Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS ok for single disk dev box? D1B1A95FBD cf7341ac8eb0a97fccc477127fd...@sn2prd0410mb372.namprd04.prod.outlook.com
Hi. I have a spare off the shelf consumer PC and was thinking about loading Solaris on it for a development box since I use Studio @work and like it better than gcc. I was thinking maybe it isn't so smart to use ZFS since it has only one drive. If ZFS detects something bad it might kernel panic and lose the whole system right? I realize UFS /might/ be ignorant of any corruption but it might be more usable and go happily on it's way without noticing? Except then I have to size all the partitions and lose out on compression etc. Any suggestions thankfully received. Suppose you start getting checksum errors. Then you *do* want to notice. I'm not convinced. I understand the theoretical value of ZFS but it introduces a whole new layer of problems other filesystems don't have. Even if it's right in theory it doesn't always make things better in reality. I like the features it provides and not having to size filesystems like in the old days is great, but ZFS can and does have bugs and like anything else is not perfect. Aside from Microsoft which used to be guaranteed to corrupt filesystems I haven't ever had corruption that caused me any problems. Certainly there must have been corruptions because of software bugs and crappy hardware but they had no visible effect and that is good enough for me in this situation I asked about. I feel this issue is a little overblown given most of the world runs on other enterprise filesystems and the world hasn't come to and end yet. ZFS is an important step in the right direction but it doesn't mean you can't live without it's error detection. We lived without it until now. What I find hard to live without is the management features it gives you which is why I have a dilemna. In this specific use case I would rather have a system that's still bootable and runs as best it can than an unbootable system that has detected an integrity problem especially at this point in ZFS's life. If ZFS would not panic the kernel and give the option to fail or mark file(s) bad, I would like it more. But having the ability manage the disk with one pool and the other nice features like compression plus the fact it works nicely on good hardware make it hard to go back once you made the jump. Choices, choices. Even if your system does crash, at least you now have an opportunity to recognize there is a problem, and think about your backups, rather than allowing the corruption to proliferate. This isn't a production box as I said it's an unused PC with a single drive, and I don't have anybody's bank accounts on it. I can rsync whatever I work on that day to a backup server. It won't be a disaster if UFS suddenly becomes unreliable and I lose a file or two, or if a drive fails, but it would be very annoying if ZFS barfed on a technicality and I had to reinstall the whole OS because of a kernel panic and an unbootable system. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS ok for single disk dev box?
would be very annoying if ZFS barfed on a technicality and I had to reinstall the whole OS because of a kernel panic and an unbootable system. It shouldn't do that. I agree but it seems like other people had it happen. Plus, if you look around a bit, you'll find some tutorials to back up the entire OS using zfs send-receive. So even if for some reason the OS becomes unbootable (e.g. blocks on some critical file is corrupted, which would cause panic/crash no matter what filesystem you use), the reinstall process is basically just a zfs send-receive plus installing the bootloader, so it can be VERY fast. Now that is interesting. But how do you do a receive before you reinstall? Live cd?? Thanks ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS ok for single disk dev box?
Thanks, sounds awesome! Pretty much takes away my concern of using ZFS! Stu Now that is interesting. But how do you do a receive before you reinstall? Live cd?? Just boot off of the CD (or jumpstart server) to single user mode. Format your new disk, create a zpool, zfs recv, installboot (or installgrub), reboot and done. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Anybody running S10 or 11 on AMD bulldozer 8 core?
