not possible with > >>AVS because... > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >well, AVS actually does reverse synchronization and does > >>it very good. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> It's a one-time operation that "re-reverses" once it completes. > >> >> > > >> >> >When primary is repaired you want to have it on-line and retain the > >> >> >changes made on the secondary. > >> >> > >> >> Not necessarily. Even when the primary is ready to go back into > >> >> service, I may not want to revert to it for one reason or another. > >> >> That means I am without a live mirror because AVS' realtime mirroring > >> >> is only one direction, primary to secondary. > >> > > >> >This why I tried to state that this is not realistic environment for > >> >non-shared storage HA deployments. > >> > >> What's not realistic? DRBD's highly flexible ability to switch roles > >> on the fly is a huge advantage over AVS. But this is not to say AVS > >> is not realistic. It's just a limitation. > >> > >> >DRBD trying to emulate shared-storage > >> >behavior at a wrong level where in fact usage of FC/iSCSI-connected > >> >storage needs to be considered. > >> > >> This makes no sense to me. We're talking about mirroring the storage > >> of two physical and independent systems. How did the concept of > >> "shared storage" get in here? > > > >This is really outside of ZFS discussion now... But your point taken. If > >you want mirror-like behavior of your 2-node cluster, you'll get some > >benefits of DRBD but my point is that such solution trying to solve two > >problems at the same time: replication and availability, which is in my > >opinion plain wrong. > > Uh, no, DRBD addresses only replication. Linux-HA (aka Heartbeat) > address availability. They can be an integrated solution and are to > some degree intended that way, so I have no idea where your opinion > is coming from. Because in my opinion DRBD takes some responsibility of management layer if you will. Classic, predominant replication in HA clusters schema is primary-backup (or master-slave) and backup by definition is not necessary primary-identical system. Having said that, it is noble for DRBD to implement role switching and not a bad idea for many small deployments. > For replication, OpenSolaris is largely limited to using AVS, whose > functionality is limited, at least relative to DRBD. But there seems > to be a few options to implement availability, which should include > Linux-HA itself as it should run on OpenSolaris! Everything is implementable and I believe AVS designers thought about dynamic switching of roles, but they end up with what we have today, they likely discarded this idea. AVS not switching roles and forces IT admins to use it as primary-backup data protection service only. > But relevant to the poster's initial question, ZFS is so far and away > more advanced than any Linux filesystem can even dream about that it > handily nullifies any disadvantage in having to run AVS. Right. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexenta/ZFS vs Heartbeat/DRBD
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 19:10 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 18:37 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 15:00 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> >> >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:36 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> >> >> A disadvantage, however, is that Sun StorageTek Availability Suite > >> >> >> (AVS), the DRBD equivalent in OpenSolaris, is much less > >>flexible than > >> >> >> DRBD. For example, AVS is intended to replicate in one direction, > >> >> >> from a primary to a secondary, whereas DRBD can switch on the fly. > >> >> >> See > >> >> >> > >> http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=68881&tstart=30 > >> >> >> for details on this. > >> >> > > >> >> >I would be curious to see production environments "switching" > >> direction > >> >> >on the fly at that low level... Usually some top-level brain does > >> that > >> >> >in context of HA fail-over and so on. > >> >> > >> >> By switching on the fly, I mean if the primary services are taken > >> >> down and then brought up on the secondary, the direction of > >> >> synchronization gets reversed. That's not possible with AVS because... > >> >> > >> >> >well, AVS actually does reverse synchronization and does it very > >> good. > >> >> > >> >> It's a one-time operation that "re-reverses" once it completes. > >> > > >> >When primary is repaired you want to have it on-line and retain the > >> >changes made on the secondary. > >> > >> Not necessarily. Even when the primary is ready to go back into > >> service, I may not want to revert to it for one reason or another. > >> That means I am without a live mirror because AVS' realtime mirroring > >> is only one direction, primary to secondary. > > > >This why I tried to state that this is not realistic environment for > >non-shared storage HA deployments. > > What's not realistic? DRBD's highly flexible ability to switch roles > on the fly is a huge advantage over AVS. But this is not to say AVS > is not realistic. It's just a limitation. > > >DRBD trying to emulate shared-storage > >behavior at a wrong level where in fact usage of FC/iSCSI-connected > >storage needs to be considered. > > This makes no sense to me. We're talking about mirroring the storage > of two physical and independent systems. How did the concept of > "shared storage" get in here? This is really outside of ZFS discussion now... But your point taken. If you want mirror-like behavior of your 2-node cluster, you'll get some benefits of DRBD but my point is that such solution trying to solve two problems at the same time: replication and availability, which is in my opinion plain wrong. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexenta/ZFS vs Heartbeat/DRBD
