The files are approx. 1 MB with an thumbnail of approx. 4 KB.
So the 1 MB files are stored as ~8 x 128K recordsize.
Because of
5003563 use smaller tail block for last block of object
I tried to search for this but only saw references to this and similar
threads. Is there a
On 24 September, 2007 - Claus Guttesen sent me these 1,5K bytes:
The files are approx. 1 MB with an thumbnail of approx. 4 KB.
So the 1 MB files are stored as ~8 x 128K recordsize.
Because of
5003563 use smaller tail block for last block of object
I tried to search
On Sep 14, 2007, at 8:16 AM, Łukasz wrote:
I have a huge problem with space maps on thumper.
Space maps takes
over 3GB
and write operations generates massive read
operations.
Before every spa sync phase zfs reads space maps
from disk.
I decided to turn on compression for pool
Hi all,
I recently started seeing zfs chattiness at boot time: reading zfs config
and something like mounting zfs filesystems (n/n).
Is this really necessary? I thought with SMF the times where every script
announced its' existance had gone (and good thing, too).
Can't we print something only
Pawel Jakub Dawidek writes:
I'm CCing zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, as this doesn't look like
FreeBSD-specific problem.
It looks there is a problem with block allocation(?) when we are near
quota limit. tank/foo dataset has quota set to 10m:
Without quota:
FreeBSD:
On 9/24/07, Michael Schuster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I recently started seeing zfs chattiness at boot time: reading zfs config
and something like mounting zfs filesystems (n/n).
Is this really necessary? I thought with SMF the times where every script
announced its' existance had gone (and
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Michael Schuster wrote:
I recently started seeing zfs chattiness at boot time: reading zfs config
and something like mounting zfs filesystems (n/n).
This was added recently because ZFS can take a while to mount large
configs. Consoles would appear to freeze after the
See http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=122606
-- richard
Michael Schuster wrote:
Hi all,
I recently started seeing zfs chattiness at boot time: reading zfs config
and something like mounting zfs filesystems (n/n).
Is this really necessary? I thought with SMF the
Mark J Musante wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Michael Schuster wrote:
I recently started seeing zfs chattiness at boot time: reading zfs config
and something like mounting zfs filesystems (n/n).
This was added recently because ZFS can take a while to mount large
configs. Consoles would
Paul Kraus writes:
On 9/24/07, Michael Schuster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I recently started seeing zfs chattiness at boot time: reading zfs config
and something like mounting zfs filesystems (n/n).
Is this really necessary? I thought with SMF the times where every script
announced
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 12:33:00PM -0400, Mark J Musante wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Michael Schuster wrote:
I recently started seeing zfs chattiness at boot time: reading zfs config
and something like mounting zfs filesystems (n/n).
This was added recently because ZFS can take a while to
Paul B. Henson wrote:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007, James F. Hranicky wrote:
This can be solved using an automounter as well.
Well, I'd say more kludged around than solved ;), but again unless
you've used DFS it might not seem that way.
It just seems rather involved, and relatively inefficient
Paul B. Henson wrote:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, James F. Hranicky wrote:
It just seems rather involved, and relatively inefficient to continuously
be mounting/unmounting stuff all the time. One of the applications to be
deployed against the filesystem will be web service, I can't really
envision
Paul B. Henson wrote:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007, Richard Elling wrote:
50,000 directories aren't a problem, unless you also need 50,000 quotas
and hence 50,000 file systems. Such a large, single storage pool system
will be an outlier... significantly beyond what we have real world
experience
James L Baker wrote:
I'm a small-time sysadmin with big storage aspirations (I'll be honest
- for a planned MythTV back-end, and *ahem*, other storage), and I've
recently discovered ZFS. I'm thinking about putting together a
homebrew SAN with a NAS head, and am wondering if the following will
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Michael Schuster wrote:
I'm also quite prepared to see a running tally(?) after an initial timeout
(your minute) has gone by and we haven't finished ... but I guess we'd also
have to make sure that the output generated isn't messed up by other output
to the console that's
Re: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6602947
Specifically this part:
[i]Create zpool /testpool/. Create zfs file system /testpool/testfs.
Right click on /testpool/testfs (filesystem) in nautilus and rename to testfs2.
Do zfs list. Note that only /testpool/testfs (filesystem) is
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Ed Plese wrote:
ZFS ACL support was going to be merged into 3.0.26 but 3.0.26 ended up
being a security fix release and the merge got pushed back. The next
release will be 3.2.0 and ACL support will be in there.
Arg, you're right, I based that on the mailing list
Hi,
I converted my laptop to use ZFS root, loosely following the instructions:
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/boot/zfsboot-manual/
In my case I added seperate filesystems under rootfs for /usr, /var, /opt, and
/export, which slightly complicates things (they have to be added to vfstab
On 9/24/07, Paul B. Henson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but checking the actual release notes shows no ZFS mention. 3.0.26 to
3.2.0? That seems an odd version bump...
3.0.x and before are GPLv2. 3.2.0 and later are GPLv3.
http://news.samba.org/announcements/samba_gplv3/
--
Mike Gerdts
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Richard Elling wrote:
I can't imagine a web server serving tens of thousands of pages. I think
you should put a more scalable architecture in place, if that is your
goal. BTW, there are many companies that do this: google, yahoo, etc.
In no case do they have a single
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Richard Elling wrote:
Yes. Sun currently has over 45,000 users with automounted home
directories. I do not know how many servers are involved, though, in part
because home directories are highly available services and thus their
configuration is abstracted away from the
Paul B. Henson wrote:
On Sat, 22 Sep 2007, Jonathan Loran wrote:
My gut tells me that you won't have much trouble mounting 50K file
systems with ZFS. But who knows until you try. My questions for you is
can you lab this out?
Yeah, after this research phase has been completed,
Hello All,
Awhile back (Feb '07) when we noticed ZFS was hogging all the memory
on the system, y'all were kind enough to help us use the arc_max
tunable to attempt to limit that usage to a hard value. Unfortunately,
at the time a sticky problem was that the hard limit did not include
DNLC entries
On Sep 24, 2007, at 6:15 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote:
Well, considering that some days we automatically create accounts for
thousands of students, I wouldn't want to be the one stuck typing 'zfs
create' a thousand times 8-/. And that still wouldn't resolve our
requirement for our help desk staff
25 matches
Mail list logo
