Re: [zfs-discuss] Sun X4200 Question...
Thanks for the info. I am planning g the install this weekend, between formula one and other hardware upgrades... fingers crossed it works! On 14 Mar 2013 09:19, "Heiko L." wrote: > > > support for VT, but nothing for AMD... The Opterons dont have VT, so i > wont > > be using XEN, but the Zones may be useful... > > We use XEN/PV on X4200 for many years without problems. > dom0: X4200+openindiana+xvm > guests(PV): openindiana,linux/fedora,linux/debian > (vmlinuz-2.6.32.28-xenU-32,vmlinuz-2.6.18-xenU64) > > > regards Heiko > > ___ > 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] Sun X4200 Question...
to tell you the truth, i dont really need the virtualization stuff... Zones sounds interesting, since it seems to be ligher weight than Xen or anything like that... On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Bob Friesenhahn < bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote: > On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Tiernan OToole wrote: > > I know this might be the wrong place to ask, but hopefully someone can >> point me in the right direction... >> I got my hands on a Sun x4200. Its the original one, not the M2, and has >> 2 single core Opterons, 4Gb RAM and 4 73Gb SAS Disks... >> But, I dont know what to install on it... I was thinking of SmartOS, but >> the site mentions Intel support for VT, but nothing for >> AMD... The Opterons dont have VT, so i wont be using XEN, but the Zones >> may be useful... >> > > OpenIndiana or OmniOS seem like the most likely candidates. > > You can run VirtualBox on OpenIndiana and it should be able to work > without VT extensions. > > Bob > -- > Bob Friesenhahn > bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/** > users/bfriesen/ <http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/> > GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Sun X4200 Question...
I know this might be the wrong place to ask, but hopefully someone can point me in the right direction... I got my hands on a Sun x4200. Its the original one, not the M2, and has 2 single core Opterons, 4Gb RAM and 4 73Gb SAS Disks... But, I dont know what to install on it... I was thinking of SmartOS, but the site mentions Intel support for VT, but nothing for AMD... The Opterons dont have VT, so i wont be using XEN, but the Zones may be useful... Any advice? Thanks! -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Distro Advice
Thanks again lads. I will take all that info into advice, and will join that new group also! Thanks again! --Tiernan On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Tim Cook wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Tiernan OToole wrote: > >> Thanks all! I will check out FreeNAS and see what it can do... I will >> also check my RAID Card and see if it can work with JBOD... fingers >> crossed... The machine has a couple internal SATA ports (think there are 2, >> could be 4) so i was thinking of using those for boot disks and SSDs >> later... >> >> As a follow up question: Data Deduplication: The machine, to start, will >> have about 5Gb RAM. I read somewhere that 20TB storage would require about >> 8GB RAM, depending on block size... Since i dont know block sizes, yet (i >> store a mix of VMs, TV Shows, Movies and backups on the NAS) I am not sure >> how much memory i will need (my estimate is 10TB RAW (8TB usable?) in a >> ZRAID1 pool, and then 3TB RAW in a striped pool). If i dont have enough >> memory now, can i enable DeDupe at a later stage when i add memory? Also, >> if i pick FreeBSD now, and want to move to, say, Nexenta, is that possible? >> Assuming the drives are just JBOD drives (to be confirmed) could they just >> get imported? >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> > > Yes, you can move between FreeBSD and Illumos based distros as long as you > are at a compatible zpool version (which they currently are). I'd avoid > deduplication unless you absolutely need it... it's still a bit of a > kludge. Stick to compression and your world will be a much happier place. > > --Tim > > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Distro Advice
Thanks all! I will check out FreeNAS and see what it can do... I will also check my RAID Card and see if it can work with JBOD... fingers crossed... The machine has a couple internal SATA ports (think there are 2, could be 4) so i was thinking of using those for boot disks and SSDs later... As a follow up question: Data Deduplication: The machine, to start, will have about 5Gb RAM. I read somewhere that 20TB storage would require about 8GB RAM, depending on block size... Since i dont know block sizes, yet (i store a mix of VMs, TV Shows, Movies and backups on the NAS) I am not sure how much memory i will need (my estimate is 10TB RAW (8TB usable?) in a ZRAID1 pool, and then 3TB RAW in a striped pool). If i dont have enough memory now, can i enable DeDupe at a later stage when i add memory? Also, if i pick FreeBSD now, and want to move to, say, Nexenta, is that possible? Assuming the drives are just JBOD drives (to be confirmed) could they just get imported? Thanks. On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Tim Cook wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Volker A. Brandt wrote: > >> Tim Cook writes: >> > > I need something that will allow me to share files over SMB (3 if >> > > possible), NFS, AFP (for Time Machine) and iSCSI. Ideally, i would >> > > like something i can manage "easily" and something that works with >> > > the Dell... >> > >> > All of them should provide the basic functionality you're looking >> > for. >> > None of them will provide SMB3 (at all) or AFP (without a third >> > party package). >> >> FreeNAS has AFP built-in, including a Time Machine discovery method. >> >> The latest FreeNAS is still based on Samba 3.x, but they are aware >> of 4.x and will probably integrate it at some point in the future. >> Then you should have SMB3. I don't know how far along they are... >> >> >> Best regards -- Volker >> >> > > FreeNAS comes with a package pre-installed to add AFP support. There is > no native AFP support in FreeBSD and by association FreeNAS. > > --Tim > > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] ZFS Distro Advice
Good morning all. My home NAS died over the weekend, and it leaves me with a lot of spare drives (5 2Tb and 3 1Tb disks). I have a Dell Poweredge 2900 Server sitting in the house, which has not been doing much over the last while (bought it a few years back with the intent of using it as a storage box, since it has 8 Hot Swap drive bays) and i am now looking at building the NAS using ZFS... But, now i am confused as to what OS to use... OpenIndiana? Nexenta? FreeNAS/FreeBSD? I need something that will allow me to share files over SMB (3 if possible), NFS, AFP (for Time Machine) and iSCSI. Ideally, i would like something i can manage "easily" and something that works with the Dell... Any recommendations? Any comparisons to each? Thanks. -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Dedicated server running ESXi with no RAID card, ZFS for storage?