I have a chance to pick up a system at a reasonable price built with an AMD FX8120 8 core 3.1 GHz on a Gigabyte motherboard. Is anybody runing with this combo? Looking for info from an actual user. Thanks. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Server upgrade
I would recommend solaris 11 express based on personal experience. It gets bugfixes and new features sooner than commercial solaris. I thought they stopped making 11 Express available when 11 went out? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] about btrfs and zfs
LOL. Well, for what it's worth, there are three common pronunciations for btrfs. Butterfs, Betterfs, and B-Tree FS (because it's based on b-trees.) Check wikipedia. (This isn't really true, but I like to joke, after saying something like that, I wrote the wikipedia page just now.) ;-) You forget Broken Tree File System, Badly Trashed File System, etc. Follow the newsgroup and you'll get plenty more ideas for names ;-) ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Saving data across install
I installed a Solaris 10 development box on a 500G root mirror and later I received some smaller drives. I learned from this list its better to have the root mirror on the smaller small drives and then create another mirror on the original 500G drives so I copied everything that was on the small drives onto the 500G mirror to free up the smaller drives for a new install. After my install completes on the smaller mirror, how do I access the 500G mirror where I saved my data? If I simply create a tank mirror using those drives will it recognize there's data there and make it accessible? Or will it destroy my data? Thanks. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Saving data across install
Please ignore this post. Bad things happened and now there is another thread for it. Thank you. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Server with 4 drives, how to configure ZFS?
Actually, you do want /usr and much of /var on the root pool, they are integral parts of the svc:/filesystem/local needed to bring up your system to a useable state (regardless of whether the other pools are working or not). Ok. I have my feelings on that topic but they may not be as relevant for ZFS. It may be because I tried to avoid single points of failure on other systems with techniques that don't map to ZFS or Solaris. I believe I can bring up several OS without /usr or /var although they complain they will work. But I'll take your point here. Depending on the OS versions, you can do manual data migrations to separate datasets of the root pool, in order to keep some data common between OE's or to enforce different quotas or compression rules. For example, on SXCE and Solaris 10 (but not on oi_148a) we successfully splice out many filesystems in such a layout (the example below also illustrates multiple OEs): Thanks, I have done similar things but I didn't know if they were approved. And you can not boot from any pool other than a mirror or a single drive. Rationale: a single BIOS device must be sufficient to boot the system and contain all the data needed to boot. Definitely important fact here. Thanks for all the info! ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption accelerator card recommendations.
All (Ultra)SPARC T2, T2+, and T3 CPUs should have these capabilities; if you have some other CPU the capabilities are probably not present. Run 'prtdiag | head -20' to see the CPUs on your system/s; run cryptoadm(1M) with the list option (Solaris 10+) to see the software and hardware providers available. For further assistance your best bet would be crypto-discuss (this has gotten OT for zfs-discuss): http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/crypto-discuss/ Thanks, I'll ask over there. I understood there was a broadcomm add on card for servers but from your answer it seems the CPU supports crypto operations. I don't understand what the purpose of having both support it is if they want to sell crypto cards. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Server with 4 drives, how to configure ZFS?
Hello Bob! Thanks for the reply. I was thinking about going with a 3 way mirror and a hot spare. But I don't think I can upgrade to larger drives unless I do it all at once, is that correct? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Server with 4 drives, how to configure ZFS?
Hello Marty! With four drives you could also make a RAIDZ3 set, allowing you to have the lowest usable space, poorest performance and worst resilver times possible. That's not funny. I was actually considering this :p But you have to admit, it would probably be somewhat reliable! ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Server with 4 drives, how to configure ZFS?
Has there been any change to the server hardware with respect to number of drives since ZFS has come out? Many of the servers around still have an even number of drives (2, 4) etc. and it seems far from optimal from a ZFS standpoint. All you can do is make one or two mirrors, or a 3 way mirror and a spare, right? Wouldn't it make sense to ship with an odd number of drives so you could at least RAIDZ? Or stop making provision for anything except 1 or two drives or no drives at all and require CD or netbooting and just expect everybody to be using NAS boxes? I am just a home server user, what do you guys who work on commercial accounts think? How are people using these servers? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Any use for extra drives?
Hi ladies and gents, I've got a new Solaris 10 development box with ZFS mirror root using 500G drives. I've got several extra 320G drives and I'm wondering if there's any way I can use these to good advantage in this box. I've got enough storage for my needs with the 500G pool. At this point I would be looking for a way to speed things up if possible or add redundancy if necessary but I understand I can't use these smaller drives to stripe the root pool, so what would you suggest? Thanks. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
