Re: [zfs-discuss] [?] - What is the recommended number of disks for a consumer PC with ZFS
References: Thread: ZFS effective short-stroking and connection to thin provisioning? http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=127608 Confused about consumer drives and zfs can someone help? http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=132253 Recommended RAM for ZFS on various platforms http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=132072 Performance advantages of spool with 2x raidz2 vdevs vs. Single vdev - Spindles http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=132127 -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Performance advantages of spool with 2x raidz2 vdevs vs. Single vdev
Hi guys, I am about to reshape my data spool and am wondering what performance diff. I can expect from the new config. Vs. The old. The old config. Is a pool of a single vdev of 8 disks raidz2. The new pool config is 2vdev's of 7 disk raidz2 in a single pool. I understand it should be better with higher io throughputand better read/write rates...but interested to hear the science behind it. ... FYI, it's just a home serverbut I like it. Some answers (and questions) are here: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=102368tstart=0 *** We need this explained in the ZFS FAQ by a Panel of Experts *** Q: I (we) have a Home Computer and desire to use ZFS with a few large, cheap, (consumer-grade) Drives. What can I expect from 3 Drives, would I be better off with 4 or 5. Please note: I doubt I can afford as many as 10 Drives nor could I stuff them into my Box so please suggest options that use less than that many (most prefefably less than 7). A: ? Thanks, Rob -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [?] - What is the recommended number of disks for a consumer PC with ZFS
I'm building my new storage server, all the parts should come in this week. ... Another answer is here: http://eonstorage.blogspot.com/2010/03/whats-best-pool-to-build-with-3-or-4.html Rob -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Confused about consumer drives and zfs can someone help?
I wanted to build a small back up (maybe also NAS) server using A common question that I am trying to get answered (and have a few) here: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=102368tstart=0 Rob -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Recommended RAM for ZFS on various platforms
I'm currently planning on running FreeBSD with ZFS, but I wanted to double-check how much memory I'd need for it to be stable. The ZFS wiki currently says you can go as low as 1 GB, but recommends 2 GB; however, elsewhere I've seen someone claim that you need at least 4 GB. ... How about other OpenSolaris-based OSs, like NexentaStor? ... If it matters, I'm currently planning on RAID-Z2 with 4x500GB consumer-grade SATA drives. ... This is on an AMD64 system, and the OS in question will be running inside of VirtualBox ... Thanks, Michael Buy the biggest Chips you can afford and if you need to pair them (for performance) do so. You want to keep as many Memory Slots open as you can so you can add more memory later. I think you (or I) would be unhappy with a measly 4GB in a new System but in reality it would be OK. If it is not OK (for you) then you have open Memory Slots in which to add more Chips (which you are certain to want to do in the future). Rob -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] [?] - What is the recommended number of disks for a consumer PC with ZFS
I'm building my new storage server, all the parts should come in this week... How did it turn out ? Did 8x1TB Drives seem to be the correct number or a couple too many (based on the assumption that you did not run out of space; I mean solely from a performance / 'ZFS usability' standpoint - as opposed to over three dozen tiny Drives). Thanks for your reply, Rob -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ? SX:CE snv_91 - ZFS - raid and mirror - drive sizes don't add correctl
Bump. Some of the threads on this were last posted to over a year ago. I checked 6485689 and it is not fixed yet, is there any work being done in this area? Thanks, Rob There may be some work being done to fix this: zpool should support raidz of mirrors http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bu g_id=6485689 Discussed in this thread: Mirrored Raidz ( Posted: Oct 19, 2006 9:02 PM ) http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=15854 tstart=0 The suggested solution (by jone http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=6627 9 ) is: # zpool create a1pool raidz c0t0d0 c0t1d0 c0t2d0 .. # zpool create a2pool raidz c1t0d0 c1t1d0 c1t2d0 .. # zfs create -V a1pool/vol # zfs create -V a2pool/vol # zpool create mzdata mirror /dev/zvol/dsk/a1pool/vol /dev/zvol/dsk/a2pool/vol -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ? SX:CE snv_91 - ZFS - raid and mirror - drive sizes don't add correctl
There may be some work being done to fix this: zpool should support raidz of mirrors http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6485689 Discussed in this thread: Mirrored Raidz ( Posted: Oct 19, 2006 9:02 PM ) http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=15854tstart=0 This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS deduplication