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 18:37 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 15:00 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:36 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> >> A disadvantage, however, is that Sun StorageTek Availability Suite > >> >> (AVS), the DRBD equivalent in OpenSolaris, is much less flexible than > >> >> DRBD. For example, AVS is intended to replicate in one direction, > >> >> from a primary to a secondary, whereas DRBD can switch on the fly. > >> >> See > >> >> http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=68881&tstart=30 > >> >> for details on this. > >> > > >> >I would be curious to see production environments "switching" direction > >> >on the fly at that low level... Usually some top-level brain does that > >> >in context of HA fail-over and so on. > >> > >> By switching on the fly, I mean if the primary services are taken > >> down and then brought up on the secondary, the direction of > >> synchronization gets reversed. That's not possible with AVS because... > >> > >> >well, AVS actually does reverse synchronization and does it very good. > >> > >> It's a one-time operation that "re-reverses" once it completes. > > > >When primary is repaired you want to have it on-line and retain the > >changes made on the secondary. > > Not necessarily. Even when the primary is ready to go back into > service, I may not want to revert to it for one reason or another. > That means I am without a live mirror because AVS' realtime mirroring > is only one direction, primary to secondary. This why I tried to state that this is not realistic environment for non-shared storage HA deployments. DRBD trying to emulate shared-storage behavior at a wrong level where in fact usage of FC/iSCSI-connected storage needs to be considered. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexenta/ZFS vs Heartbeat/DRBD
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 15:00 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:36 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > >> A disadvantage, however, is that Sun StorageTek Availability Suite > >> (AVS), the DRBD equivalent in OpenSolaris, is much less flexible than > >> DRBD. For example, AVS is intended to replicate in one direction, > >> from a primary to a secondary, whereas DRBD can switch on the fly. > >> See > >> http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=68881&tstart=30 > >> for details on this. > > > >I would be curious to see production environments "switching" direction > >on the fly at that low level... Usually some top-level brain does that > >in context of HA fail-over and so on. > > By switching on the fly, I mean if the primary services are taken > down and then brought up on the secondary, the direction of > synchronization gets reversed. That's not possible with AVS because... > > >well, AVS actually does reverse synchronization and does it very good. > > It's a one-time operation that "re-reverses" once it completes. When primary is repaired you want to have it on-line and retain the changes made on the secondary. Your secondary did the job and switched back to its secondary role. This HA fail-back cycle could be repeated as many times as you need using reverse sync command. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexenta/ZFS vs Heartbeat/DRBD
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:36 -0400, Maurice Volaski wrote: > A disadvantage, however, is that Sun StorageTek Availability Suite > (AVS), the DRBD equivalent in OpenSolaris, is much less flexible than > DRBD. For example, AVS is intended to replicate in one direction, > from a primary to a secondary, whereas DRBD can switch on the fly. > See > http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=68881&tstart=30 > for details on this. I would be curious to see production environments "switching" direction on the fly at that low level... Usually some top-level brain does that in context of HA fail-over and so on. well, AVS actually does reverse synchronization and does it very good. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexenta/ZFS vs Heartbeat/DRBD
Well, obviously - its Linux vs. OpenSolaris question. Most serious advantage of OpenSolaris is ZFS and its enterprise level storage stack. Linux just not there yet.. On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:51 +0200, Axel Schmalowsky wrote: > Hallo list, > > hope that so can help me on this topic. > > I'd like to know where the *real* advantages of Nexenta/ZFS (i.e. > ZFS/StorageTek) over DRBD/Heartbeat are. > I'm pretty new to this topic and hence do not have enough experience to judge > their respective advantages/disadvantages reasonably. > > Any suggestion would be appreciated. > > ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ?: any effort for snapshot management
