> Both work properly. Half of the job done; now I have
> the new home mounted, but inactive. So I can rm -Rf *
> or similar there; in order to 'cp -a' the content of
> the old home to the new home.
> Still the other half is unresolved: How do I mount
> the old home which is in no fstab (mnttab), on
Andy,
my excuses, I didn't really appreciate your input in my earlier mail !
[i]I can't get to the console of a system to take it to single user, but you
might try
"svcadm enable -tr filesystem/local" or "zfs mount -a".
[/i]
Both work properly. Half of the job done; now I have the new home mount
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/u01/home# zfs snapshot u01/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/u01/home# zfs send u01/[EMAIL PROTECTED] | zfs receive
u02/home
One caveat here is that I could not find a way to back up the base of the zpool
"u01" into the base of zpool "u02". i.e.
zfs snapshot [EMAIL PROTECT
The Thumper was an eval unit on loan. Unfortunately time ran out so
we are unable to do additional tests. (It's now sitting in a crate
waiting to
be picked by the shipping company.)
Shigeki Misawa
Luke Lonergan wrote:
Has someone e-mailed the author to recommend upgrading to S10U3? I'm
shock
Has someone e-mailed the author to recommend upgrading to S10U3? I'm
shocked the eval was favorable with S10U2 given S10U3's substantial
performance improvements...
- Luke
> > Rayson Ho wrote:
> >
> >> Interesting...
> >>
> >>
> http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/RCF/LiaisonMeeting/20070118/Other/thumper
Selim Daoud wrote:
here's an interesting status report published by Microsoft labs
http://research.microsoft.com/research/pubs/view.aspx?msr_tr_id=MSR-TR-2005-166
That is the paper in which Jim Gray coined "Mean time to data loss".
It's been quoted here before.
Sad note: Turing award winn
On 2/11/07, Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Matty,
Sunday, February 11, 2007, 6:56:14 PM, you wrote:
M> Howdy,
M> On one of my Solaris 10 11/06 servers, I am getting numerous errors
M> similar to the following:
AFAIK nothing was integrated yet to do it.
Hot Spare will kick i
Hello Leon,
Sunday, February 11, 2007, 5:53:48 PM, you wrote:
LK> Jeff,
LK> thank you for the explanation but it's hard to me to accept it because:
LK> 1.You described a different configuration: 7 LUNs. Marion post
LK> was about 7 slices of the same LUN.
LK> 2.I never saw the storage controller
Hello Matty,
Sunday, February 11, 2007, 6:56:14 PM, you wrote:
M> Howdy,
M> On one of my Solaris 10 11/06 servers, I am getting numerous errors
M> similar to the following:
AFAIK nothing was integrated yet to do it.
Hot Spare will kick in automatically only when zfs can't open a device
other th
Ian Collins wrote:
Rayson Ho wrote:
Interesting...
http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/RCF/LiaisonMeeting/20070118/Other/thumper-eval.pdf
I wonder where they got the information that "Solaris 10 doesn't support
dual-core Intel" from?
probably from evaluating Solaris 8 or something.
__
On 2/11/07, Matty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Howdy,
On one of my Solaris 10 11/06 servers, I am getting numerous errors
similar to the following:
Feb 11 09:30:23 rx scsi: WARNING: /[EMAIL PROTECTED],2000/[EMAIL
PROTECTED],1/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0 (sd1):
Feb 11 09:30:23 rx Error for Command:
On 2/11/07, Jeff Bonwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The object number is in hex. 21e282 hex is 2220674 decimal --
give that a whirl.
This is all better now thanks to some recent work by Eric Kustarz:
6410433 'zpool status -v' would be more useful with filenames
This was integrated into Nevada
To squash this before it gets out of hand, there was some confusion
about the configuration of the server used in the test. I had
mistakenly told the tester that the system was a dual CPU dual core
system (i.e., a total of 4 cores). It was not until quite
some time later (after the tests were run
Chris Ridd wrote:
On 11/2/07 3:04, "Ian Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rayson Ho wrote:
Interesting...
http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/RCF/LiaisonMeeting/20070118/Other/thumper-eval.pdf
I wonder where they got the information that "Solaris 10 doesn't support
dual-core Intel" from?
