Re: [zfs-discuss] what have you been buying for slog and l2arc?
hi may be check out stec ssd or checkout the service manual of sun zfs appliance service manual to see the read and write ssd in the system regards Sent from my iPad On Aug 3, 2012, at 22:05, Hung-Sheng Tsao (LaoTsao) Ph.D laot...@gmail.com wrote: Intel 311 Series Larsen Creek 20GB 2.5 SATA II SLC Enterprise Solid State Disk SSDSA2VP020G201 Average Rating (12 reviews) Write a Review Sent from my iPad On Aug 3, 2012, at 21:39, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote: On Fri, 3 Aug 2012, Karl Rossing wrote: I'm looking at http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state-drives/solid-state-drives-ssd.html wondering what I should get. Are people getting intel 330's for l2arc and 520's for slog? For the slog, you should look for a SLC technology SSD which saves unwritten data on power failure. In Intel-speak, this is called Enhanced Power Loss Data Protection. I am not running across any Intel SSDs which claim to match these requirements. Extreme write IOPS claims in consumer SSDs are normally based on large write caches which can lose even more data if there is a power failure. 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 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] what have you been buying for slog and l2arc?
Intel 311 Series Larsen Creek 20GB 2.5 SATA II SLC Enterprise Solid State Disk SSDSA2VP020G201 Average Rating (12 reviews) Write a Review Sent from my iPad On Aug 3, 2012, at 21:39, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote: On Fri, 3 Aug 2012, Karl Rossing wrote: I'm looking at http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state-drives/solid-state-drives-ssd.html wondering what I should get. Are people getting intel 330's for l2arc and 520's for slog? For the slog, you should look for a SLC technology SSD which saves unwritten data on power failure. In Intel-speak, this is called Enhanced Power Loss Data Protection. I am not running across any Intel SSDs which claim to match these requirements. Extreme write IOPS claims in consumer SSDs are normally based on large write caches which can lose even more data if there is a power failure. 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 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] unable to import the zpool
so zpool import -F .. zpool import -f ... all not working? regards Sent from my iPad On Aug 2, 2012, at 7:47, Suresh Kumar sachinnsur...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Hung-sheng, It is not displaying any output, like the following. bash-3.2# zpool import -nF tXstpool bash-3.2# Thanks Regards, Suresh. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] unable to import the zpool
hi can you post zpool history regards Sent from my iPad On Aug 2, 2012, at 7:47, Suresh Kumar sachinnsur...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Hung-sheng, It is not displaying any output, like the following. bash-3.2# zpool import -nF tXstpool bash-3.2# Thanks Regards, Suresh. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] online increase of zfs after LUN increase ?
imho, the 147440-21 does not list the bugs that solved by 148098- even through it obsoletes the 148098 Sent from my iPad On Jul 25, 2012, at 18:14, Habony, Zsolt zsolt.hab...@hp.com wrote: Thank you for your replies. First, sorry for misleading info. Patch 148098-03 indeed not included in recommended set, but trying to download it shows that 147440-15 obsoletes it and 147440-19 is included in latest recommended patch set. Thus time solves the problem elsewhere. Just for fun, my case was: A standard LUN used as a zfs filesystem, no redundancy (as storage already has), and no partition is used, disk is given directly to zpool. # zpool status -oraarch pool: -oraarch state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM xx-oraarch ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t60060E800570B90070B96547d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors Partitioning shows this. partition pr Current partition table (original): Total disk sectors available: 41927902 + 16384 (reserved sectors) Part TagFlag First SectorSizeLast Sector 0usrwm 256 19.99GB 41927902 1 unassignedwm 0 0 0 2 unassignedwm 0 0 0 3 unassignedwm 0 0 0 4 unassignedwm 0 0 0 5 unassignedwm 0 0 0 6 unassignedwm 0 0 0 8 reservedwm 41927903 8.00MB 41944286 As I mentioned I did not partition it, zpool create did. I had absolutely no idea how to resize these partitions, where to get the available number of sectors and how many should be skipped and reserved ... Thus I backed up the 10G, destroyed zpool, created zpool (size was fine now) , restored data. Partition looks like this now, I do not think I could have created it easily manually. partition pr Current partition table (original): Total disk sectors available: 209700062 + 16384 (reserved sectors) Part TagFlag First Sector Size Last Sector 0usrwm 256 99.99GB 209700062 1 unassignedwm 0 0 0 2 unassignedwm 0 0 0 3 unassignedwm 0 0 0 4 unassignedwm 0 0 0 5 unassignedwm 0 0 0 6 unassignedwm 0 0 0 8 reservedwm 2097000638.00MB 209716446 Thank you for your help. Zsolt Habony ___ 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] New fast hash algorithm - is it needed?
