On a v40z running snv_51, I'm doing a "zpool replace z c1t4d0 c1t5d0".
(so, why am I doing the replace? The outgoing disk has been reporting
read errors sporadically but with increasing frequency over time..)
zpool iostat -v shows writes going to the old (outgoing) disk as well as
to the replace
On 11/7/06, Richard Elling - PAE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> d10 mirror of c0t2d0s0 and c0t3d0s0swap (2+2GB, to match above)
Also a waste, use a swap file. Add a dumpdev if you care about
kernel dumps, no need to mirror a dumpdev.
How do you figure that allocating space to a swap fil
The best thing about best practices is that there are so many of them :-)
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello John,
Tuesday, November 7, 2006, 7:45:46 PM, you wrote:
JT> Greetings all-
JT> I have a new X4200 that I'm getting ready to deploy. It has
JT> four 146 GB SAS drives. I'd like to setup
Hello John,
Tuesday, November 7, 2006, 7:45:46 PM, you wrote:
JT> Greetings all-
JT> I have a new X4200 that I'm getting ready to deploy. It has
JT> four 146 GB SAS drives. I'd like to setup the box for maximum
JT> redundancy on the data stored on these drives. Unfortunately, it
JT> looks li
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, John Tracy wrote:
> Greetings all-
> I have a new X4200 that I'm getting ready to deploy. It has four 146 GB
> SAS drives. I'd like to setup the box for maximum redundancy on the data
> stored on these drives. Unfortunately, it looks like ZFS boot/root aren't
> really o
listman wrote:
hi, i found a comment comparing linux and solaris but wasn't sure which
version of solaris was being referred. can the list confirm that this
issue isn't a problem with solaris10/zfs??
"Linux also supports asynchronous directory updates which can make a
significant performanc
Richard Elling - PAE schrieb:
For modern machines, which *should* be the design point, the channel
bandwidth is underutilized, so why not use it?
And what about encrypted disks? Simply create a zpool with checksum=sha256,
fill it up, then scrub. I'd be happy if I could use my machine during
s
>hi, i found a comment comparing linux and solaris but wasn't sure
>which version of solaris was being referred. can the list confirm
>that this issue isn't a problem with solaris10/zfs??
>
>"Linux also supports asynchronous directory updates which can make a
>significant performance improve
hi, i found a comment comparing linux and solaris but wasn't sure which version of solaris was being referred. can the list confirm that this issue isn't a problem with solaris10/zfs??"Linux also supports asynchronous directory updates which can make a significant performance improvement when branc
Greetings all-
I have a new X4200 that I'm getting ready to deploy. It has four 146 GB
SAS drives. I'd like to setup the box for maximum redundancy on the data stored
on these drives. Unfortunately, it looks like ZFS boot/root aren't really
options at this time. The LSI Logic controller in
On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 10:30 -0800, Akhilesh Mritunjai wrote:
> > > Yuen L. Lee wrote:
> > opensolaris could be a nice NAS filer. I posted
> > my question on "How to build a NAS box" asking for
> > instructions on how to build a Solaris NAS box.
> > It looks like everyone is busy. I haven't got any
> > Yuen L. Lee wrote:
> opensolaris could be a nice NAS filer. I posted
> my question on "How to build a NAS box" asking for
> instructions on how to build a Solaris NAS box.
> It looks like everyone is busy. I haven't got any
> response yet. By any chance, do you have any
Hi Yuen
May I suggest
Yuen L. Lee wrote:
Yuen L. Lee wrote:
Thanks, Matt! I have the same understanding from my
previous
experience. The difference is my code may not be
integrated into
the official distribution. I'm interested in
porting the ZFS to the Linux
platform because I'm attempting to use ZFS in
openf
Richard Elling - PAE wrote:
The better approach is for the file system to do what it needs
to do as efficiently as possible, which is the current state of ZFS.