Steffen, Most complete and serious ZFS snapshot management, integrated ZFS send/recv replication over RSYNC with CLI, integrated AVS, GUI and management server which provides rich API for C/C++/Perl/Python/Ruby integrators available here: http://www.nexenta.com/nexentastor-overview Its ZFS+ with a lot of reliability fixes. Enterprise quality, production ready solution. Demo of of advanced CLI usage is here: http://www.nexenta.com/demos/automated-snapshots.html http://www.nexenta.com/demos/auto-tier-basic.html As a side not, I think that dis-integrated general-purpose scripting which is available on the Internet simply can not provide production quality and easy of use. On Fri, 2008-09-05 at 13:14 -0400, Steffen Weiberle wrote: > I have seen Tim Foster's auto-snapshot and it looks interesting. > > Is there a bug id or effort to deliver snapshot policy and space > management framework? Not looking for a GUI, although a CLI based UI > might be helpful. Customer needs something that allows the use of > snapshots on 100s of systems, and minimizes the administration to handle > disks filling up. > > I imagine a component is a time or condition based auto-delete of older > snopshot(s). > > Thanks > Steffen > ___ > 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] NexentaStor API & Windows SDK published
Hey folks, just saw another cool news this morning - Nexenta Systems released documentation for remote API and Windows SDK with demos for accessing NexentaStor. News itself: http://www.nexenta.com/corp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=154&Itemid=56 ZFS and the rest of appliance functionality abstracted via Nexenta Management Server (NMS) and available remotely via API with following language bindings: C, C++, Perl, Python and Ruby: http://www.nexenta.com/nexentastor-api And another cool feature worth mentioning is - plugin architecture. There is no API for plugins available yet, but there are number of CDDL-licensed plugins available as an examples here: http://www.nexenta.com/nexentastor-plugins Nice! ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Pogo Linux ships NexentaStor pre-installed boxes
Hi folks, wanted to share some exciting news with you. Pogo Linux shipping NexentaStor pre-installed boxes, like this one 16TB - 24TB: http://www.pogolinux.com/quotes/editsys?sys_id=3989 And here is announce: http://www.nexenta.com/corp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=129&Itemid=56 Pogo says: "Managed Storage – NetApp features without the price"... Go OpenSolaris, Go! ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] five megabytes per second with Microsoft iSCSI initiator (2.06)
http://blogs.sun.com/constantin/entry/x4500_solaris_zfs_iscsi_perfect On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 14:44 -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > It would be useful if people here who have used iSCSI on top of ZFS > could share their performance experiences. It is very easy to waste a > lot of time trying to realize unrealistic expectations. Hopefully > iSCSI on top of ZFS normally manages to transfer much more than > 5MB/second! > > Bob > == > Bob Friesenhahn > [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ > GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.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] ZFS replication strategies
Take a look on NexentaStor - its a complete 2nd tier solution: http://www.nexenta.com/products and AVS is nicely integrated via management RPC interface which is connecting multiple NexentaStor nodes together and greatly simplifies AVS usage with ZFS... See demo here: http://www.nexenta.com/demos/auto-cdp.html On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 10:15 -0800, Vincent Fox wrote: > Does anyone have any particularly creative ZFS replication strategies they > could share? > > I have 5 high-performance Cyrus mail-servers, with about a Terabyte of > storage each of which only 200-300 gigs is used though even including 14 days > of snapshot space. > > I am thinking about setting up a single 3511 with 4 terabytes of storage at a > remote site as a backup device for the content. Struggling with how to > organize the idea of wedging 5 servers into the one array though. > > Simplest way that occurs is one big RAID-5 storage pool with all disks. Then > slice out 5 LUNs each as it's own ZFS pool. Then use zfs send & receive to > replicate the pools. > > Ideally I'd love it if ZFS directly supported the idea of rolling snapshots > out into slower secondary storage disks on the SAN, but in the meanwhile > looks like we have to roll our own solutions. > > > 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] Issue fixing ZFS corruption
well, we had some problems with si3124 driver, but with driver binary posted in this forum the problem seems been fixed. Later we saw the same fix went in into b72. On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 05:11 +0300, Jonathan Stewart wrote: > Jeff Bonwick wrote: > > The Silicon Image 3114 controller is known to corrupt data. > > Google for "silicon image 3114 corruption" to get a flavor. > > I'd suggest getting your data onto different h/w, quickly. > > I'll second this, the 3114 is a piece of junk if you value your data. I > bought a 4 port LSI SAS card (yes a bit pricy) and have had 0 problems > since and hot swap actually works. I never tried it with the 3114 I had > just never seen it actually working before so I was quite pleasantly > surprised. > > Jonathan > ___ > 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] Issue fixing ZFS corruption