Thanks Eugen. yea, i am with Hetzner, but no hardware passthough... As for ESXi, i am happy with it, but its not booting from USB... its using the disk to boot from... I am thinking of using a USB key to boot from though... just need to figure out how to remotely do this and if i should... Thanks again! --Tiernan On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 12:58:04PM +0100, Sašo Kiselkov wrote: > > On 11/07/2012 12:39 PM, Tiernan OToole wrote: > > > Morning all... > > > > > > I have a Dedicated server in a data center in Germany, and it has 2 3TB > > > drives, but only software RAID. I have got them to install VMWare ESXi > and > > > so far everything is going ok... I have the 2 drives as standard data > > > stores... > > > > > > But i am paranoid... So, i installed Nexenta as a VM, gave it a small > disk > > > to boot off and 2 1Tb disks on separate physical drives... I have > created a > > > mirror pool and shared it with VMWare over NFS and copied my ISOs to > this > > > share... > > > > > > So, 2 questions: > > > > > > 1: If you where given the same hardware, what would you do? (RAID card > is > > > an extra EUR30 or so a month, which i don't really want to spend, but > > > could, if needs be...) > > A RAID will only hurt you with all in one. Do you have hardware passthrough > with Hetzner (I presume you're with them, from the sound of it) on ESXi? > > > > 2: should i mirror the boot drive for the VM? > > > > If it were my money, I'd throw ESXi out the window and use Illumos for > > the hypervisor as well. You can use KVM for full virtualization and > > zones for light-weight. Plus, you'll be able to set up a ZFS mirror on > > I'm very interested, as I'm currently working on an all-in-one with > ESXi (using N40L for prototype and zfs send target, and a Supermicro > ESXi box for production with guests, all booted from USB internally > and zfs snapshot/send source). > > Why would you advise against the free ESXi, booted from USB, assuming > your hardware has disk pass-through? The UI is quite friendly, and it's > easy to deploy guests across the network. > > > the data pair and set copies=2 on the rpool if you don't have another > > disk to complete the rpool with it. Another possibility, though somewhat > > convoluted, is to slice up the disks into two parts: a small OS part and > > a large datastore part (e.g. 100GB for the OS, 900GB for the datastore). > > Then simply put the OS part in a three-way mirror rpool and the > > datastore part in a raidz (plus do a grubinstall on all disks). That > > way, you'll be able to sustain a single-disk failure of any one of the > > three disks. > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Dedicated server running ESXi with no RAID card, ZFS for storage?
Morning all... I have a Dedicated server in a data center in Germany, and it has 2 3TB drives, but only software RAID. I have got them to install VMWare ESXi and so far everything is going ok... I have the 2 drives as standard data stores... But i am paranoid... So, i installed Nexenta as a VM, gave it a small disk to boot off and 2 1Tb disks on separate physical drives... I have created a mirror pool and shared it with VMWare over NFS and copied my ISOs to this share... So, 2 questions: 1: If you where given the same hardware, what would you do? (RAID card is an extra EUR30 or so a month, which i don't really want to spend, but could, if needs be...) 2: should i mirror the boot drive for the VM? Thanks. -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Building an On-Site and Off-Size ZFS server, replication question
Cool beans lads. Thanks! On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Ian Collins wrote: > On 10/08/12 20:08, Tiernan OToole wrote: > >> Ok, so, after reading a bit more of this discussion and after playing >> around at the weekend, i have a couple of questions to ask... >> >> 1: Do my pools need to be the same? for example, the pool in the >> datacenter is 2 1Tb drives in Mirror. in house i have 5 200Gb virtual >> drives in RAIDZ1, giving 800Gb usable. If i am backing up stuff to the home >> server, can i still do a ZFS Send, even though underlying system is >> different? >> > > Yes you can, just make sure you have enough space! > > > 2: If i give out a partition as an iSCSI LUN, can this be ZFS Sended as >> normal, or is there any difference? >> >> > It can be sent as normal. > > -- > Ian. > > __**_ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/**mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss<http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss> > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Building an On-Site and Off-Size ZFS server, replication question
Ok, so, after reading a bit more of this discussion and after playing around at the weekend, i have a couple of questions to ask... 1: Do my pools need to be the same? for example, the pool in the datacenter is 2 1Tb drives in Mirror. in house i have 5 200Gb virtual drives in RAIDZ1, giving 800Gb usable. If i am backing up stuff to the home server, can i still do a ZFS Send, even though underlying system is different? 2: If i give out a partition as an iSCSI LUN, can this be ZFS Sended as normal, or is there any difference? Thanks. --Tiernan On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Richard Elling wrote: > On Oct 7, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Johannes Totz wrote: > > > On 05/10/2012 15:01, Edward Ned Harvey > > (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) wrote: > >>> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > >>> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Tiernan OToole > >>> > >>> I am in the process of planning a system which will have 2 ZFS > >>> servers, one on site, one off site. The on site server will be > >>> used by workstations and servers in house, and most of that will > >>> stay in house. There will, however, be data i want backed up > >>> somewhere else, which is where the offsite server comes in... This > >>> server will be sitting in a Data Center and will have some storage > >>> available to it (the whole server currently has 2 3Tb drives, > >>> though they are not dedicated to the ZFS box, they are on VMware > >>> ESXi). There is then some storage (currently 100Gb, but more can > >>> be requested) of SFTP enabled backup which i plan to use for some > >>> snapshots, but more on that later. > >>> > >>> Anyway, i want to confirm my plan and make sure i am not missing > >>> anything here... > >>> > >>> * build server in house with storage, pools, etc... * have a > >>> server in data center with enough storage for its reason, plus the > >>> extra for offsite backup * have one pool set as my "offsite" > >>> pool... anything in here should be backed up off site also... * > >>> possibly have another set as "very offsite" which will also be > >>> pushed to the SFTP server, but not sure... * give these pools out > >>> via SMB/NFS/iSCSI * every 6 or so hours take a snapshot of the 2 > >>> offsite pools. * do a ZFS send to the data center box * nightly, > >>> on the very offsite pool, do a ZFS send to the SFTP server * if > >>> anything goes wrong (my server dies, DC server dies, etc), Panic, > >>> download, pray... the