Yes, we are running Solaris 9. Our Solaris footprint is shrinking, so
there hasn't been much of a push to upgrade to Solaris 10. Our Linux
footprint has been growing slowly, so it might make more sense to
migrate to Linux.
Jason
Dale Ghent wrote:
Note the you only need SUNWsan if you're
Thanks, Jason.
Is the hardware the same as what you tested last year?
Kim
Jason Edgecombe wrote:
Is this what you need?
PKGINST: SUNWsan
NAME: SAN Foundation Kit
CATEGORY: system
ARCH: sparc
VERSION: 1.0
BASEDIR: /
VENDOR: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
DESC: This
Yes. We only have one fibre channel HBA and one fibre channel disk pack,
a Sun StorEdge 3511 expansion tray with SATA disks.
For what it's worth, we just tested 1.4.6 inode fileserver (nologging
ufs) on an old-style direct-attached SCSI disk pack and saw similar
sluggish vos performance to
Note the you only need SUNWsan if you're running Solaris 10.
Why one would run Solaris 10 these days is beyond me, but...
/dale
On Mar 20, 2008, at 3:40 PM, Kim Kimball wrote:
Thanks, Jason.
Is the hardware the same as what you tested last year?
Kim
Jason Edgecombe wrote:
Is this
Is this what you need?
PKGINST: SUNWsan
NAME: SAN Foundation Kit
CATEGORY: system
ARCH: sparc
VERSION: 1.0
BASEDIR: /
VENDOR: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
DESC: This package provides a support for the SAN Foundation Kit.
PSTAMP: sanserve-a20031029172438
INSTDATE:
Would this have affected clone operations as well?
It seems it would.
Thanks.
Kim
Robert Banz wrote:
AFS can't really cause san issues in that it's just another
application using your filesystem. In some cases, it can be quite a
heavy user of such, but since its only interacting
On Mar 18, 2008, at 7:01 AM, Kim Kimball wrote:
Would this have affected clone operations as well?
It seems it would.
I'm pretty sure, yes.
___
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
Kim Kimball wrote:
SAN symptoms, for those interested
I'm seeing SCSI command timeouts and UFS log timeouts (on vice
partitions using the SAN for storage) on LUNS used for vicep's on the
Hitachi USP, and was seeing them also on the 9585 until a recent
configuration change.
At first I
Thanks Rob!
Robert Banz wrote:
AFS can't really cause san issues in that it's just another
application using your filesystem. In some cases, it can be quite a
heavy user of such, but since its only interacting through the fs, its
not going to know anything about your underlying storage
Thanks Russ.
I expected as much when I saw your posting from 2005 in answer to a
similar question.
This is a great data point for me.
Kim
Russ Allbery wrote:
Kim Kimball [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We're using Hitachi USP and Hitachi 9585 SAN devices, and have had a
series of
Hi Jeff,
Jeffrey Altman wrote:
AFS is a very stressful application for a file system. If there are
bugs in the SAN AFS would be more likely to find them than other
applications.
*grin* Try telling that to my management! I just sent an email calling
AFS an excellent network and storage
We're using Hitachi USP and Hitachi 9585 SAN devices, and have had a
series of incidents that, after two years of success, significantly
affected AFS reliability for a period of six months.
I'm wondering if anyone else has had any issues using SANs for vice
partitions.
Also, to make a long
AFS can't really cause san issues in that it's just another
application using your filesystem. In some cases, it can be quite a
heavy user of such, but since its only interacting through the fs, its
not going to know anything about your underlying storage fabric, or
have any way of
Robert Banz wrote:
AFS can't really cause san issues in that it's just another
application using your filesystem. In some cases, it can be quite a
heavy user of such, but since its only interacting through the fs, its
not going to know anything about your underlying storage fabric, or
Kim Kimball [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We're using Hitachi USP and Hitachi 9585 SAN devices, and have had a
series of incidents that, after two years of success, significantly
affected AFS reliability for a period of six months.
I'm wondering if anyone else has had any issues using SANs for
15 matches
Mail list logo