Sent from my iPad On Jul 11, 2012, at 13:11, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote: On Wed, 11 Jul 2012, Richard Elling wrote: The last studio release suitable for building OpenSolaris is available in the repo. See the instructions at http://wiki.illumos.org/display/illumos/How+To+Build+illumos Not correct as far as I can tell. You should re-read the page you referenced. Oracle recinded (or lost) the special Studio releases needed to build the OpenSolaris kernel. hi you can still download 12 12.1 12.2, AFAIK through OTN The only way I can see to obtain these releases is illegally. However, Studio 12.3 (free download) produces user-space executables which run fine under Illumos. 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 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots slow on sol11?
hi just wondering can you change from samba to SMB? regards Sent from my iPad On Jun 27, 2012, at 2:46, Carsten John cj...@mpi-bremen.de wrote: -Original message- CC:ZFS Discussions zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org; From:Jim Klimov jimkli...@cos.ru Sent:Tue 26-06-2012 22:34 Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] snapshots slow on sol11? 2012-06-26 23:57, Carsten John wrote: Hello everybody, I recently migrated a file server (NFS Samba) from OpenSolaris (Build 111) to Sol11. (After?) the move we are facing random (or random looking) outages of our Samba... As for the timeouts, check if your tuning (i.e. the migrated files like /etc/system) don't enforce long TXG syncs (default was 30sec) or something like that. Find some DTrace scripts to see if ZIL is intensively used during these user-profile writes, and if these writes are synchronous - maybe an SSD/DDR logging device might be useful for this scenario? Regarding the zfs-auto-snapshot, it is possible to install the old scripted package from OpenSolaris onto Solaris 10 at least; I did not have much experience with newer releases yet (timesliderd) so can't help better. HTH, //Jim Klimov ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss Hi everybody, in the meantime I was able to eliminate the snapshots. I disabled snapshot, but the issue still persists. I will now check Jim's suggestions. thx so far Carsten ___ 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] (fwd) Re: ZFS NFS service hanging on Sunday
in solaris zfs cache many things, you should have more ram if you setup 18gb swap , imho, ram should be high than 4gb regards Sent from my iPad On Jun 25, 2012, at 5:58, tpc...@mklab.ph.rhul.ac.uk wrote: 2012-06-14 19:11, tpc...@mklab.ph.rhul.ac.uk wrote: In message 201206141413.q5eedvzq017...@mklab.ph.rhul.ac.uk, tpc...@mklab.ph.r hul.ac.uk writes: Memory: 2048M phys mem, 32M free mem, 16G total swap, 16G free swap My WAG is that your zpool history is hanging due to lack of RAM. Interesting. In the problem state the system is usually quite responsive, eg. not memory trashing. Under Linux which I'm more familiar with the 'used memory' = 'total memory - 'free memory', refers to physical memory being used for data caching by the kernel which is still available for processes to allocate as needed together with memory allocated to processes, as opposed to only physical memory already allocated and therefore really 'used'. Does this mean something different under Solaris ? Well, it is roughly similar. In Solaris there is a general notion [snipped] Dear Jim, Thanks for the detailed explanation of ZFS memory usage. Special thanks also to John D Groenveld for the initial suggestion of a lack of RAM problem. Since up-ing the RAM from 2GB to 4GB the machine has sailed though the last two Sunday mornings w/o problem. I was interested to subsequently discover the Solaris command 'echo ::memstat | mdb -k' which reveals just how much memory ZFS can use. Best regards Tom. -- Tom Crane, Dept. Physics, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, England. Email: T.Crane@rhul dot ac dot uk ___ 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] Good tower server for around 1,250 USD?
well check this link https://shop.oracle.com/pls/ostore/product?p1=SunFireX4270M2serverp2=p3=p4=sc=ocom_x86_SunFireX4270M2servertz=-4:00 you may not like the price Sent from my iPad On Mar 23, 2012, at 17:16, The Honorable Senator and Mrs. John Blutarskybl...@nymph.paranoici.org wrote: On Fri Mar 23 at 10:06:12 2012 laot...@gmail.com wrote: well use component of x4170m2 as example you will be ok intel cpu lsi sas controller non raid sas 72rpm hdd my 2c That sounds too vague to be useful unless I could afford an X4170M2. I can't build a custom box and I don't have the resources to go over the parts list and order something with the same components. Thanks though. ___ 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] Good tower server for around 1,250 USD?