usual... :) > >>> > >>> Anyway, I want to make sure i am doing this correctly... Is there > >>> anything on that list that sounds stupid or am i doing anything > >>> wrong? am i missing anything? > >>> > >>> Also, as a follow up question, but slightly unrelated, when it > >>> comes to the ZFS Send, i could use SSH to do the send, directly to > >>> the machine... Or i could upload the compressed, and possibly > >>> encrypted dump to the server... Which, for resume-ability and > >>> speed, would be suggested? And if i where to go with an upload > >>> option, any suggestions on what i should use? > >> > >> It is recommended, whenever possible, you should pipe the "zfs send" > >> directly into a "zfs receive" on the receiving system. For two > >> solid reasons: > >> > >> If a single bit is corrupted, the whole stream checksum is wrong and > >> therefore the whole stream is rejected. So if this occurs, you want > >> to detect it (in the form of one incremental failed) and then > >> correct it (in the form of the next incremental succeeding). > >> Whereas, if you store your streams on storage, it will go undetected, > >> and everything after that point will be broken. > >> > >> If you need to do a restore, from a stream stored on storage, then > >> your only choice is to restore the whole stream. You cannot look > >> inside and just get one file. But if you had been doing send | > >> receive, then you obviously can look inside the receiving filesystem > >> and extract some individual specifics. > >> > >> If the recipient system doesn't support "zfs receive," [...] > > > > On that note, is there a minimal user-mode zfs thing that would allow > > receiving a stream into an image file? No need for file/directory access > > etc. > > cat :-) > > > I was thinking maybe the zfs-fuse-on-linux project may have suitable > bits? > > I'm sure most Linux distros have cat > -- richard > > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Building an On-Site and Off-Size ZFS server, replication question
Thanks Ian. That sounds like an option also. The plan was to break up the file systems anyway, since some i will want to be replicated remotely, and others not as much. --Tiernan On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Ian Collins wrote: > On 10/05/12 21:36, Jim Klimov wrote: > >> 2012-10-05 11:17, Tiernan OToole wrote: >> >>> Also, as a follow up question, but slightly unrelated, when it comes to >>> the ZFS Send, i could use SSH to do the send, directly to the machine... >>> Or i could upload the compressed, and possibly encrypted dump to the >>> server... Which, for resume-ability and speed, would be suggested? And >>> if i where to go with an upload option, any suggestions on what i should >>> use? >>> >> As for this, the answer depends on network bandwidth, reliability, >> and snapshot file size - ultimately, on the probability and retry >> cost of an error during transmission. >> >> Many posters on the list strongly object to using files as storage >> for snapshot streams, because in reliability this is (may be) worse >> than a single-disk pool and bitrot on it - a single-bit error in >> a snapshot file can render it and all newer snapshots invalid and >> un-importable. >> >> Still, given enough scratch space on the sending and receiving sides >> and a bad (slow, glitchy) network in-between, I did go with compressed >> files of zfs-send streams (perhaps making recursion myself and using >> smaller files of one snapshot each - YMMV). For compression on multiCPU >> senders I can strongly suggest "pigz --fast $filename" (I did have >> problems in pigz-1.7.1 compressing several files with one command, >> maybe that's fixed now). If you're tight on space/transfer size more >> than on CPU, you can try other parallel algos - pbzip2, p7zip, etc. >> Likewise, you can also pass the file into an encryptor of your choice. >> > > I do have to suffer a slow, glitchy WAN to a remote server and rather than > send stream files, I broke the data on the remote server into a more fine > grained set of filesystems than I would do normally. In this case, I made > the directories under what would have been the leaf filesystems filesystems > themselves. > > By spreading the data over more filesystems, the individual incremental > sends are smaller, so there is less data to resend if the link burps during > a transfer. > > -- > Ian. > > __**_ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/**mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss<http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss> > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Building an On-Site and Off-Size ZFS server, replication question
Thanks again Jim. Very handy info. This is now my weekend project, so hopefully things go well! --Tiernan On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Jim Klimov wrote: > 2012-10-05 13:13, Tiernan OToole wrote: > >> Thanks for that Jim! >> >> Sounds like a plan there... One question about the storing ZFS dumps in >> a file... So, the idea of storing the data in a SFTP server which has an >> unknown underlying file system... Is that defiantly off limits, or can >> it be done? >> > > Mileages do vary. Maybe you should pack the stream files into > archives with error-correction codes (or at least verification > CRCs) like ZIP, RAR, likely p7zip, maybe others; and also keep > checksum files. At least this can help detect or even fix small > nasty surprises. > > The general concern is that zfs send streams have no built-in > redundancy, I'm not sure about error-checking - likely it is > there. And it is widely assumed that this being a stream, a small > error can redirect the flow widely differently from expectations > and cause the whole dataset state to be invalid (likely this > snapshot receiving will be aborted, and then you can't receive > any newer ones over it). > > That said, some people do keep the streams on tape; the NDMP > tools and protocol from Sun IIRC do the same for backups. > So it's not off-limits, but precautions may be due (keep 2+ > copies, do CRC/ECC and so on). > > > > and should i be doing a full dump or just an incremental > > one? maybe incremental daily, and then a full dump weekly? > > A full dump of a large filesystem can be unbearably large for > storage and transfers. Still, the idea of storing occasional > full snapshots and a full history of incrementals (so that you > can try to recover starting from any of the full snapshots you > have) sounds sane. This way you have a sort of second copy by > virtue of a full snapshot incorporating some state of the dataset > and if the most recent one is broken - you can try to recover > with the one(s) before it and applying more incremental snapshots. > Likewise, errors in very old snapshots become irrelevant when a > newer full snapshot is intact. But sometimes two or more things > can break - or be detected to break - at once ;) > > In particular, regular drills should be done (and provisioned > for) to test that you can in fact recover from your backups, > and that they do contain all the data you need. Older configs > can become obsolete as live systems evolve... > > HTH, > //Jim > > > __**_ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/**mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss<http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss> > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Building an On-Site and Off-Size ZFS server, replication question