Hi All Is there any hope for deduplication on ZFS ? Mertol Ozyoney Storage Practice - Sales Manager Sun Microsystems Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is always hope. Seriously thought, looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_revision_control_software there are a lot of choices of how we could implement this. SVN/K , Mercurial and Sun Teamware all come to mind. Simply ;) merge one of those with ZFS. It _could_ be as simple (with SVN as an example) of using directory listings to produce files which were then 'diffed'. You could then view the diffs as though they were changes made to lines of source code. Just add a tree subroutine to allow you to grab all the diffs that referenced changes to file 'xyz' and you would have easy access to all the changes of a particular file (or directory). With the speed optimized ability added to use ZFS snapshots with the tree subroutine to rollback a single file (or directory) you could undo / redo your way through the filesystem. Using a LKCD (http://www.faqs.org/docs/Linux-HOWTO/Linux-Crash-HOWTO.html) you could sit out on the play and watch from the sidelines -- returning to the OS when you thought you were 'safe' (and if not, jumping backout). Thus, Mertol, it is possible (and could work very well). Rob This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ? SX:CE snv_91 - ZFS - raid and mirror - drive
Though possible, I don't think we would classify it as a best practice. -- richard Looking at http://opensolaris.org/os/community/volume_manager/ I see: Supports RAID-0, RAID-1, RAID-5, Root mirroring and Seamless upgrades and live upgrades (that would go nicely with my ZFS root mirror - right). I also don't see that there is a nice GUI for those that desire one ... Looking at http://evms.sourceforge.net/gui_screen/ I see some great screenshots and page http://evms.sourceforge.net/ says it supports: Ext2/3, JFS, ReiserFS, XFS, Swap, OCFS2, NTFS, FAT -- so it might be better to suggest adding ZFS there instead of focusing on non-ZFS solutions in this ZFS discussion group. Rob This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS deduplication
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, Miles Nordin wrote: scrubs making pools uselessly slow? Or should it be scrub-like so that already-written filesystems can be thrown into the dedup bag and slowly squeezed, or so that dedup can run slowly during the business day over data written quickly at night (fast outside-business-hours backup)? I think that the scrub-like model makes the most sense since ZFS write performance should not be penalized. It is useful to implement score-boarding so that a block is not considered for de-duplication until it has been duplicated a certain number of times. In order to decrease resource consumption, it is useful to perform de-duplication over a span of multiple days or multiple weeks doing just part of the job each time around. Deduping a petabyte of data seems quite challenging yet ZFS needs to be scalable to these levels. Bob Friesenhahn In case anyone (other than Bob) missed it, this is why I suggested File-Level Dedup: ... using directory listings to produce files which were then 'diffed'. You could then view the diffs as though they were changes made ... We could have: Block-Level (if we wanted to restore an exact copy of the drive - duplicate the 'dd' command) or Byte-Level (if we wanted to use compression - duplicate the 'zfs set compression=on rpool' _or_ 'bzip' commands) ... etc... assuming we wanted to duplicate commands which already implement those features, and provide more than we (the filesystem) needs at a very high cost (performance). So I agree with your comment about the need to be mindful of resource consumption, the ability to do this over a period of days is also useful. Indeed the Plan9 filesystem simply snapshots to WORM and has no delete - nor are they able to fill their drives faster than they can afford to buy new ones: Venti Filesystem http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/seanq/p9trace.html Rob This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ? SX:CE snv_91 - ZFS - raid and mirror - drive
Solaris will allow you to do this, but you'll need to use SVM instead of ZFS. Or, I suppose, you could use SVM for RAID-5 and ZFS to mirror those. -- richard Or run Linux ... Richard, The ZFS Best Practices Guide says not. Do not use the same disk or slice in both an SVM and ZFS configuration. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Adding my own compression to zfs
Robert Milkowski wrote: During christmass I managed to add my own compression to zfs - it as quite easy. Great to see innovation but unless your personal compression method is somehow better (very fast with excellent compression) then would it not be a better idea to use an existing (leading edge) compression method ? 7-Zip's (http://www.7-zip.org/) 'newest' methods are LZMA and PPMD (http://www.7-zip.org/7z.html). There is a proprietary license for LZMA that _might_ interest Sun but PPMD is no explicit license see this link: Using PPMD for compression http://www.codeproject.com/KB/recipes/ppmd.aspx Rob This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] How to delete hundreds of emtpy snapshots
I got overzealous with snapshot creation. Every 5 mins is a bad idea. Way too many. What's the easiest way to delete the empty ones? zfs list takes FOREVER You might enjoy reading: ZFS snapshot massacre http://blogs.sun.com/chrisg/entry/zfs_snapshot_massacre. (Yes, the . is part of the URL (NMF) - so add it or you'll 404). Rob This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ? SX:CE snv_91 - ZFS - raid and mirror - drive
