Zlotnick Fred wrote:
> On Aug 20, 2008, at 6:39 PM, Kyle McDonald wrote:
>
>>
>> My suggestion still remains though. Log your enterprises wish for this
>> feature through as many channels as you have into Sun. This list, Sales,
>> Support, every way you can think of. Get it documented, so that when
On Aug 20, 2008, at 6:39 PM, Kyle McDonald wrote:
> John wrote:
>> Our "enterprise" is about 300TB.. maybe a bit more...
>>
>> You are correct that most of the time we grow and not shrink...
>> however, we are fairly dynamic and occasionally do shrink. DBA's
>> have been known to be off on the
John wrote:
> Our "enterprise" is about 300TB.. maybe a bit more...
>
> You are correct that most of the time we grow and not shrink... however, we
> are fairly dynamic and occasionally do shrink. DBA's have been known to be
> off on their space requirements/requests.
>
>
For the record I agre
Al Hopper writes:
>
> Interesting thread - thanks to all the contributors. I've seen, on
> several different forums, that many CF users lean towards Sandisk for
> reliability and longevity. Does anyone else see consensus in terms of
> CF brands?
>
The people to ask are probably professional
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote:
> How about for serving up CDROM and DVD images (genunix.org). Even two
> 32Gb drives in a ZFS mirrored config would give you 20K+ read OPs/Sec
> - as compared to a 10k RPM SCSI drive that starts to fall-over at 400
> read IOPS. This type is workload is way
I second that question, and also ask what brand folks like for
performance and compatibility?
Ebay is killing me with vast choice and no detail... ;)
Nathan.
Al Hopper wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Neal Pollack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ian Collins wrote:
>>> Brian Hechinger wr
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Neal Pollack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ian Collins wrote:
>> Brian Hechinger wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
>>>
Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter?
I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW C
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Where's the beef?
>>
>> I sense a lot of smoke and mirrors here, similar to Intel's recent CPU
>> "announcements" which don't even reveal the number of cores. No
>> prices and funny numbers that the writers of
>> technical article
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote:
>>
>> > It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the
>> > latest SSD product announce
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Seriously, I don't even care about the cost. Even with the smallest
> capacity, four of those gives me 128GB of write cache supporting 680MB/s and
> 40k IOPS. Show me a hardware raid controller that can even come close to
> that. Four of those will strain even 10GB/s In
> Where's the beef?
>
> I sense a lot of smoke and mirrors here, similar to Intel's recent CPU
> "announcements" which don't even reveal the number of cores. No
> prices and funny numbers that the writers of
> technical articles can't seem to get straight.
>
> Obviously these are a significant
I don't think its just b94, I recall this behavior for as long as I've
had the card. I'd also be interested to know if the sun driver team
has ever even tested with this card. I realize its probably not a top
priority, but it sure would be nice to have it working properly.
On 8/20/08, Ross
All,
System running Solaris 10 8/07 withe ZFS filesystem and Oracle
application on it.
Customer accidentally removed one of the Oracle directories under zfs
filesystem and now would like
to restore.
They are using EMC Networker Backup software for backup/restore.
Cu tried to restore the directo
Ross Smith wrote:
> > > Without fail, cfgadm changes the status from "disk" to "sata-port"
> when I
> > > unplug a device attached to port 6 or 7, but most of the time
> unplugging
> > > disks 0-5 results in no change in cfgadm, until I also attach disk
> 6 or 7.
> >
> > That does seem inco
I've heard (though I'd be really interested to read the studies if someone
has a link) that a lot of this human error percentage comes at the hardware
level. Replacing the wrong physical disk in a RAID-5 disk group, bumping
cables, etc.
-Aaron
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Bob Friesenhahn <
Kyle wrote:
> ... If I recall, the low priority was based on the percieved low demand
> for the feature in enterprise organizations. As I understood it shrinking a
> pool is percieved as being a feature most desired by home/hobby/development
> users, and that enterprises mainly only grow thier po
> > Without fail, cfgadm changes the status from "disk" to "sata-port" when I
> > unplug a device attached to port 6 or 7, but most of the time unplugging
> > disks 0-5 results in no change in cfgadm, until I also attach disk 6 or 7.