Does Ope
>On 11/2/07 3:04, "Ian Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Rayson Ho wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting...
>>>
>>> http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/RCF/LiaisonMeeting/20070118/Other/thumper-eval.pdf
>>>
>>>
>> I wonder where they got the information that "Solaris 10 doesn't support
>> dual-core Intel" from
Howdy,
On one of my Solaris 10 11/06 servers, I am getting numerous errors
similar to the following:
Feb 11 09:30:23 rx scsi: WARNING: /[EMAIL PROTECTED],2000/[EMAIL
PROTECTED],1/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0 (sd1):
Feb 11 09:30:23 rx Error for Command: write(10)
Error Level: Retryable
Feb 11 09:30:
Jeff,
thank you for the explanation but it's hard to me to accept it because:
1.You described a different configuration: 7 LUNs. Marion post was about 7
slices of the same LUN.
2.I never saw the storage controller with cache-per-LUN setting. Cache size
doesn't depend on number of LUNs IMHO, it'
On 11/2/07 3:04, "Ian Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rayson Ho wrote:
>
>> Interesting...
>>
>> http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/RCF/LiaisonMeeting/20070118/Other/thumper-eval.pdf
>>
>>
> I wonder where they got the information that "Solaris 10 doesn't support
> dual-core Intel" from?
Does Open
Hi Joe,
Joe Little wrote:
So, I attempting to find the inode from the result of a "zpool status -v":
errors: The following persistent errors have been detected:
DATASET OBJECT RANGE
cc 21e382 lvl=0 blkid=0
>
Well, 21e282 appears to not be a valid number for "find .
On 10 February, 2007 - Joe Little sent me these 0,4K bytes:
> So, I attempting to find the inode from the result of a "zpool status -v":
>
> errors: The following persistent errors have been detected:
>
> DATASET OBJECT RANGE
> cc 21e382 lvl=0 blkid=0
>
>
> Well, 21e
I have a 100gb SAN lun in a pool, been running ok for about 6 months. panicked
the system this morning. system was running S10U2. In the course of
troubleshooting I've installed the latest recommended bundle including kjp
118833-36 and zfs patch 124204-03
created as:
zpool create zfspool01 /dev
I've used this to track down the filename and other tidbits using the object ID
from zpool status -v:
errors: The following persistent errors have been detected:
DATASET OBJECT RANGE
zfspool01/nb60openv 292 1835008-1966080
zfspool01/nb60openv 292
all,
here's an interesting status report published by Microsoft labs
http://research.microsoft.com/research/pubs/view.aspx?msr_tr_id=MSR-TR-2005-166
sd.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listi
The object number is in hex. 21e282 hex is 2220674 decimal --
give that a whirl.
This is all better now thanks to some recent work by Eric Kustarz:
6410433 'zpool status -v' would be more useful with filenames
This was integrated into Nevada build 57.
Jeff
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 05:18:05PM -
> [b]How the ZFS striped on 7 slices of FC-SATA LUN via NFS worked [u]146 times
> faster[/u] than the ZFS on 1 slice of the same LUN via NFS???[/b]
Without knowing more I can only guess, but most likely it's a simple
matter of working set. Suppose the benchmark in question has a 4G
working set,
> Get the content of c0d1s1 to c0d0s7 ?
> c0d1s1 is pool home and active; c0d0s7 is not
> active.
>
I have not tried this particular use case, but I think this is a case for "zfs
send" and "zfs receive". You'd create a new pool containing only c0d0s7 and
do something like this, assuming your o
Rayson Ho wrote:
> Interesting...
>
> http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/RCF/LiaisonMeeting/20070118/Other/thumper-eval.pdf
>
>
I wonder where they got the information that "Solaris 10 doesn't support
dual-core Intel" from?
Ian.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-d
27 matches
Mail list logo
