On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Ronald Klop wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 12:55:43 +0200, seanr...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> I think this zpool upgrade thing is weird. Can you try 'zpool upgrade -a'?
>
> Mine says:
> zpool get version zroot
> NAME PROPERTY VALUE
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Sean Rees wrote:
>
> On Aug 6, 2011, at 07:24, Gary Palmer wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 08:56:36PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>>> On 08/05/2011 20:38, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>>>
Ahh, but OP had moved these files away and performance was still poor..
>>>
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Jeremy Chadwick
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 11:55:43AM +0100, seanr...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>> >> If it is a limitation in ZFS it would be nice to know that, perhaps it
>> >
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>> If it is a limitation in ZFS it would be nice to know that, perhaps it
>> truly, really is a bug that can be avoided (or it's inherent in the way ZFS
>> handles such things)
>
> It is possible that there is not enough memory in ARC to cach
inline
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Jeremy Chadwick
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 08:39:03AM +0100, seanr...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On my FreeBSD 8.2-S machine (built circa 12th June), I created a
>> directory and populated it over the course of 3 weeks with about 2
>&g
Hi there,
I Googled around and checked the PRs and wasn't successful in finding
any reports of what I'm seeing. I'm hoping someone here can help me
debug what's going on.
On my FreeBSD 8.2-S machine (built circa 12th June), I created a
directory and populated it over the course of 3 weeks with ab