I believe issue been fixed in snv_72+, no? On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 16:41 -0800, Jeff Bonwick wrote: > The Silicon Image 3114 controller is known to corrupt data. > Google for "silicon image 3114 corruption" to get a flavor. > I'd suggest getting your data onto different h/w, quickly. > > Jeff > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:34:56PM -0800, Bertrand Sirodot wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have been experiencing corruption on one of my ZFS pool over the last > > couple of days. I have tried running zpool scrub on the pool, but everytime > > it comes back with new files being corrupted. I would have thought that > > zpool scrub would have identified the corrupted files once and for all and > > would be fine afterwards. The feeling I have right now is that zpool scrub > > is actually spreading the corruption and won't stop until I have no more > > files on the file systems. > > > > I am running 5.11 snv_60 on an Asus M2A VM motherboard. I am using both the > > SATA controller on the motherboard and a Si3114 based controller. I have > > had the Si3114 controller for a couple of years now with no issue, that I > > know of. > > > > Any idea? I was trying to salvage the situation, but it looks like I am > > going to have to destroy the pool and recreate it. > > > > Thanks a lot in advance, > > Bertrand. > > > > > > 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 > ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Integrated transactional upgrades with ZFS
Hi guys, new article available explaining details on how enterprise-like upgrades integrated with Nexenta Core Platform starting from RC2 using ZFS capabilities and Debian APT: http://www.nexenta.org/os/TransactionalZFSUpgrades What is NexentaCP? NexentaCP is a minimal (core) foundation that can be used to quickly build servers, desktops, and custom distributions tailored for specialized applications such as NexentaStor. Similar to NexentOS desktop distribution, NexentaCP combines reliable state-of-the-art kernel with the GNU userland, and the ability to integrate open source components in no time. However, unlike NexentaOS desktop distribution, NexentaCP does not aim to provide a complete desktop. The overriding objective for NexentaCP is - stable foundation. Enjoy! ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexenta/Debian APT integrated with ZFS now...
Thank you! we are working on it. new website is coming, as well as next release of NCP. Meanwhile, old RC1 could be downloaded from: http://archive.nexenta.org/releases On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 18:01 -0800, MC wrote: > > 2) Unstable APT integrated with ON build 79, give it a try! > > Excellent progress!! But your website is out of date and I cannot find a > NexentaCP link on the download page. Only the old NexentaOS link. Also you > should update the news page so it looks like the project is active :) > > > 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
[zfs-discuss] Nexenta/Debian APT integrated with ZFS now...
Hi All, This is the road to NCP 1.0... Our motto: """Ubuntu makes best Debian Desktop platform - Nexenta makes best Debian Server/Storage platform.""" Some latest Nexenta related news: 1) Official Nexenta Core Platform (NCP) repository now is http://apt.nexenta.org 2) Unstable APT integrated with ON build 79, give it a try! 3) apt-get now fully integrated with ZFS cloning. New management tool provided: apt-clone. Never loose your upgrades again! 4) I'm seeking for developers who loves Debian and will help us to join Debian community. We've got general agreement with Debian leaders, but some work needs to be done, lets coordinate on official Nexenta IRC: #nexenta ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaCP Beta1-test2 (ZFS/Boot - manual partitioning support)
just use "pkgadd -d" wrapper. it will auto-magically convert SVR4 package to the .deb(s) and install them on the fly. You can also use "pkgrm" to remove them. pkginfo wrapper is also available. On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 16:38 +0200, Selim Daoud wrote: > superbe job...synaptic package manager is really impressive > is there a way to transform Sun package to a synaptic package? > > selim > > On 6/22/07, Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Erast Benson wrote: > > > > > New unstable ISO of NexentaCP (Core Platform) available. > > > > > > http://www.gnusolaris.org/unstable-iso/ncp_beta1-test2-b67_i386.iso > > > > Also available at: > > > > http://www.genunix.org/distributions/gnusolaris/index.html > > > > > Changes: > > > > > > * ON B67 based > > > * ZFS/Boot manual partitioning support implemented (in addition to > > > auto-partitioning). Both, Wizard and FDisk types fully supported. > > > * gcc/g++ now officially included on installation media > > > * APT repository fixed > > > * first official meta-package: nexenta-gnome > > > > > > After installation, those who needs GNOME environment, just type: > > > > > > $ sudo apt-get install nexenta-gnome > > > > > > Known bugs: > > > > > > * after fresh install APT caches needs to be re-created: > > > > > > $ sudo rm /var/lib/apt/* > > > $ sudo apt-get update > > > -- > > > Erast > > > > Regards, > > > > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT > > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ > > ___ > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] NexentaCP Beta1-test2 (ZFS/Boot - manual partitioning support)