Thanks for that Jim! Sounds like a plan there... One question about the storing ZFS dumps in a file... So, the idea of storing the data in a SFTP server which has an unknown underlying file system... Is that defiantly off limits, or can it be done? and should i be doing a full dump or just an incremental one? maybe incremental daily, and then a full dump weekly? Thanks! --Tiernan On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Jim Klimov wrote: > 2012-10-05 11:17, Tiernan OToole wrote: > >> Also, as a follow up question, but slightly unrelated, when it comes to >> the ZFS Send, i could use SSH to do the send, directly to the machine... >> Or i could upload the compressed, and possibly encrypted dump to the >> server... Which, for resume-ability and speed, would be suggested? And >> if i where to go with an upload option, any suggestions on what i should >> use? >> > > As for this, the answer depends on network bandwidth, reliability, > and snapshot file size - ultimately, on the probability and retry > cost of an error during transmission. > > Many posters on the list strongly object to using files as storage > for snapshot streams, because in reliability this is (may be) worse > than a single-disk pool and bitrot on it - a single-bit error in > a snapshot file can render it and all newer snapshots invalid and > un-importable. > > Still, given enough scratch space on the sending and receiving sides > and a bad (slow, glitchy) network in-between, I did go with compressed > files of zfs-send streams (perhaps making recursion myself and using > smaller files of one snapshot each - YMMV). For compression on multiCPU > senders I can strongly suggest "pigz --fast $filename" (I did have > problems in pigz-1.7.1 compressing several files with one command, > maybe that's fixed now). If you're tight on space/transfer size more > than on CPU, you can try other parallel algos - pbzip2, p7zip, etc. > Likewise, you can also pass the file into an encryptor of your choice. > > Then I can rsync these files to the receiving server, using "rsync -c" > and/or md5sum, sha256sum, sha1sum or whatever tool(s) of your liking > to validate that the files received match those sent - better safe > than sorry. I'm usually using "rsync -cavPHK" for any work, which > gives you retryable transfers in case network goes down, status bar, > directory recursion and hardlink support among other things. > > NFS is also retryable if so configured (even if the receiver gets > rebooted in the process), and if you, for example, already have > VPN between two sites, you might find it faster than rsync which > involves extra encryption - maybe redundant in VPN case. > > When the scratch area on the receiver has got and validated the > compressed snapshot stream, I can gzcat it and pipe into zfs recv. > This ultimately validates that the zfs-send stream arrived intact > and is fully receivable, and only then I can delete the temporary > files involved - or retry the send from different steps (it is > possible that the initial file was corrupted in RAM, etc.) > > Note that such approach via files essentially disables zfs-send > deduplication which may be available in protocol between two > active zfs commands, but AFAIK this does not preclude you from > receiving data into deduped datasets - local dedup happens upon > block writes anyway, like compression, encryption and stuff like > that. > > HTH, > //Jim Klimov > > __**_ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/**mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss<http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss> > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Building an On-Site and Off-Size ZFS server, replication question
Good morning. I am in the process of planning a system which will have 2 ZFS servers, one on site, one off site. The on site server will be used by workstations and servers in house, and most of that will stay in house. There will, however, be data i want backed up somewhere else, which is where the offsite server comes in... This server will be sitting in a Data Center and will have some storage available to it (the whole server currently has 2 3Tb drives, though they are not dedicated to the ZFS box, they are on VMware ESXi). There is then some storage (currently 100Gb, but more can be requested) of SFTP enabled backup which i plan to use for some snapshots, but more on that later. Anyway, i want to confirm my plan and make sure i am not missing anything here... * build server in house with storage, pools, etc... * have a server in data center with enough storage for its reason, plus the extra for offsite backup * have one pool set as my "offsite" pool... anything in here should be backed up off site also... * possibly have another set as "very offsite" which will also be pushed to the SFTP server, but not sure... * give these pools out via SMB/NFS/iSCSI * every 6 or so hours take a snapshot of the 2 offsite pools. * do a ZFS send to the data center box * nightly, on the very offsite pool, do a ZFS send to the SFTP server * if anything goes wrong (my server dies, DC server dies, etc), Panic, download, pray... the usual... :) Anyway, I want to make sure i am doing this correctly... Is there anything on that list that sounds stupid or am i doing anything wrong? am i missing anything? Also, as a follow up question, but slightly unrelated, when it comes to the ZFS Send, i could use SSH to do the send, directly to the machine... Or i could upload the compressed, and possibly encrypted dump to the server... Which, for resume-ability and speed, would be suggested? And if i where to go with an upload option, any suggestions on what i should use? Thanks. -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Large scale performance query
they dont go into too much detail on their setup, and they are not running Solaris, but they do mention how their SATA cards see different drives, based on where they are placed they also have a second revision at http://blog.backblaze.com/2011/07/20/petabytes-on-a-budget-v2-0revealing-more-secrets/ which talks about building their system with 135Tb in a single 45 bay 4U box... I am also interested in this kind of scale... Looking at the BackBlaze box, i am thinking of building something like this, but not in one go... so, anything you do find out in your build, keep us informed! :) --Tiernan On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Roberto Waltman wrote: > > Phil Harrison wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Hoping to gain some insight from some people who have done large scale > > systems before? I'm hoping to get some performance estimates, suggestions > > and/or general discussion/feedback. > > No personal experience, but you may find this useful: > "Petabytes on a budget" > > > http://blog.backblaze.com/2009/09/01/petabytes-on-a-budget-how-to-build-cheap-cloud-storage/ > > -- > > Roberto Waltman > > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Migrating from ZFS-Fuse to ZFS Proper...