This implies that the filesystem has exclusive use of the channel - SAN
or otherwise - as well as the storage array front end control
> Yuen L. Lee wrote:
> > Thanks, Matt! I have the same understanding from my
> previous
> > experience. The difference is my code may not be
> integrated into
> > the official distribution. I'm interested in
> porting the ZFS to the Linux
> > platform because I'm attempting to use ZFS in
> openfile
Daniel Rock wrote:
Richard Elling - PAE schrieb:
The big question, though, is "10% of what?" User CPU? iops?
Maybe something like the "slow" parameter of VxVM?
slow[=iodelay]
Reduces toe system performance impact of copy
operations. Su
Yuen L. Lee wrote:
Thanks, Matt! I have the same understanding from my previous
experience. The difference is my code may not be integrated into
the official distribution. I'm interested in porting the ZFS to the Linux
platform because I'm attempting to use ZFS in openfiler. I think it
would be a
Richard Elling - PAE schrieb:
The big question, though, is "10% of what?" User CPU? iops?
Maybe something like the "slow" parameter of VxVM?
slow[=iodelay]
Reduces toe system performance impact of copy
operations. Such operations are us
>
>
> James Dickens wrote:
> cite="midcd09bdd10611062233q6dde0c0clc8033761832e9ab2
> mail.gmail.com"
> type="cite">
>
> On 11/6/06, class="gmail_sendername">Yuen L. Lee < href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> /a>> wrote:
>tyle="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
> Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > There have been extensive discussions on loadable
> modules and licensing
> > w/r/t the GPLv2 in the linux kernel. nVidia,
> amongst others, pushed hard
> > to allow for non-GPL-compatible licensed code to be
> allowed as a Linux
> > kernel module
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Saturday, November 4, 2006, 12:46:05 AM, you wrote:
REP> Incidentally, since ZFS schedules the resync iops itself, then it can
REP> really move along on a mostly idle system. You should be able to resync
REP> at near the media speed for an idle system. By contrast, a har
Here is my take on this
http://blogs.sun.com/roch/entry/zfs_and_directio
-r
Marlanne DeLaSource writes:
> I had a look at various topics covering ZFS direct I/O, and this topic is
> sometimes mentioned, and it was not really clear to me.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong
> Direct
I had a look at various topics covering ZFS direct I/O, and this topic is
sometimes mentioned, and it was not really clear to me.
Correct me if I'm wrong
• Direct I/O is not strictly POSIX
• It is not implemented in ZFS (?)
Then, how can we try to replace this feature that can speed databases fo
Hello Richard,
Saturday, November 4, 2006, 12:46:05 AM, you wrote:
REP> Incidentally, since ZFS schedules the resync iops itself, then it can
REP> really move along on a mostly idle system. You should be able to resync
REP> at near the media speed for an idle system. By contrast, a hardware
RE
Dear all,
Just to announce that [b]Bill Moore [/b]will visit Switzerland on the first
week of December and he will present & demo ZFS at our CHOSUG events planned on
[b]Dec. 7th at EPFL[/b] (Lausanne) and on [b]Dec. 8th at CERN[/b] (Geneva).
Those events are obviously free and open to anyone: y
Matt Ingenthron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not an expert (nor am I offering legal advice), but my understanding
> of GPLv2 is the copyright holder can explicitly state exceptions on
> linking, so they could allow linking with ZFS even though it's under the
> CDDL. Linux, when run on say
Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There have been extensive discussions on loadable modules and licensing
> w/r/t the GPLv2 in the linux kernel. nVidia, amongst others, pushed hard
> to allow for non-GPL-compatible licensed code to be allowed as a Linux
> kernel module. However, the ke
There have been extensive discussions on loadable modules and licensing
w/r/t the GPLv2 in the linux kernel. nVidia, amongst others, pushed hard
to allow for non-GPL-compatible licensed code to be allowed as a Linux
kernel module. However, the kernel developers' consensus seems to have
come do
28 matches
Mail list logo
