[zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
I see in NexentaStor's announcement of Community Edition 3.0.3 they mention some backported patches in this release. Aside from their management features / UI what is the core OS difference if we move to Nexenta from OpenSolaris b134? These DeDup bugs are my main frustration - if a staff member does a rm * in a directory with dedup you can take down the whole storage server - all with 1% cpu load and relatively little disk i/o due to DeDup DDT not fitting in the SSD + RAM (l2arc+arc). This is rediculous, something must be single threaded and it can't be that difficult to at least allow reads from other files.. Writes perhaps are more complex - But in our case the "other files" don't even have DeDup enabled on them and they can't be read. It seems like some of these bugs have been fixed but Oracle hasn't published a new build - Perhaps we should be updating to newer builds, I haven't invested much time in seeking these out but b134 is the latest "obvious" build I see. Am I just not RTFM enough on finding new builds? I hate to move to Nexenta, I would think in the future Oracle will maintain this better than a third party and don't want to switch back and forth. Steve Radich - www.BitShop.com - www.LinkedIn.com/in/SteveRadich -- 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] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
On Jul 2, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Steve Radich, BitShop, Inc. wrote: > I see in NexentaStor's announcement of Community Edition 3.0.3 they mention > some backported patches in this release. Yes. These patches are in the code tree, currently at b143 (~18 weeks newer than b134) > Aside from their management features / UI what is the core OS difference if > we move to Nexenta from OpenSolaris b134? You're not stuck at b134 for ZFS anymore ;-) > These DeDup bugs are my main frustration - if a staff member does a rm * in a > directory with dedup you can take down the whole storage server - all with 1% > cpu load and relatively little disk i/o due to DeDup DDT not fitting in the > SSD + RAM (l2arc+arc). This is rediculous, something must be single threaded > and it can't be that difficult to at least allow reads from other files.. > Writes perhaps are more complex - But in our case the "other files" don't > even have DeDup enabled on them and they can't be read. Some are fixed, more are in the upstream development queue. > It seems like some of these bugs have been fixed but Oracle hasn't published > a new build - Perhaps we should be updating to newer builds, I haven't > invested much time in seeking these out but b134 is the latest "obvious" > build I see. Am I just not RTFM enough on finding new builds? No, what you see is what you get. After the CIC there hasn't been a binary release from Oracle, just source releases. I read this as saying the community should build their own distros. In a quick look at http://www.genunix.org it appears that Nexenta and EON are the only distro releases since early March. Rich Lowe has released a b142 tarball, too, but does that qualify as a distro? > I hate to move to Nexenta, I would think in the future Oracle will maintain > this better than a third party and don't want to switch back and forth. I understand, but if actions speak louder than words, then consider joining the Nexenta core platform community at http://www.nexenta.org But don't forget to stay up to date with ZFS on zfs-discuss :-) -- richard -- Richard Elling rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 ZFS and NexentaStor training, Rotterdam, July 13-15, 2010 http://nexenta-rotterdam.eventbrite.com/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 8:06 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > On Jul 2, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Steve Radich, BitShop, Inc. wrote: > > > I see in NexentaStor's announcement of Community Edition 3.0.3 they > mention some backported patches in this release. > > Yes. These patches are in the code tree, currently at b143 (~18 weeks > newer than b134) > > > Aside from their management features / UI what is the core OS difference > if we move to Nexenta from OpenSolaris b134? > > You're not stuck at b134 for ZFS anymore ;-) > > > These DeDup bugs are my main frustration - if a staff member does a rm * > in a directory with dedup you can take down the whole storage server - all > with 1% cpu load and relatively little disk i/o due to DeDup DDT not fitting > in the SSD + RAM (l2arc+arc). This is rediculous, something must be single > threaded and it can't be that difficult to at least allow reads from other > files.. Writes perhaps are more complex - But in our case the "other files" > don't even have DeDup enabled on them and they can't be read. > > Some are fixed, more are in the upstream development queue. > > > It seems like some of these bugs