never mind... found an answer here: http://groups.google.com/a/zfsonlinux.org/group/zfs-discuss/browse_thread/thread/3183dab146d5f1af/d9e9d59b19aa4401?lnk=raot On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Tiernan OToole wrote: > Good morning all. > > I built a test system using Linux (Ubuntu) and ZFS Fuse, just for > testing... I formatted 2 drives in the pool as ZFS, and have been putting > data on the system to see how performance worked, etc... Is this pool > compatible with ZFS proper? Eg, Solaris Express? Open Indiana?, or Nexenta? > Its not a major problem if its not, as i was eventually going to kill the > pool and create, what i would call, production pool, but just wondering... > > Thanks. > > -- > Tiernan O'Toole > blog.lotas-smartman.net > www.geekphotographer.com > www.tiernanotoole.ie > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Migrating from ZFS-Fuse to ZFS Proper...
Good morning all. I built a test system using Linux (Ubuntu) and ZFS Fuse, just for testing... I formatted 2 drives in the pool as ZFS, and have been putting data on the system to see how performance worked, etc... Is this pool compatible with ZFS proper? Eg, Solaris Express? Open Indiana?, or Nexenta? Its not a major problem if its not, as i was eventually going to kill the pool and create, what i would call, production pool, but just wondering... Thanks. -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.geekphotographer.com www.tiernanotoole.ie ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zil on multiple usb keys
Ok, so, taking 2 300Gb disks, and 2 500Gb disks, and creating an 800Gb mirrored striped thing is sounding like a bad idea... what about just creating a pool of all disks, without using mirrors? I seen something called "copies", which if i am reading correctly, will make sure a number of copies of a file exist... Am i reading that correctly? If this does work the way i think it works, then taking all 4 disks, and making one large 1.6Tb pool, setting copies to 2, should, in theory, create a poor mans pool with striping, right? --Tiernan On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:20 AM, Brandon High wrote: > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Edward Ned Harvey > wrote: > > Actually, you can't do that. You can't make a vdev from other vdev's, > and when it comes to striping and mirroring your only choice is to do it the > right way. > > > > If you were REALLY trying to go out of your way to do it wrong somehow, I > suppose you could probably make a zvol from a stripe, and then export it to > yourself via iscsi, repeat with another zvol, and then mirror the two iscsi > targets. ;-) You might even be able to do the same crazy thing with > simply zvol's and no iscsi... But either way you'd really be going out of > your way to create a problem. ;-) > > The right way to do it, um, incorrectly is to create a striped device > using SVM, and use that as a vdev for your pool. > > So yes, you could create two 800GB stripes, and use them to create a > ZFS mirror. But it would be a really bad idea. > > -B > > -- > Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zil on multiple usb keys
thats not a typo... I was thinking 2 pools, 800gb each, and mirrored... think i should mess around with this setup a bit more and see what i can get working... might work better if i just move them into a new enclosure... we see what happens... Thanks for the info on the USB drives... if the ZIL drive falls over, does ZFS not recover well? do i need to reboot fully? Thanks. --Tienan On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Jim Klimov wrote: > 2011-07-16 15:46, Tiernan OToole пишет: > > Thanks for the info. need to rebuild my machine and ZFS pool kind of > new to this and realized i built it as a stripe, not a mirror... also, want > to add extra disks... > > As a follow up question: > > I have 2 500Gb internal drives and 2 300Gb USB drives. If i where to > create a 2 pools, a 300Gb and a 500Gb in each, and then mirror over them, > would that work? is it even posible? or what would you recomend for that > setup? > > Is there a typo? It would rather be a 2*300Gb mirror and a 2*500Gb > mirror, > with a "stripe" above them as much as writes can get balanced. > > That would work (with forcing on command-line), is possible, moderately > recommmended because unbalanced setups can have more issues than > usual (hence you must use the force to enable such setup). > > And just in case, this pool can not be a bootable rpool. > > You might make a 2*200Gb slice mirror for an rpool and a more balanced > 4*300Gb pool of any layout (raid10, raidz123)... > > As for using USB sticks, I started my unlucky setup with some sticks used > as L2ARC, and about once a week the device got lost (possibly because > a stick could slide a bit from its contact bay on the chassis - BIOS also > did > not see the stick until it was re-plugged). Loss of a device would also > hang > my pool for quite a long while... > > Thanks. > > --Tiernan > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Edward Ned Harvey < > opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com> wrote: > >> > From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- >> > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Tiernan OToole >> > >> > This might be a stupid question, but here goes... Would adding, say, 4 4 >> or >> > 8gb usb keys as a zil make enough of a difference for writes on an iscsi >> shared >> > vol? >> > >> > I am finding reads are not too bad (40is mb/s over gige on 2 500gb >> drives >> > stripped) but writes top out at about 10 and drop a lot lower... If I >> where to >> > add a couple usb keys for zil, would it make a difference? >> >> Unfortunately, usb keys, even the fastest ones, are slower than physical >> hard drives. I even went out of my way to buy a super expensive super >> fast >> USB3 16G fob... And it's still slower than a super-cheap USB2 sata hard >> drive. >> >> There is a way you can evaluate the effect of adding a fast slog device >> without buying one. (It would have to be a fast device, certainly no USB >> fobs.) Just temporarily disable your ZIL. That's the fastest you can >> possibly go. If it makes a big difference, then getting a fast slog >> device >> will help you approach that theoretical limit. If it doesn't make a huge >> difference, then adding slog will not do you any good. >> >> To disable ZIL, if your pool is sufficiently recent, use the zfs set sync= >> command. It takes effect immediately. If you have an older system, >> you'll >> have to use a different command, and you'll probably have to remount your >> filesystem in order for the change to take effect. >> >> > > > -- > Tiernan O'Toole > blog.lotas-smartman.net > www.tiernanotoolephotography.com > www.the-hairy-one.com > > > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing > listzfs-discuss@opensolaris.orghttp://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > > -- > > > ++ > || > | Климов Евгений, Jim Klimov | > | технический директор CTO | > | ЗАО "ЦОС и ВТ" JSC COS&HT | > || > | +7-903-7705859 (cellular) mailto:jimkli...@cos.ru > | > | CC:ad...@cos.ru,jimkli...@mail.ru | > ++ > | () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail | > | /\