well use component of x4170m2 as example you will be ok intel cpu lsi sas controller non raid sas 72rpm hdd my 2c Sent from my iPad On Mar 22, 2012, at 14:41, Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote: On Thu, 22 Mar 2012, The Honorable Senator and Mrs. John Blutarsky wrote: This will be a do-everything machine. I will use it for development, hosting various apps in zones (web, file server, mail server etc.) and running other systems (like a Solaris 11 test system) in VirtualBox. Ultimately I would like to put it under Solaris support so I am looking for something officially approved. The problem is there are so many systems on the HCL I don't know where to begin. One of the Supermicro super workstations looks Almost all of the systems listed on the HCL are defunct and no longer purchasable except for on the used market. Obtaining an approved system seems very difficult. In spite of this, Solaris runs very well on many non-approved modern systems. I don't know what that means as far as the ability to purchase Solaris support. 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 ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Unable to import exported zpool on a new server
hi are the disk/sas controller the same on both server? -LT Sent from my iPad On Mar 13, 2012, at 6:10, P-O Yliniemi p...@bsd-guide.net wrote: Hello, I'm currently replacing a temporary storage server (server1) with the one that should be the final one (server2). To keep the data storage from the old one I'm attempting to import it on the new server. Both servers are running OpenIndiana server build 151a. Server 1 (old) The zpool consists of three disks in a raidz1 configuration: # zpool status pool: storage state: ONLINE scan: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM storage ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c4d0ONLINE 0 0 0 c4d1ONLINE 0 0 0 c5d0ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors Output of format command gives: # format AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS: 0. c2t1d0 LSILOGIC-LogicalVolume-3000 cyl 60785 alt 2 hd 255 sec 126 /pci@0,0/pci8086,25e2@2/pci8086,350c@0,3/pci103c,3015@6/sd@1,0 1. c4d0 ST3000DM- W1F07HW-0001-2.73TB /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1f,2/ide@0/cmdk@0,0 2. c4d1 ST3000DM- W1F05H2-0001-2.73TB /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1f,2/ide@0/cmdk@1,0 3. c5d0 ST3000DM- W1F032R-0001-2.73TB /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1f,2/ide@1/cmdk@0,0 4. c5d1 ST3000DM- W1F07HZ-0001-2.73TB /pci@0,0/pci-ide@1f,2/ide@1/cmdk@1,0 (c5d1 was previously used as a hot spare, but I removed it as an attempt to export and import the zpool without the spare) # zpool export storage # zpool list (shows only rpool) # zpool import pool: storage id: 17210091810759984780 state: ONLINE action: The pool can be imported using its name or numeric identifier. config: storage ONLINE raidz1-0 ONLINE c4d0ONLINE c4d1ONLINE c5d0ONLINE (check to see if it is importable to the old server, this has also been verified since I moved back the disks to the old server yesterday to have it available during the night) zdb -l output in attached files. --- Server 2 (new) I have attached the disks on the new server in the same order (which shouldn't matter as ZFS should locate the disks anyway) zpool import gives: root@backup:~# zpool import pool: storage id: 17210091810759984780 state: UNAVAIL action: The pool cannot be imported due to damaged devices or data. config: storageUNAVAIL insufficient replicas raidz1-0 UNAVAIL corrupted data c7t5000C50044E0F316d0 ONLINE c7t5000C50044A30193d0 ONLINE c7t5000C50044760F6Ed0 ONLINE The problem is that all the disks are there and online, but the pool is showing up as unavailable. Any ideas on what I can do more in order to solve this problem ? Regards, PeO zdb_l_c4d0s0.txt zdb_l_c4d1s0.txt zdb_l_c5d0s0.txt zdb_l_c5d1s0.txt zdb_l_c7t5000C50044A30193d0s0.txt zdb_l_c7t5000C50044E0F316d0s0.txt zdb_l_c7t5000C50044760F6Ed0s0.txt ___ 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] Advice for migrating ZFS configuration
read the link please it seems that afmter you create the radiz1 zpool you need to destroy the fakedisk so it will have contains data when you to the copy copy the data by following the steps in the link replace the fakedisk withnthe real disk this is a good approach that i did not know before -LT Sent from my iPad On Mar 7, 2012, at 17:48, Bob Doolittle bob.doolit...@oracle.com wrote: Wait, I'm not following the last few steps you suggest. Comments inline: On 03/07/12 17:03, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote: - use the one new disk to create a temporary pool - copy the data (zfs snapshot -r + zfs send -R | zfs receive) - destroy old pool - create a three-disk raidz pool using two disks and a fake device, something like http://www.dev-eth0.de/creating-raidz-with-missing-device/ Don't I need to copy the data back from the temporary pool to the new raidz pool at this point? I'm not understanding the process beyond this point, can you clarify please? - destroy the temporary pool So this leaves the data intact on the disk? - replace the fake device with now-free disk So this replicates the data on the previously-free disk across the raidz pool? What's the point of the following export/import steps? Renaming? Why can't I just give the old pool name to the raidz pool when I create it? - export the new pool - import the new pool and rename it in the process: zpool import temp_pool_name old_pool_name Thanks! -Bob In the end I want the three-disk raidz to have the same name (and mount point) as the original zpool. There must be an easy way to do this. Nope. ___ 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
