A customer has a zpool where their spectral analysis applications create a ton
(millions?) of very small files that are typically 1858 bytes in length.
They're using ZFS because UFS consistently runs out of inodes. I'm assuming
that ZFS aggregates these little files into recordsize (128K?) blo
Hello list,
We discovered a failed disk with checksum errors. Took out the disk
and resilvered, which reported many errors. A few of my subvolumes to
the pool won't mount anymore, with "zfs import poolname" reporting
that "cannot mount 'poolname/proj': I/O error"
Ok, we have a problem. I can succ
A Darren Dunham wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:51:03PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>> Can someone please post a summary of any new ZFS features or
>> significant fixes which are in Solaris 10U5?
> I'm guessing it has some changes/fixes applied, but I don't know of any
> significant feature
> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:46:35 PDT
> From: Veltror <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Having just installed Solaris 10 U5 I was kind of hoping that this was
> incorporated.
> This is a showstopper as far as using ZFS in production. This is because all
> production
> is based on EMC storage with either
Stuart Anderson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 02:07:53PM -0700, Richard Elling wrote:
>
Personally, I'd estimate using du rather than ls.
>>> They report the exact same number as far as I can tell. With the caveat
>>> that Solaris ls -s returns the number of 512-by
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:51:03PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> Even though I am on a bunch of Sun propaganda lists, I have not yet
> spotted an announcement for Solaris 10U5 even though it is now
> available for download. Sun's formal web site is useless for
> comparing what is in different
Even though I am on a bunch of Sun propaganda lists, I have not yet
spotted an announcement for Solaris 10U5 even though it is now
available for download. Sun's formal web site is useless for
comparing what is in different update releases since its notion of
"What's New" is a comparison with S
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Tim wrote:
>
> Along those lines, I'd *strongly* suggest running Jeff's script to pin down
> whether one drive is the culprit:
But that script only tests read speed and Pascal's read performance
seems fine.
Bob
==
Bob Friesenhahn
[EMAIL PR
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Bob Friesenhahn <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Pascal Vandeputte wrote:
> >
> > At the moment I'm seeing read speeds of 200MB/s on a ZFS raidz
> > filesystem consisting of c1t0d0s3, c1t1d0 and c1t2d0 (I'm booting
> > from a small 700MB slice on
Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello Richard,
>
> Wednesday, April 16, 2008, 11:19:27 PM, you wrote:
>
> RE> No, not normally. ZFS groups writes to try to do 128kByte writes.
> RE> So in a single 128kByte block, there may be parts of different files.
> RE> By default the transaction group is flushed ev
Austin wrote:
> I've been trying to figure out how the copies command works and have been
> experimenting, but I haven't really seen any results (both with 5 physical
> drives I will soon add to my data pool as a 2nd RAIDZ and on a virtual
> machine with two RAIDZ in a pool). First: Is data copi
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Pascal Vandeputte wrote:
>
> At the moment I'm seeing read speeds of 200MB/s on a ZFS raidz
> filesystem consisting of c1t0d0s3, c1t1d0 and c1t2d0 (I'm booting
> from a small 700MB slice on the first sata drive; c1t0d0s3 is about
> 690 "real" gigabytes large and ZFS just use
Hello Richard,
Wednesday, April 16, 2008, 11:19:27 PM, you wrote:
RE> No, not normally. ZFS groups writes to try to do 128kByte writes.
RE> So in a single 128kByte block, there may be parts of different files.
RE> By default the transaction group is flushed every 5 seconds, but there
RE> are man
I had a brief look into this too. I'm a solaris newbie, but the best solution
looked to be tar, or something called Star.
Our plan is to use ZFS send/receive to back the data up onto live server
storage. But for tape archives I actually want to use a completely different
filesystem. If somet
I've been trying to figure out how the copies command works and have been
experimenting, but I haven't really seen any results (both with 5 physical
drives I will soon add to my data pool as a 2nd RAIDZ and on a virtual machine
with two RAIDZ in a pool). First: Is data copied across physical dev
Hi,
It is possible to run Solaris from a USB stick, but maybe not recommended since
the sticks may have a limited number of "writes".
It is also possible to have Solaris run from a mirrored disk.
Would it be possible to run it from several zfs mirrored USB sticks and thereby:
1) benefit from zfs
Having just installed Solaris 10 U5 I was kind of hoping that this was
incorporated. This is a showstopper as far as using ZFS in production. This is
because all production is based on EMC storage with either a backend RAID1 or
RAID5. This is not an issue when systems have dual paths to storage
Hi everyone,
I've bought some new hardware a couple of weeks ago to replace my home
fileserver:
Intel DG33TL motherboard with Intel gigabit nic and ICH9R
Intel Pentium Dual E2160 (= 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo 64-bit architecture with less
cache, cheap, cool and more than fast enough)
2 x 1 GB DDR2 RAM
Hello Brandon,
Wednesday, April 16, 2008, 11:23:48 PM, you wrote:
BH> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:54 PM, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have some code that implements background media scanning so I am able to
>> detect bad blocks well before zfs encounters them. I need a script or
>> so
Hello Richard,
Wednesday, April 16, 2008, 6:33:05 PM, you wrote:
RE> David wrote:
>> I have some code that implements background media scanning so I am able to
>> detect bad blocks well before zfs encounters them. I need a script or
>> something that will map the known bad block(s) to a logic
20 matches
Mail list logo