>
> That does seem inconsistent, or at least, it's not what I'd
Bob Friesenhahn writes:
>
> The SSD drives will work well for a boot drive, or a non-volatile
> transaction cache, but will be dramatically more expensive for storage
> than traditional hard drives. This must be why Intel is focusing on
> laptop users and not on enterprise storage.
>
The swe
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>>
>> SSDs + ZFS - a marriage made in (computer) heaven!
>
> Where's the beef?
>
> I sense a lot of smoke and mirrors here, similar to Intel's recent CPU
> "announcements" which don't even reveal the number of cores. No
> prices and funny numbers that the writers of tec
Ross wrote:
> lol, I got bored after 13 pages and a whole day of going back through my
> notes to pick out the relevant information.
>
> Besides, I did mention that I was using cfgadm to see what was connected
> :-p. If you're really interested, most of my troubleshooting notes have
> been posted
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 18:40, Bob Friesenhahn
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The errant command which accidentally adds a vdev could just as easily
> be a command which scrambles up or erases all of the data.
True enough---but if there's a way to undo accidentally adding a vdev,
there's one source o
lol, I got bored after 13 pages and a whole day of going back through my notes
to pick out the relevant information.
Besides, I did mention that I was using cfgadm to see what was connected :-p.
If you're really interested, most of my troubleshooting notes have been posted
to the forum, but un
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Tim wrote:
>
> I don't know about that. I just went from an SSD back to a SATA drive
> because the SSD started failing in less than a month (I'm having troubles
> believing this great write-leveling they talk about is working
> properly...). And the SATA drive is dog slow in
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Miles Nordin wrote:
>> "j" == John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> j> There is also the human error factor. If someone accidentally
> j> grows a zpool
>
> or worse, accidentally adds an unredundant vdev to a redundant pool.
> Once you press return, all you can do
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Bob Friesenhahn <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote:
>
> > It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the
> > latest SSD product announcements. No pricing yet ... but the specs
> > will push computer system IO ban
Well, when you leave out a bunch of relevant information you also leave
people guessing! :-)
Regardless, is it possibly that all of your testing was done with ZFS and not
just the "raw" disk? If so, it is possible that ZFS isn't noticing the hot
unplugging
of the disk until it tries to access th
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Al Hopper wrote:
> It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the
> latest SSD product announcements. No pricing yet ... but the specs
> will push computer system IO bandwidth performance to numbers only
> possible today with extremely expensive RAM based
I wouldn't know about using newer ZFS with older builds, but I can tell you
that b94 looks rock solid to me. I've been running it for a few weeks on a
live server and haven't had any crashing or instability problems at all.
Ordinarily, if you're having problems, the first thing I would try woul
>
> All,I'm currently working out
> details on an upgrade from UFS/SDS on DAS to ZFS on a
> SAN fabric. I'm interested in hearing how
> ZFS has behaved in more traditional SAN environments
> using gear that scales vertically like EMC
> Clarion/HDS AMS/3PAR etc. Do you experience
> issues with zp
John wrote:
> Our "enterprise" is about 300TB.. maybe a bit more...
>
> You are correct that most of the time we grow and not shrink... however, we
> are fairly dynamic and occasionally do shrink. DBA's have been known to be
> off on their space requirements/requests.
>
>
Isn't that one of the
> "j" == John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
j> There is also the human error factor. If someone accidentally
j> grows a zpool
or worse, accidentally adds an unredundant vdev to a redundant pool.
Once you press return, all you can do is scramble to find mirrors for
it.
vdev removal
Neal Pollack wrote:
> Ian Collins wrote:
>> Brian Hechinger wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
>>>
Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter?
I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB
card that I wante
All,
I'm currently working out details on an upgrade from UFS/SDS on DAS to ZFS
on a SAN fabric. I'm interested in hearing how ZFS has behaved in more
traditional SAN environments using gear that scales vertically like EMC
Clarion/HDS AMS/3PAR etc. Do you experience issues with zpool integrity
be
Ian Collins wrote:
> Brian Hechinger wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter?
>>>
>>> I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card
>>> that I wanted to use for a boot pool an
It looks like Intel has a huge hit (product) on its hands with the
latest SSD product announcements. No pricing yet ... but the specs
will push computer system IO bandwidth performance to numbers only
possible today with extremely expensive RAM based disk subsystems.