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zil on multiple usb keys
So, i like the sound of that, but the box is a very frankinbox like... it has 2 SATA ports, one used for the boot drive, one for one of the 500s... the second 500Gb is IDE. The 2 USB drives both internally are SATA, so pulling one and plugging it internally wont work that well... but thats for the info. On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Edward Ned Harvey < opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com> wrote: > > From: Tiernan OToole [mailto:lsmart...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 7:46 AM > > > > I have 2 500Gb internal drives and 2 300Gb USB drives. If i where to > create a 2 > > pools, a 300Gb and a 500Gb in each, and then mirror over them, would that > > work? is it even posible? or what would you recomend for that setup? > > I think the risk of accidental disconnection is higher on the USB drive. > So > I would recommend swapping the disks inside the enclosures... One 500 > inside, one 500 outside, one 300 inside, one 300 outside. Mirror the 500G > drives to each other, mirror the 300g drives to each other. That way, if > you accidentally disconnect one or both of the external drives, you just > plug it back in and everything moves forward without any problem. > > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zil on multiple usb keys
Thanks for the info. need to rebuild my machine and ZFS pool kind of new to this and realized i built it as a stripe, not a mirror... also, want to add extra disks... As a follow up question: I have 2 500Gb internal drives and 2 300Gb USB drives. If i where to create a 2 pools, a 300Gb and a 500Gb in each, and then mirror over them, would that work? is it even posible? or what would you recomend for that setup? Thanks. --Tiernan On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Edward Ned Harvey < opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com> wrote: > > From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Tiernan OToole > > > > This might be a stupid question, but here goes... Would adding, say, 4 4 > or > > 8gb usb keys as a zil make enough of a difference for writes on an iscsi > shared > > vol? > > > > I am finding reads are not too bad (40is mb/s over gige on 2 500gb drives > > stripped) but writes top out at about 10 and drop a lot lower... If I > where to > > add a couple usb keys for zil, would it make a difference? > > Unfortunately, usb keys, even the fastest ones, are slower than physical > hard drives. I even went out of my way to buy a super expensive super fast > USB3 16G fob... And it's still slower than a super-cheap USB2 sata hard > drive. > > There is a way you can evaluate the effect of adding a fast slog device > without buying one. (It would have to be a fast device, certainly no USB > fobs.) Just temporarily disable your ZIL. That's the fastest you can > possibly go. If it makes a big difference, then getting a fast slog device > will help you approach that theoretical limit. If it doesn't make a huge > difference, then adding slog will not do you any good. > > To disable ZIL, if your pool is sufficiently recent, use the zfs set sync= > command. It takes effect immediately. If you have an older system, you'll > have to use a different command, and you'll probably have to remount your > filesystem in order for the change to take effect. > > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Zil on multiple usb keys
Well, not knowing a lot about these, but if the flash stick is based on SSD, then it might work well, but if its just a standard USB key rebundled as a eSATA disk, maybe not... On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 04:21:13PM +0000, Tiernan OToole wrote: > > This might be a stupid question, but here goes... Would adding, say, 4 4 > or 8gb usb keys as a zil make enough of a difference for writes on an iscsi > shared vol? > > > > I am finding reads are not too bad (40is mb/s over gige on 2 500gb drives > stripped) but writes top out at about 10 and drop a lot lower... If I where > to add a couple usb keys for zil, would it make a difference? > > Speaking of which, is there a point in using an eSATA flash stick? > If yes, which? > > -- > Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl http://leitl.org > __ > ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org > 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Zil on multiple usb keys
This might be a stupid question, but here goes... Would adding, say, 4 4 or 8gb usb keys as a zil make enough of a difference for writes on an iscsi shared vol? I am finding reads are not too bad (40is mb/s over gige on 2 500gb drives stripped) but writes top out at about 10 and drop a lot lower... If I where to add a couple usb keys for zil, would it make a difference? Thanks. Sent from a fruity device ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Recomendations for Storage Pool Config
Good morning all. This question has probably poped up before, but maybe not in this exact way… I am planning on building a SAN for my home meta centre, and have some of the raid cards I need for the build. I will be ordering the case soon, and then the drives. The cards I have are 2 8 port PXI-Express cards (A dell Perc 5 and a Adaptec card…). The case will have 20 hot swap SAS/SATA drives, and I will be adding a third RAID controller to allow the full 20 drives. I have read something about trying to setup redundancy with the RAID controllers, so having zpools spanning multiple controllers. Given I won’t be using the on-board RAID features of the cards, I am wondering how this should be setup… I was thinking of zpools: 2+2+1 X 4 in ZRAID2. This way, I could lose a controller and not lose any data from the pools… But is this theory correct? If I were to use 2Tb drives, each zpool would be 10Tb RAW and 6TB useable… giving me a total of 40Tb RAW and 24Tb usable… Is this over kill? Should I be worrying about losing a controller? Thanks in advance. --Tiernan ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Plan for upgrading a ZFS based SAN
At the moment is just one pool with a plan to add the 500gb drives... What would be recommend? -Original Message- From: Brandon High Sent: 17 February 2010 01:00 To: Tiernan OToole Cc: Robert Milkowski ; zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Plan for upgrading a ZFS based SAN On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Tiernan OToole wrote: > Cool... Thanks for the advice! Buy why would it be a good idea to change > layout on bigger disks? On top of the reasons Bob gave, your current layout will be very unbalanced after adding devices. You can't currently add more devices to a raidz vdev or remove a top level vdev from a pool, so you'll be stuck with 8 drives in a raidz2, 3 drives in a raidz, and any future additions in additional vdevs. When you say you have 2 pools, do you mean two vdevs in one pool, or actually two pools? -B -- Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com Indecision is the key to flexibility. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Plan for upgrading a ZFS based SAN
