Hello Friends,
Can some please let me know how I can disable ZFS ACL completely. I want to use
ZFS with plain unix permission without ACL support
thanks
Sachin Palav
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
Sachin Palav wrote:
Hello Friends,
Can some please let me know how I can disable ZFS ACL completely. I want to
use ZFS with plain unix permission without ACL support
I'm really curious as to why you want to do that but it seems that ZFS
allows you to do so. It is documented in the zfs(1)
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Sachin Palav wrote:
Hello Friends,
Can some please let me know how I can disable ZFS ACL completely. I want to use
ZFS with plain unix permission without ACL support
I'm really curious as to why you want to do that but it seems that ZFS
allows you to do so.
Kyle McDonald wrote:
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Sachin Palav wrote:
Hello Friends,
Can some please let me know how I can disable ZFS ACL completely. I want to
use ZFS with plain unix permission without ACL support
I'm really curious as to why you want to do that but it seems that
Here is a draft of the fast track to allow ZFS to inherit mode
permission via owner@, group@ and everyone@
-Mark
SUMMARY:
This proposal is to change the ZFS ACL inheritance rules
when the zfs acl property is set to passthrough.
PROBLEM:
The ZFS ACL
Hi Bob ... as richard has mentioned, allocation to vdevs
is done in a fixed sized chunk (richard specs 1MB, but I
remember a 512KB number from the original spec, but this
is not very important), and the allocation algorithm is
basically doing load balancing.
for your non-raid pool, this chunk
If you are willing to go cheap you can get something that holds 8 drives
for $70: buy a standard tower case with five internal 3.5 bays ($50), and
one of these enclosures that fit in two 5.25 bays but give you three 3.5
bays ($20).
I have one of these:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Bill Moloney wrote:
When application IO sizes get small, the overhead in ZFS goes
up dramatically.
Thanks for the feedback. However, from what I have observed, it is
not a full story at all. On my own system, when a new file is
written, the write block size does not
On my own system, when a new file is
written, the write block size does not make
a significant difference to the write speed
Yes, I've observed the same result ... when a new file is being written
sequentially, the file data and newly constructed meta-data can be
built in cache and written
I am new to Solaris. I have Sun X2100 with 2 x 80G harddisks (run as email
server, run tomcat, jboss and postgresql) and want to run as mirror to secure
the data. Since ZFS cannot be used as a root file system , does that mean I am
no way can benefit from using ZFS? Instead, I should stick with
On 3/19/08, Terence Ng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am new to Solaris. I have Sun X2100 with 2 x 80G harddisks (run as email
server, run tomcat, jboss and postgresql) and want to run as mirror to
secure the data. Since ZFS cannot be used as a root file system , does that
mean I am no way can
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Terence Ng wrote:
I am new to Solaris. I have Sun X2100 with 2 x 80G harddisks (run as
email server, run tomcat, jboss and postgresql) and want to run as
mirror to secure the data. Since ZFS cannot be used as a root file
system , does that mean I am no way can benefit
Did you do anything specific with the drive caches?
How is your ZFS performance?
Nathan. :)
Rich Teer wrote:
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Terence Ng wrote:
I am new to Solaris. I have Sun X2100 with 2 x 80G harddisks (run as
email server, run tomcat, jboss and postgresql) and want to run as
13 matches
Mail list logo