SSDs + ZFS - a marriage made
Evan Layton wrote:
> Rob McMahon wrote:
>> Evan Layton wrote:
>>> Can you set BE_PRINT_ERR to see if we can get a bit more information
>>> on what going on here? (export BE_PRINT_ERR=true)
>>> It would also be helpful to see what "zpool status" shows as well as
>>> what's in menu.lst
>>>
>>>
>>
Rob McMahon wrote:
> Evan Layton wrote:
>> Can you set BE_PRINT_ERR to see if we can get a bit more information
>> on what going on here? (export BE_PRINT_ERR=true)
>> It would also be helpful to see what "zpool status" shows as well as
>> what's in menu.lst
>>
>>
> > env BE_PRINT_ERR=true beadm
Our "enterprise" is about 300TB.. maybe a bit more...
You are correct that most of the time we grow and not shrink... however, we are
fairly dynamic and occasionally do shrink. DBA's have been known to be off on
their space requirements/requests.
There is also the human error factor. If someon
I, as several others, have severe problems with the latest builds of SXCE.
After b93-94 or, everything became extremely unstable to the point of rendering
my Solaris totally useless. This is written from a Windows machine.
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=69654&tstart=0
The
Mario Goebbels wrote:
>> WOW! This is quite a departure from what we've been
>> told for the past 2 years...
>>
>
> This must be misinformation.
>
> The reason there's no project (yet) is very likely because pool shrinking
> depends strictly on the availability of bp_rewrite functionality, wh
> WOW! This is quite a departure from what we've been
> told for the past 2 years...
This must be misinformation.
The reason there's no project (yet) is very likely because pool shrinking
depends strictly on the availability of bp_rewrite functionality, which is
still in development.
The last
WOW! This is quite a departure from what we've been told for the past 2 years...
In fact if your comments are true that we'll never be able to shrink a ZFS
pool, i will be, for lack of a better word, PISSED.
Like others not being able to shrink is a feature that truly prevents us from
replaci
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
> Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter?
>
> I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card that
> I wanted to use for a boot pool and even though the BIOS reports the disk,
> Solaris B95 (or
Ben,
Here is an attempt.
c -> Is the total cache size (MRU + MFU)
p -> represents the limit of MRU
(c - p) -> represents the limit of MFU
c_max, c_min-> hard limits
size-> Total amount consumed by ARC
memory_throttle_count -> The number of times ZFS decided to
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17, Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter?
I have two of these:
http://cgi.ebay.com/CF-Compact-Flash-to-SATA-Adapter-mini-usb-by-i88990_W0QQitemZ290253443832QQihZ019QQcategoryZ74941QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZVie
I meant shrinking the pool. I know it's already possible to replace a disk,
failing or not.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Would someone "in the know" be willing to write up (preferably blog) definitive
definitions/explanations of all the arcstats provided via kstat? I'm
struggling with proper interpretation of certain values, namely "p",
"memory_throttle_count", and the mru/mfu+ghost hit vs demand/prefetch hit
co
Hello Ian,
Wednesday, August 20, 2008, 8:57:33 AM, you wrote:
IC> Brian Hechinger wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter?
>>>
>>> I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB ca
When you say 'removing a disk' from a zpool, do you mean shrinking a zpool by
logically taking disks away from it, or just removing a failing disk from a
zpool?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Daniel Polombo
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2
I've just recently discovered that ZFS doesn't support (yet) removing a disk
other than a hot spare from a zpool. I've also found out that this feature has
been on the TODO list for ages (at least since January 2006).
Is there any kind of ETA on that feature's availability? Unfortunately, there'
>> And log an RFE for having user defined properties at the pool (if one
>> doesn't already exist).
>>
6739057 was filed to track this.
Thank you,
Jan
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/l
Brian Hechinger wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
>
>> Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter?
>>
>> I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card that
>> I wanted to use for a boot pool and even though the BIOS repo
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 05:17:45PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
> Has anyone here had any luck using a CF to SATA adapter?
>
> I've just tried an Addonics ADSACFW CF to SATA adaptor with an 8GB card that
> I wanted to use for a boot pool and even though the BIOS reports the disk,
> Solaris B95 (or
53 matches
Mail list logo