have been fixed but Oracle hasn't > published a new build - Perhaps we should be updating to newer builds, I > haven't invested much time in seeking these out but b134 is the latest > "obvious" build I see. Am I just not RTFM enough on finding new builds? > > No, what you see is what you get. After the CIC there hasn't been a > binary release from Oracle, just source releases. I read this as saying > the community should build their own distros. In a quick look at > http://www.genunix.org it appears that Nexenta and EON are the only > distro releases since early March. Rich Lowe has released a b142 > tarball, too, but does that qualify as a distro? > > > I hate to move to Nexenta, I would think in the future Oracle will > maintain this better than a third party and don't want to switch back and > forth. > > > I understand, but if actions speak louder than words, then consider joining > the Nexenta core platform community at http://www.nexenta.org > But don't forget to stay up to date with ZFS on zfs-discuss :-) > -- richard > > -- > Richard Elling > rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 > ZFS and NexentaStor training, Rotterdam, July 13-15, 2010 > http://nexenta-rotterdam.eventbrite.com/ Given that the most basic of functionality was broken in Nexenta, and not Opensolaris, and I couldn't get a single response, I have a hard time recommending ANYONE go to Nexenta. It's great they're employing you now, but the community edition has an extremely long way to go before it comes close to touching the community that still hangs around here, despite Oracle's lack of care and feeding. http://www.nexenta.org/boards/1/topics/211 --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
On Jul 2, 2010, at 6:48 PM, Tim Cook wrote: > Given that the most basic of functionality was broken in Nexenta, and not > Opensolaris, and I couldn't get a single response, I have a hard time > recommending ANYONE go to Nexenta. It's great they're employing you now, but > the community edition has an extremely long way to go before it comes close > to touching the community that still hangs around here, despite Oracle's lack > of care and feeding. > > http://www.nexenta.org/boards/1/topics/211 I can't test that, due to lack of equivalent hardware, but did you file a bug? The dladm code and nge drivers come from upstream, so look for an equivalent opensolaris bug, perhaps something like http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6913874 -- richard -- Richard Elling rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 ZFS and NexentaStor training, Rotterdam, July 13-15, 2010 http://nexenta-rotterdam.eventbrite.com/ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > On Jul 2, 2010, at 6:48 PM, Tim Cook wrote: > > Given that the most basic of functionality was broken in Nexenta, and not > Opensolaris, and I couldn't get a single response, I have a hard time > recommending ANYONE go to Nexenta. It's great they're employing you now, > but the community edition has an extremely long way to go before it comes > close to touching the community that still hangs around here, despite > Oracle's lack of care and feeding. > > > > http://www.nexenta.org/boards/1/topics/211 > > I can't test that, due to lack of equivalent hardware, but did you file a > bug? > The dladm code and nge drivers come from upstream, so look for an > equivalent > opensolaris bug, perhaps something like > http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6913874 > -- richard > > No, I didn't file a bug. I couldn't get a response to the issue to even begin troubleshooting, so I had no desire to file a bug or continue using a product that was broken out of the box. Opensolaris worked, so I went back to it. I can say with a fair amount of confidence, the same wouldn't happen with Opensolaris proper. Even if I chose not to continue running down a problem, I've never run into a situation where I didn't at least get a suggestion for troubleshooting tips. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
On 3/07/10 12:25 PM, Richard Elling wrote: On Jul 2, 2010, at 6:48 PM, Tim Cook wrote: Given that the most basic of functionality was broken in Nexenta, and not Opensolaris, and I couldn't get a single response, I have a hard time recommending ANYONE go to Nexenta. It's great they're employing you now, but the community edition has an extremely long way to go before it comes close to touching the community that still hangs around here, despite Oracle's lack of care and feeding. http://www.nexenta.org/boards/1/topics/211 I can't test that, due to lack of equivalent hardware, but did you file a bug? The dladm code and nge drivers come from upstream, so look for an equivalent opensolaris bug, perhaps something like http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6913874 -- richard Hi Tim, does this CR match what you were