Cool... Thanks for the advice! Buy why would it be a good idea to change layout on bigger disks? -Original Message- From: Brandon High Sent: 16 February 2010 18:26 To: Tiernan OToole Cc: Robert Milkowski ; zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Plan for upgrading a ZFS based SAN On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Tiernan OToole wrote: > So, does that work with RAIDZ1 and 2 pools? Yes. Replace all the disks in one vdev, and that vdev will become larger. Your disk layout won't change though - You'll still have a raidz vdev, a raidz2 vdev. It might be a good idea to revise the layout a bit with larger disks. If you do change the layout, then a send/receive is the easiest way to move your data. It can be used to copy everything on the pool (including snapshots, etc) to your new system. -B -- Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com Suspicion Breeds Confidence ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Plan for upgrading a ZFS based SAN
So, does that work with RAIDZ1 and 2 pools? On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Robert Milkowski wrote: > > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2010, Tiernan OToole wrote: > > Good morning all. >> >> I am in the process of building my V1 SAN for media storage in house, and >> i >> am already thinkg ov the V2 build... >> >> Currently, there are 8 250Gb hdds and 3 500Gb disks. the 8 250s are in a >> RAIDZ2 array, and the 3 500s will be in RAIDZ1... >> >> At the moment, the current case is quite full. i am looking at a 20 drive >> hotswap case, which i plan to order soon. when the time comes, and i start >> upgrading the drives to larger drives, say 1Tb drives, would it be easy to >> migrate the contents of the RAIDZ2 array to the new Array? I see mentions >> of >> ZFS Send and ZFS recieve, but i have no idea if they would do the job... >> >> > > if you can expose both disk arrays to the host then you can replace (zpool > replace) a disk (vdev) one-by-one. Once you replaced all disks with larger > ones zfs will automatically enlarge your pool. > > -- > Robert Milkowski > http://milek.blogspot.com > > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Plan for upgrading a ZFS based SAN
Good morning all. I am in the process of building my V1 SAN for media storage in house, and i am already thinkg ov the V2 build... Currently, there are 8 250Gb hdds and 3 500Gb disks. the 8 250s are in a RAIDZ2 array, and the 3 500s will be in RAIDZ1... At the moment, the current case is quite full. i am looking at a 20 drive hotswap case, which i plan to order soon. when the time comes, and i start upgrading the drives to larger drives, say 1Tb drives, would it be easy to migrate the contents of the RAIDZ2 array to the new Array? I see mentions of ZFS Send and ZFS recieve, but i have no idea if they would do the job... Thanks in advance. -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] 3ware 9650 SE
Thanks for the feedback lads... dont really need the boot drives to be on the array... was going to use the onboard controller for that... got an adaptec card already, so might look at those again... --Tiernan On 01/02/2010 15:59, TheJay wrote: I use the Beta 9.5.3 ISO Opensolaris package with OSOL DEV131 build - I had the 3ware support team help me. It works like a charm on my 9650se-24m8 with 20 drives On Feb 1, 2010, at 3:02 AM, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: Tiernan O'Toole writes: looking at the 3ware 9650 SE raid controller for a new build... anyone have any luck with this card? their site says they support OpenSolaris... anyone used one? didn't work too well for me. it's fast and nice for a couple of days, then the driver gets slower and slower, and eventually it gets stuck and all I/O freezes. preventive reboots were needed. I used the newest driver from 3ware/AMCC with 2008.11 and 2009.05. -- Kjetil T. Homme Redpill Linpro AS - Changing the game ___ 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] 3ware 9650 SE
Good morning. looking at the 3ware 9650 SE raid controller for a new build... anyone have any luck with this card? their site says they support OpenSolaris... anyone used one? Thanks. Tiernan OToole Software Developer Chat Google Talk: lsmart...@gmail.com Skype: tiernanotoole MSN: lotas...@hotmail.com Contact Me Tiernans Comms Closet New Year, New Upgrades… --- @ WiseStamp Signature. Get it now ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Media server build
Thanks for the info. I will take the Napp-it question off line with Günther and see if i can fix that. Intel Nic sounds like a plan... was thinking of sticking 2 in anyway... just looking at the cards though, they are GigaNIX 2032T and searching for this online results nothing when i include Solaris or OpenSolaris... Pity... finally, i will use the 750 somewhere else, and use 3 500s i have here... should be enough to start with... Tiernan OToole Software Developer Chat Google Talk: lsmart...@gmail.com Skype: tiernanotoole MSN: lotas...@hotmail.com Contact Me Tiernans Comms Closet New Year, New Upgrades… --- @ WiseStamp Signature. Get it now On 31/01/2010 18:43, Günther wrote: hello napp-it is just a simple cgi-script common 3 reasons for error 500: - file permission: just set all files in /napp-it/.. to 777 recursively (rwx for all - napp-it will set them correct at first call) -files must be copied in ascii-mode have you used winscp? ; otherwise you must care about -cgi-bin folder must be allowed to hold executabels is set in apache config file in /etc/apache2/sites/enabled/000-default should be ok per default - missing modules (not a problem in nexenta) please look at apache error log-file at /var/log/apache2/error.log there you will find the reason for this error your nics: i suppose, your other nics are not supported by default you can try to find and install drivers or (better): forget them and buy a intel nic -(about 50 euro, no problem) your hd: if you build a raid 1 or raid-z, the capacity depends on the smallest drive, so your 750 hd is used as 500 gig- gea ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Media server build