New unstable ISO of NexentaCP (Core Platform) available. http://www.gnusolaris.org/unstable-iso/ncp_beta1-test2-b67_i386.iso Changes: * ON B67 based * ZFS/Boot manual partitioning support implemented (in addition to auto-partitioning). Both, Wizard and FDisk types fully supported. * gcc/g++ now officially included on installation media * APT repository fixed * first official meta-package: nexenta-gnome After installation, those who needs GNOME environment, just type: $ sudo apt-get install nexenta-gnome Known bugs: * after fresh install APT caches needs to be re-created: $ sudo rm /var/lib/apt/* $ sudo apt-get update -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Announcing NexentaCP(b65) with ZFS/Boot integrated installer
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 16:26 -0400, Francois Saint-Jacques wrote: > On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 11:51:08PM -0700, Erast Benson wrote: > > More details on NexentaCP will be available soon... > > Is it based on Alpha7? Alpha7 is the Desktop-oriented ISO, however they share the same main APT repository, i.e. Dapper/LTS. So far core team aggreed on following major decisions: 1) NexentaCP will follow Ubuntu/LTS releases only; 2) NexentaCP main set of packages shipped on ISO will be greately reduced and will contain only highly tested "base" minimum; 3) NexentaCP will offer Network-type installations using main(LTS-based) or third-party repository via Installer or after-install wizards. FYI, Martin mentioned some "main" goals of this move during LinuxTag conference: http://martinman.net/ -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Announcing NexentaCP(b65) with ZFS/Boot integrated installer
Announcing new direction of Open Source NexentaOS development: NexentaCP (Nexenta Core Platform). NexentaCP is Dapper/LTS-based core Operating System Platform distributed as a single-CD ISO, integrates Installer/ON/NWS/Debian and provides basis for Network-type installations via main or third-party APTs (NEW). First "unstable" b65-based ISO with ZFS/Boot-capable installer available as usual at: http://www.gnusolaris.org/unstable-iso/ncp_beta1-test1-b65_i386.iso Please give it a try and start building your own APT repositories and communities today! Note: this version of installer supports ZFS/Boot type of installations on single disk or 2+ mirror configuration. For now, only "Auto" partitioning mode could be used for ZFS root partition creation. More details on NexentaCP will be available soon... -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Testing of UFS, VxFS and ZFS
e, with VxFS being set to > 100%, then UFS run’s at 2.5% the speed, and ZFS at 13.8% the speed, > for OLTP UFS is 4.8% and ZFS 26.7%, however in DWR where there are > 100% reads, no writing, performance is similar with UFS at 101.2% and > ZFS at 100.2% the speed of VxFS. > > > > cid:image002.png@01C78027.99B515D0 > > > > > > Given this performance problems, then quite obviously VxFS quite > rightly deserves to be the file system of choice, even with a cost > premium. If anyone has any insight into why I am seeing, consistently, > these types of very disappointing numbers I would very much appreciate > your comments. The numbers are very disturbing as it is indicating > that write performance has issues. Please take into account that this > benchmark is performed on non-tuned file systems specifically at the > customers request as this is likely the way they would be deployed in > their production environments. > > > > Maybe I should be configuring my workload differently for VDBench – if > so, does anyone have any ideas on this? > > > > Unfortunately, I have weeks worth of test data to back up these > numbers and would enjoy the opportunity to discuss these results in > detail to discover if my methodology has problems or if it is the file > system. > > > > Thanks for your time. > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 416.801.6779 > > > > You can always tell who the Newfoundlanders are in Heaven. They're > the ones who want to go home > > > > > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Data Management API
On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 09:29 -0700, Erast Benson wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:22 +, Darren J Moffat wrote: > > Robert Milkowski wrote: > > > Hello devid, > > > > > > Tuesday, March 20, 2007, 3:58:27 PM, you wrote: > > > > > > d> Does ZFS have a Data Management API to monitor events on files and > > > d> to store arbitrary attribute information with a file? Any answer on > > > d> this would be really appreciated. > > > > > > IIRC correctly there's being developed file event mechanism - more > > > general which should work with other file systems too. I have no idea > > > of its status or if someone even started coding it. > > > > > > Your second question - no, you can't. > > > > Yes you can and it has been there even before ZFS existed see fsattr(5) > > it isn't ZFS specific but a generic attribute extension to the > > filesystems, currently supported by ufs, nfs, zfs, tmpfs. > > apparently fsattr is not part of OpenSolaris or at least I can't find > it.. oh, this is API... -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Data Management API