-Peter Tribble wrote: On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Rob Clark wrote: I have eight 10GB drives. ... I have 6 remaining 10 GB drives and I desire to raid 3 of them and mirror them to the other 3 to give me raid security and integrity with mirrored drive performance. I then want to move my /export directory to the new drive. ... You can't do that. You can't layer raidz and mirroring. You'll either have to use raidz for the lot, or just use mirroring: zpool create temparray mirror c1t2d0 c1t4d0 mirror c1t5d0 c1t3d0 mirror c1t6d0 c1t8d0 -Peter Tribble Solaris may not allow me to do that but the concept is not unheard of: Quoting: Proceedings of the Third USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/fast04/tech/corbett/corbett.pdf Mirrored RAID-4 and RAID-5 protect against higher order failures [4]. However, the efficiency of the array as measured by its data capacity divided by its total disk space is reduced. [4] Qin Xin, E. Miller, T. Schwarz, D. Long, S. Brandt, W. Litwin, ”Reliability mechanisms for very large storage systems”, 20th IEEE/11th NASA Boddard Conference on Mass Storage Systems and Technologies, San Diego, CA, pgs. 146-156, Apr. 2003. Rob This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Raid-Z with N^2+1 disks
On July 14, 2008 7:49:58 PM -0500 Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With ZFS and modern CPUs, the parity calculation is surely in the noise to the point of being unmeasurable. I would agree with that. The parity calculation has *never* been a factor in and of itself. The problem is having to read the rest of the stripe and then having to wait for a disk revolution before writing. -frank And this is where a HW RAID controller comes in. We hope it has a uP for the calculations, full knowledge of the head positions, and a list of free blocks -- then it simply chooses one of the drives that suit the criteria for the RAID level used and writes immediately to the free block under one of the heads. If only ... Maybe in a few years Sun will make a HW RAID controller using ZFS once we all get the bugs out. With Flash updates this should work wonderfully. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ? SX:CE snv_91 - ZFS - raid and mirror - drive sizes don't add correc
Peter Tribble wrote: Because what you've created is a pool containing two components: - a 3-drive raidz - a 3-drive mirror concatenated together. OK. Seems odd that ZFS would allow that (would people want that configuration instead of what I am attempting to do). I think that what you're trying to do based on your description is to create one raidz and mirror that to another raidz. (Or create a raidz out of mirrored drives.) You can't do that. You can't layer raidz and mirroring. You'll either have to use raidz for the lot, or just use mirroring: zpool create temparray mirror c1t2d0 c1t4d0 mirror c1t5d0 c1t3d0 mirror c1t6d0 c1t8d0 Bummer. Curiously I can get that same odd size with either of these two commands (the second attempt sort of looks like it is raid + mirroring): # zpool create temparray1 mirror c1t2d0 c1t4d0 mirror c1t3d0 c1t5d0 mirror c1t6d0 c1t8d0 # zpool status pool: rpool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM rpool ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t0d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t1d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors pool: temparray1 state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM temparray1 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirrorONLINE 0 0 0 c1t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirrorONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirrorONLINE 0 0 0 c1t6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t8d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # zfs list NAMEUSED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT rpool 4.36G 5.42G35K /rpool rpool/ROOT 3.09G 5.42G18K legacy rpool/ROOT/snv_91 3.09G 5.42G 3.01G / rpool/ROOT/snv_91/var 84.5M 5.42G 84.5M /var rpool/dump 640M 5.42G 640M - rpool/export 14.0M 5.42G19K /export rpool/export/home 14.0M 5.42G 14.0M /export/home rpool/swap 640M 6.05G16K - temparray1 92.5K 29.3G 1K /temparray1 # zpool destroy temparray1 And the pretty one: # zpool create temparray raidz c1t2d0 c1t4d0 raidz c1t3d0 c1t5d0 raidz c1t6d0 c1t8d0 # zpool status pool: rpool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM rpool ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t0d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t1d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors pool: temparray state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM temparray ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t4d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t5d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t8d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors # zfs list NAMEUSED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT rpool 4.36G 5.42G35K /rpool rpool/ROOT 3.09G 5.42G18K legacy rpool/ROOT/snv_91 3.09G 5.42G 3.01G / rpool/ROOT/snv_91/var 84.6M 5.42G 84.6M /var rpool/dump 640M 5.42G 640M - rpool/export 14.0M 5.42G19K /export rpool/export/home 14.0M 5.42G 14.0M /export/home rpool/swap 640M 6.05G16K - temparray94K 29.3G 1K /temparray # zpool destroy temparray That second attempt leads this newcommer to imagine that they have 3 raid drives mirrored to 3 raid drives. Is there a way to get mirror performance (double speed) with raid integrity (one drive can fail and you are OK)? I can't imagine that there exists no one who would want that configuration. Thanks for your comment Peter. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