right... so, the machine booted with NexentaCore, but have a couple of questions... probably stupid ones... firstly, trying to install Napp-it fails... 500 error messages... tried all the tips, any recommendations? secondly, i have 8 250Gb hdds (on a raid controller, but listed out as 8 drives, no RAID), a 120Gb (boot) a 500Gb and a 750Gb... the 8 drives are in ZRAID2 ATM, but any recommendations how i should setup the other 2? i can swap the 750 for another 500, which i have 2 of... and i could get all 3 500's in...should i go zraid1 with the 3 500s or do something else? finally, i have 3 net cards in the box (not ZFS specific, but i will ask here anyway...) and only the onboard has been configured but its only 100mb/s... how do i figure out what the others are and add them? Again, stupid newbe questions here... Tiernan OToole Software Developer Chat Google Talk: lsmart...@gmail.com Skype: tiernanotoole MSN: lotas...@hotmail.com Contact Me Tiernans Comms Closet New Year, New Upgrades… --- @ WiseStamp Signature. Get it now On 30/01/2010 09:33, Günther wrote: hello may i suggest my free napp-it zfs-server it is based on free nexenta3 (core) or opensolaris/eon, (no hd limit, deduplication, zfs3, all the new stuff) -with user editable webgui, -easy setup instructions (copy and run) and a hardware reference design. howto see http://www.napp-it.org/napp-it.pdf more http://www.napp-it.org gea ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Media server build
cool lads! thanks for the links. checking out Simon's posts now. going to try get my hands on an external DVD Drive and install something tomorrow... NextaCore might be the way to go if it has both OpenSolaris and Debian, or StormOS, which sounds interesting too... I agree, 4Tb for a home server is not a lot... currently, raw, there is more than that in the case ATM, and there is another 4Tb RAW still to go in (need a bigger case...). Thanks again. On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Simon Breden wrote: > Yep, you're right, the topic was media server build :) > > Cheers, > Simon > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] Media server build
thanks. I have looked at nexentastor, but i have a lot more drives than 2Tb... i know their nexentacore could be better suited... I think its also based on OpenSolaris too, correct? On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Thomas Burgess wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 7:58 PM, Tiernan OToole wrote: > >> Good morning. This is more than likley a stupid question on this alias >> but I will ask anyway. I am building a media server in the house and >> am trying to figure out what os to install. I know it must have zfs >> support but can't figure if I should use Freenas or open solaris. >> >> Free nas has the advantage of out of the box setup but is there >> anything similar for opensolaris? Also, ability to boot and install >> from USB key would be handy. >> >> Thanks. >> >> --Tiernan >> >> You should def. go with opensolaris or something based on opensolaris if > possible BUT there is one major caveat > > OpenSolaris has a much smaller HCL than FreeBSD. Finding hardware for Osol > isn't hard if you design your system around it, but it CAN be an issue when > you are using "found" hardware or old stuff you just happen to have. If you > are designing a system from scratch and don't mind doing the research, it's > a nice option. > > The main reason i PERSONALLY say to go with Osol is that it has the newest > ZFS features and i found CIFS performance to be great, not to mention easy > to set up. (you download 2 packages and then simply use zfs set sharesmb=on, > what could be easier) > > FreeBSD is great too (and FreeNAS is based on FreeBSD) but for PURE > fileserver/nas I think opensolaris is a better choice. > > > > > > >> -- >> >> Tiernan O'Toole >> blog.lotas-smartman.net >> www.tiernanotoolephotography.com >> www.the-hairy-one.com >> ___ >> zfs-discuss mailing list >> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >> > > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] Media server build
Good morning. This is more than likley a stupid question on this alias but I will ask anyway. I am building a media server in the house and am trying to figure out what os to install. I know it must have zfs support but can't figure if I should use Freenas or open solaris. Free nas has the advantage of out of the box setup but is there anything similar for opensolaris? Also, ability to boot and install from USB key would be handy. Thanks. --Tiernan -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] $100 SSD = >5x faster dedupe
Sorry to hijack the thread, but can you explain your setup? Sounds interesting, but need more info... Thanks! --Tiernan On Jan 7, 2010 11:56 PM, "Marty Scholes" wrote: Ian wrote: > Why did you set dedup=verify on the USB pool? Because that is my last-ditch copy of the data and MUST be correct. At the same time, I want to cram as much data as possible into the pool. If I ever go to the USB pool, something has already gone horribly wrong and I am desperate. I can't comprehend the anxiety I would have if one or more stripes had a birthday collision giving me silent data corruption that I found out about months or years later. It's probably paranoid, but a level of paranoia I can live with. Good question, by the way. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zf... ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS iSCSI volume problems
stupid question, but it wouldent by any chance be an Intel Network adapter? had a weird problem on Windows which had the same issue... new net driver solved the problem... wonder if the Intel drive has the same problem on Solaris... --Tiernan On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 2:28 PM, John wrote: > I'm using snv_111 to host iSCSI for my backups. This went fine until I > enabled compression on the volume. About halfway through a backup (~250gb > done), Solaris loses its network connection with no errors logged > (/var/adm/messages and /var/log/* with no entries for an hour preceding). > After reformatting the iSCSI volume (from Windows) and starting from scratch > to use compression, it takes about 10gb to trigger this. I've tried several > switches and routers, and the same always happens - the Solaris system drops > off the network for about 15 minutes. > > I tried to do a 'zfs destroy' on the volume, and it hung, along with all > other zfs commands for about 3 hours. The volume only ever contained 550gb > total of data. > > This is a 700gb volume on two mirrored 1tb drives. > > Looking back through the OpenSolaris-help mailing list, I see the zfs > destroy hanging problem, but it looked like people believed that to be more > related to dedup. > > Anyone have any ideas on what I could be doing better to avoid these > behaviors? > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] De-Dupe and iSCSI
Good morning all... Great work on the De-Dupe stuff. cant wait to try it out. but quick question about iSCSI and De-Dupe. will it work? if i share out a ZVOL to another machine and copy some simular files to it (thinking VMs) will they get de-duplicated? Thanks. -- Tiernan O'Toole blog.lotas-smartman.net www.tiernanotoolephotography.com www.the-hairy-one.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