On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 16:22 +, Darren J Moffat wrote: > Robert Milkowski wrote: > > Hello devid, > > > > Tuesday, March 20, 2007, 3:58:27 PM, you wrote: > > > > d> Does ZFS have a Data Management API to monitor events on files and > > d> to store arbitrary attribute information with a file? Any answer on > > d> this would be really appreciated. > > > > IIRC correctly there's being developed file event mechanism - more > > general which should work with other file systems too. I have no idea > > of its status or if someone even started coding it. > > > > Your second question - no, you can't. > > Yes you can and it has been there even before ZFS existed see fsattr(5) > it isn't ZFS specific but a generic attribute extension to the > filesystems, currently supported by ufs, nfs, zfs, tmpfs. apparently fsattr is not part of OpenSolaris or at least I can't find it.. -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and Solaris as a VMWare guest
On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 20:53 -0600, James Dickens wrote: > > > On 3/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What issues, if any, are likely to surface with using Solaris > inside vmware as a guest os, if I choose to use ZFS? > > works great in vmware server, IO rates suck. > > > I'm assuming that ZFS's ability to maintain data integrity > will prevail and protect me from any problems that the > addition of vmware might introduce. > > no problems so far, created two virtual disks and concat, its just a > toy/test bed for nexenta, only problem I have with nexenta is that the > 64bit mode crashes on boot. b55 may be fixed who knows. its ae driver. Murayama fixed it recently in unstable branch. If you don't want to upgrade to latest, you could change your vmware settings to use e1000g driver instead. Or just upgrade myamanet-ae from unstable like: $ sudo apt-get install myamanet-ae > > Are there likely to be any issues with disk drive IO > performance? > > i'm getting 11MB/s on bonnie++, the disks are backed by sata drives > on a ultra 20 2.6ghz and has 512MB allocated. > > > not exactly a speed demon it would get about 130MB/s on the raw > hardware. > > > James Dickens > uadmin.blogspot.com > > > > > The concern here is with comments on how ZFS likes to > "own spindles" so that it can properly schedule I/O and > maximise performance. > > Any other gotchas, such as the extra vmware layer doing > buffering that ZFS isn't aware of, etc? > > If there are problems, are they likely to be any > better/different > when using ZFS and Solaris as a Xen domU? > > Darren > > ___ > 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 -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS as root FS
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 09:46 +, Darren J Moffat wrote: > Lori Alt wrote: > > Latest plan is to release zfs boot with U5. It definitely isn't going > > to make U4. > > We have new prototype bits, but they haven't been putback yet. There are > > a number of design decisions that have hinged on syncing up our strategy > > with other projects, or allowing some other projects to "gel". Main > > dependencies: Xen, some sparc boot changes, and zones upgrade. It's > > coming together and I hope we can have some new bits putback shortly > > after the first of the year. > > Any chance of you setting up a repository on OpenSolaris.org with the > prototype bits in source so that people can build them and test them out ? > > For some of us the most interesting part of this is the bits in ON not > the installer bits - particularly those people interested in building > their own distros of OpenSolaris. +1 SchiliX, BeleniX, Nexenta, Martux have their own installers and boot environments anyways, so would be *really* nice if you guys could open up zfs root ON bits. -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: ZFS for Linux 2.6
On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 10:30 -0800, Akhilesh Mritunjai wrote: > > > Yuen L. Lee wrote: > > opensolaris could be a nice NAS filer. I posted > > my question on "How to build a NAS box" asking for > > instructions on how to build a Solaris NAS box. > > It looks like everyone is busy. I haven't got any > > response yet. By any chance, do you have any > > Hi Yuen > > May I suggest that a better question would have been "How to build a minimal > Nevada distribution ?". I'm sure it would have gotten more responses as it is > both - a more general, and a more relevent question. > > Apart from that unasked advice, If my memory serves right the Belenix folks > (Moinak and gang) were discussing a similar thing in a thread sometime > back... chasing them might be a good idea ;-) > > I found some articles on net on how to build minimal image of solaris with > networking. Packages relating to storage (zfs, iSCSI etc) can be added to it > later. The minimal system with required components, sure, is heavy - about > 200MB... but shouldn't be an issue for a *NAS* box. I googled "Minimal > solaris configuration" and found several articles. Alternative way would be to simply use NexentaOS InstallCD and select "Minimal Profile" during installation. -- Erast ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
