From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On
Behalf Of Daniel Hagerty
What you are looking for is ATA TRIM support.
ATA TRIM,
or
SCSI UNMAP
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@blu.org
ma...@mohawksoft.com writes:
Again, like I said, these do not address the problems. Specifically, the
post about sparse volumes says nothing about how to keep a ZFS pool from
growing out of control on a sparse presented to it from a SAN. It merely
says give ZFS whole disks, which is stupid.
From: ma...@mohawksoft.com [mailto:ma...@mohawksoft.com]
From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On
Behalf Of ma...@mohawksoft.com
says give ZFS whole disks, which is stupid.
Mark, clearly you know nothing about ZFS.
Think what you wish. Maybe I'm not
From: ma...@mohawksoft.com [mailto:ma...@mohawksoft.com]
nothing I have written about ZFS is fundamentally incorrect
at this point in time
You've written like 12 pages of text in the last 2 days, which will require 20
pages and a week of reference finding, in order to respond to all the
On 3/12/2015 8:46 AM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
(1) If someone could point me in the direction of documentation on how to
get ZFS to update file or zvol blocks IN PLACE, i.e. without going through
the ZIL, then cool, I would really find that helpful.
See, this is what Ned is on about. There
On 3/12/2015 8:46 AM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
(1) If someone could point me in the direction of documentation on how
to
get ZFS to update file or zvol blocks IN PLACE, i.e. without going
through
the ZIL, then cool, I would really find that helpful.
See, this is what Ned is on about.
On 3/12/2015 12:14 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
Exactly my point, by the way. I don't want ZIL for some applications. It
isn't a misunderstanding, I've looked over the code intensely looking for
some way to provide this functionality.
I disbelieve. Globally disabling the ZIL was an
On 3/12/2015 12:14 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
Exactly my point, by the way. I don't want ZIL for some applications. It
isn't a misunderstanding, I've looked over the code intensely looking
for
some way to provide this functionality.
I disbelieve. Globally disabling the ZIL was an
On 3/12/2015 2:04 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
sync only controls when data is written to the ZIL, not whether or not
the
ZIL is used at all.
Incorrect on all counts. You can read Robert Milkowski's blog (Robert is
the author of this piece of code) for further details. No, I'm not
ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
Consider this: You are a large cloud hosting company. You have a SAN
storage system from which you allocate thin provisioned virtual luns which
you then present to ESX server virtual machines. You give each customer a
2T LUN on which to install their OS of choice.
On 3/12/2015 1:51 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
So, what is it?
Ahahahahaha.
man zfs and read. You're looking for the sync option.
--
Rich P.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@blu.org
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
On 3/12/2015 1:51 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
So, what is it?
Ahahahahaha.
man zfs and read. You're looking for the sync option.
sync only controls when data is written to the ZIL, not whether or not the
ZIL is used at all.
Try again.
--
Rich P.
From: ma...@mohawksoft.com [mailto:ma...@mohawksoft.com]
From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On
Behalf Of ma...@mohawksoft.com
says give ZFS whole disks, which is stupid.
Mark, clearly you know nothing about ZFS.
Think what you wish. Maybe I'm not
On 3/10/2015 11:09 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
There are some very good reasons to NOT use ZFS, but this isn't the
discussion I intended to start.
Then all I will say on this subject at this time is that your problems
with ZFS seem to fall under you're doing it wrong. ZFS best practices
On 3/11/2015 3:04 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
Again, like I said, these do not address the problems. Specifically, the
post about sparse volumes says nothing about how to keep a ZFS pool from
growing out of control on a sparse presented to it from a SAN. It merely
You probably have
On 3/11/2015 1:13 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
Yes, please, oh please, put some links that describe best practices
that
address my complaints as there are none that anyone I have ever known
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=zfs+best+practices+memory
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=zfs+best+practices+database
On 3/11/2015 1:13 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
Yes, please, oh please, put some links that describe best practices that
address my complaints as there are none that anyone I have ever known
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=zfs+best+practices+memory
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=zfs+best+practices+database
I was just reading some Oracle docs cause of your discussion. It’s amazing how
much has changed so fast. I used to work for a company that had about a dozen
large Oracle databases on a couple of different *nixes. I was just a support
tech who got to write a bunch of SQL and Bash. The things
From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On
Behalf Of ma...@mohawksoft.com
says give ZFS whole disks, which is stupid.
Mark, clearly you know nothing about ZFS.
Also, it's clear you have an axe to grind, which makes anything you say about
it take it with a grain of
From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On
Behalf Of ma...@mohawksoft.com
says give ZFS whole disks, which is stupid.
Mark, clearly you know nothing about ZFS.
Think what you wish. Maybe I'm not explaining the problem
Commercial SAN systems provide disks as
On 3/10/2015 11:09 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
There are some very good reasons to NOT use ZFS, but this isn't the
discussion I intended to start.
Then all I will say on this subject at this time is that your problems
with ZFS seem to fall under you're doing it wrong. ZFS best practices
As the storage wars continue, the debate of ZFS vs LVM continues. I have
been dealing with ZFS heavily for about a year now and just don't see it
as a viable file system for a lot of applications that would otherwise
benefit from its feature set.
Specifically thin provisioned volumes for virtual
On 3/10/2015 1:03 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
intensive for much hungrier applications. LVM is much more light weight
and has better performance in applications that manage their own
journalling and data integrity (like a database).
The important part of the above paragraph that was
On 3/10/2015 1:03 PM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
intensive for much hungrier applications. LVM is much more light weight
and has better performance in applications that manage their own
journalling and data integrity (like a database).
If you're getting substantially better performance with
24 matches
Mail list logo