experiencing? http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6901419 6901419 dladm create-aggr -u incorrectly rejects some valid ethernet addresses If so - fixed in snv_136. The only other dladm CR I can see in the push logs for builds post 134 is 6932656 "dladm set-linkprop -p cpus" can't take more than 32 CPUs fixed in 138. hth, James -- Senior Software Engineer, Solaris Oracle http://www.jmcp.homeunix.com/blog ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:55 PM, James C. McPherson wrote: > On 3/07/10 12:25 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > >> On Jul 2, 2010, at 6:48 PM, Tim Cook wrote: >> >>> Given that the most basic of functionality was broken in Nexenta, and not >>> Opensolaris, and I couldn't get a single response, I have a hard time >>> recommending ANYONE go to Nexenta. It's great they're employing you now, >>> but the community edition has an extremely long way to go before it comes >>> close to touching the community that still hangs around here, despite >>> Oracle's lack of care and feeding. >>> >>> http://www.nexenta.org/boards/1/topics/211 >>> >> >> I can't test that, due to lack of equivalent hardware, but did you file a >> bug? >> The dladm code and nge drivers come from upstream, so look for an >> equivalent >> opensolaris bug, perhaps something like >> http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6913874 >> -- richard >> >> > > Hi Tim, > does this CR match what you were experiencing? > > http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6901419 > 6901419 dladm create-aggr -u incorrectly rejects some valid ethernet > addresses > > If so - fixed in snv_136. > > The only other dladm CR I can see in the push logs for builds > post 134 is > > 6932656 "dladm set-linkprop -p cpus" can't take more than 32 CPUs > fixed in 138. > > > hth, > James > -- > Senior Software Engineer, Solaris > Oracle > http://www.jmcp.homeunix.com/blog Hi james, Nope. I'm not sure what exactly I was hitting. I've never run into a problem on any release of Opensolaris. I believe I've tested on 126, 132, 133, and 134 (as well as many iterations of older versions). The dladm issue was exclusively on nexenta. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
I am sorry you feel that way. I will look at your issue as soon as I am able, but I should say that it is almost certain that whatever the problem is, it probably is inherited from OpenSolaris and the build of NCP you were testing was indeed not the final release so some issues are not entirely surprising. - Garrett Tim Cook wrote: >On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 8:06 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > >> On Jul 2, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Steve Radich, BitShop, Inc. wrote: >> >> > I see in NexentaStor's announcement of Community Edition 3.0.3 they >> mention some backported patches in this release. >> >> Yes. These patches are in the code tree, currently at b143 (~18 weeks >> newer than b134) >> >> > Aside from their management features / UI what is the core OS difference >> if we move to Nexenta from OpenSolaris b134? >> >> You're not stuck at b134 for ZFS anymore ;-) >> >> > These DeDup bugs are my main frustration - if a staff member does a rm * >> in a directory with dedup you can take down the whole storage server - all >> with 1% cpu load and relatively little disk i/o due to DeDup DDT not fitting >> in the SSD + RAM (l2arc+arc). This is rediculous, something must be single >> threaded and it can't be that difficult to at least allow reads from other >> files.. Writes perhaps are more complex - But in our case the "other files" >> don't even have DeDup enabled on them and they can't be read. >> >> Some are fixed, more are in the upstream development queue. >> >> > It seems like some of these bugs have been fixed but Oracle hasn't >> published a new build - Perhaps we should be updating to newer builds, I >> haven't invested much time in seeking these out but b134 is the latest >> "obvious" build I see. Am I just not RTFM enough on finding new builds? >> >> No, what you see is what you get. After the CIC there hasn't been a >> binary release from Oracle, just source releases. I read this as saying >> the community should build their own distros. In a quick look at >> http://www.genunix.org it appears that Nexenta and EON are the only >> distro releases since early March. Rich Lowe has released a b142 >> tarball, too, but does that qualify as a distro? >> >> > I hate to move to Nexenta, I would think in the future Oracle will >> maintain this better than a third party and don't want to switch back and >> forth. >> >> >> I understand, but if actions speak louder than words, then consider joining >> the Nexenta core platform community at http://www.nexenta.org >> But don't forget to stay up to date with ZFS on zfs-discuss :-) >> -- richard >> >> -- >> Richard Elling >> rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 >> ZFS and NexentaStor training, Rotterdam, July 13-15, 2010 >> http://nexenta-rotterdam.eventbrite.com/ > > > >Given that the most basic of functionality was broken in Nexenta, and not >Opensolaris, and I couldn't get a single response, I have a hard time >recommending ANYONE go to Nexenta. It's great they're employing you now, >but the community edition has an extremely long way to go before it comes >close to touching the community that still hangs around here, despite >Oracle's lack of care and feeding. > >http://www.nexenta.org/boards/1/topics/211 > > >--Tim > >___ >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] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > I am sorry you feel that way. I will look at your issue as soon as I am > able, but I should say that it is almost certain that whatever the problem > is, it probably is inherited from OpenSolaris and the build of NCP you were > testing was indeed not the final release so some issues are not entirely > surprising. So would you say that NCP / NexentaStore Community 3.0.3 is good enough to use today as stand-in replacement for last available build of Opensolaris when used primarily for storage server? -- Fajar ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
Compared to b134? Yes! We have fixed many bugs that still exist in 134. "Fajar A. Nugraha" wrote: >On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: >> I am sorry you feel that way. I will look at your issue as soon as I am >> able, but I should say that it is almost certain that whatever the problem >> is, it probably is inherited from OpenSolaris and the build of NCP you were >> testing was indeed not the final release so some issues are not entirely >> surprising. > >So would you say that NCP / NexentaStore Community 3.0.3 is good >enough to use today as stand-in replacement for last available build >of Opensolaris when used primarily for storage server? > >-- >Fajar > ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
- Original Message - > Compared to b134? Yes! We have fixed many bugs that still exist in > 134. Where can I find a list of these? Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 r...@karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer på norsk. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
> Where can I find a list of these? This leads to the more generic question of: where are *any* release notes? I saw on Genunix that Community Edition 3.0.3 was replaced by 3.0.3-1. What changed? I went to nexenta.org and looked around. But it wasn't immediately obvious where to find release notes. Also, as Tim Cook noted, the Nexenta forums aren't exactly "lively". For a simple, easily understood and easily navigated web site, you can't beat www.openbsd.org. Both Sun/Oracle and Nexenta could learn a lot from it. And I can also follow very clean, simple instructions for running the "stable" OpenBSD branch (which is mostly security fixes). -- 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] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
In 3.0.3+ new option would list appliance changelog going forward: nmc$ show version -c On 07/04/2010 05:58 PM, Bohdan Tashchuk wrote: Where can I find a list of these? This leads to the more generic question of: where are *any* release notes? I saw on Genunix that Community Edition 3.0.3 was replaced by 3.0.3-1. What changed? I went to nexenta.org and looked around. But it wasn't immediately obvious where to find release notes. Also, as Tim Cook noted, the Nexenta forums aren't exactly "lively". For a simple, easily understood and easily navigated web site, you can't beat www.openbsd.org. Both Sun/Oracle and Nexenta could learn a lot from it. And I can also follow very clean, simple instructions for running the "stable" OpenBSD branch (which is mostly security fixes). ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
Release Notes information: If there are new features, each release is added to http://www.nexenta.com/corp/documentation/release-notes-support. If just bug fixes, then the Changelog listing is updated: http://www.nexenta.com/corp/documentation/nexentastor-changelog Regards, Spandana ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] NexentaStor 3.0.3 vs OpenSolaris - Patches more up to date?
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Spandana Goli wrote: > Release Notes information: > If there are new features, each release is added to > http://www.nexenta.com/corp/documentation/release-notes-support. > > If just bug fixes, then the Changelog listing is updated: > http://www.nexenta.com/corp/documentation/nexentastor-changelog Is there a bug tracker were one can objectively list all the bugs (with details) that went into a release ? "Many bug fixes" is a bit too general. -- Giovanni Tirloni gtirl...@sysdroid.com ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
