Ian Collins wrote:
I have a case open for this problem on Solaris 10u7.
The case has been identified and I've just received an IDR,which I
will test next week. I've been told the issue is fixed in update 8,
but I'm not sure if there is an nv fix target.
I'll post back once I've abused a
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Marty Scholes wrote:
I really want to move back to 2009.06 and keep all of my files /
snapshots. Is there a way somehow to zfs send an older stream that
2009.06 will read so that I can import that into 2009.06?
Can I even create an older pool/dataset using 122?
On 09/15/09 02:07 PM, Mark J Musante wrote:
zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem
is possible to implement into a future version of ZFS a released send
command, like:
# zfs send -r2 snap ...
to send a specific release (version 2 in the example) of the metadata?
--
Luca Morettoni
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 08:48:20PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
Ian Collins wrote:
I have a case open for this problem on Solaris 10u7.
The case has been identified and I've just received an IDR,which I
will test next week. I've been told the issue is fixed in update 8,
but I'm not sure if
The zfs send stream is dependent on the version of
the filesystem, so the
only way to create an older stream is to create a
back-versioned
filesystem:
zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem
You can see what versions your system supports by
using the zfs upgrade
command:
The case has been identified and I've just received
an IDR,which I will
test next week. I've been told the issue is fixed in
update 8, but I'm
not sure if there is an nv fix target.
Anyone know if there Is an opensolaris fix for this issue and when?
These seem to be related.
Hi,
I think I've run into the same issue on OpenSolaris 2009.06.
Does anybody know when this issue will be solved in OpenSolaris?
What's the BugID?
Thanks,
Constantin
Gary Mills wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 08:48:20PM +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
Ian Collins wrote:
I have a case open for
EON ZFS NAS 0.59.3 based on snv_122 released!
Embedded Operating system/Networking (EON), RAM based live ZFS NAS appliance is
released on Genunix! Much thanks to Al at Genunix.org for download hosting and
serving the opensolaris community.
It is available in a CIFS and Samba flavor
EON 64-bit
On 09/15/09 06:27, Luca Morettoni wrote:
On 09/15/09 02:07 PM, Mark J Musante wrote:
zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem
is possible to implement into a future version of ZFS a released
send command, like:
# zfs send -r2 snap ...
to send a specific release (version 2 in the
Hi, I'm setting up a ZFS environment running on a Sun x4440 + J4400 arrays
(similar to 7410 environment) and I was trying to figure out the best way to
map a disk drive physical location (tray and slot) to the Solaris device
c#t#d#. Do I need to install the CAM software to do this, or is
http://www.dailytech.com/Startup+Drops+Bombshell+Lightning+SSD+With+180k+IOPS+500320+MBs+ReadWrites/article16249.htm
Pliant Technologies
just released two Lightning high performance enterprise SSDs that threaten to blow
away the competition. The drives uses proprietary ASICs to deliver an
http://www.plianttechnology.com/lightning_ls.php
Write Endurance Unlimited
:)
--
Roman Naumenko
ro...@frontline.ca
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Sep 15, 2009, at 5:21 PM, Richard Elling wrote:
On Sep 15, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Dale Ghent wrote:
On Sep 10, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Rich Morris wrote:
On 07/28/09 17:13, Rich Morris wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
Sun has opened internal CR 6859997. It is now
Reference below...
On Sep 15, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Dale Ghent wrote:
On Sep 15, 2009, at 5:21 PM, Richard Elling wrote:
On Sep 15, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Dale Ghent wrote:
On Sep 10, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Rich Morris wrote:
On 07/28/09 17:13, Rich Morris wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Bob
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Dale Ghent wrote:
Question though... why is bug fix that can be a watershed for
performance be held back for so long? s10u9 won't be available for
at least 6 months from now, and with a huge environment, I try hard
not to live off of IDRs.
As someone who currently
Hi,
I'm trying to identify why my nfs server does not work. I'm using a more
or less core install of OSOL 2009.06 (release) and installed and
configured a nfs server.
The issue: nfs server won't start - it can't find any filesystems in
/etc/dfs/sharetab. the zfs file systems do have
On Sep 15, 2009, at 6:28 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Dale Ghent wrote:
Question though... why is bug fix that can be a watershed for
performance be held back for so long? s10u9 won't be available for
at least 6 months from now, and with a huge environment, I try hard
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Tom de Waal tom.dew...@sun.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to identify why my nfs server does not work. I'm using a more or
less core install of OSOL 2009.06 (release) and installed and configured a
nfs server.
The issue: nfs server won't start - it can't find any
Quoting Brian Hechinger wo...@4amlunch.net:
If you need to ask you can't afford it? :-D
-brian
--
We can all dream can't we?
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
intended
Tom
What's in the NFS server log? (svcs -x)
BTW: Why are the NFS services disabled? If it has a problem I would
have expected it to be in state maintenance.
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2252/smf-5?a=view
DISABLED
The instance is disabled. Enabling the service results
Hi!
Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if
yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs
etc.) are supported by tmpfs ?
Bye,
Roland
--
__ . . __
(o.\ \/ /.o) roland.ma...@nrubsig.org
\__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix
Neal Pollack Neal.Pollack at Sun.COM writes:
Pliant Technologies just released two Lightning high performance
enterprise SSDs that threaten to blow away the competition.
One can build an SSD-based storage device that gives you:
o 320GB of storage capacity (2.1x better than their 2.5 model:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Hi!
Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if
yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs
etc.) are supported by tmpfs ?
tmpfs does not support ACLs
see _PC_ACL_ENABLED in [f]pathconf(2). You can query the file
Norm Jacobs wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if
yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs
etc.) are supported by tmpfs ?
I have some vague recollection that tmpfs doesn't support ACLs snd it
appears to
Interesting question takes a
few minutes to test...
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2252/acl-5?l=ena=viewq=acl%285%29+
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2239/chmod-1?l=ena=view
ZFS
[tp47...@norton:] df .
Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on
rpool/export/home/tp47565
16G
Roland Mainz wrote:
Norm Jacobs wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if
yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs
etc.) are supported by tmpfs ?
I have some vague recollection that tmpfs doesn't
Ian Collins wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Norm Jacobs wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if
yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs
etc.) are supported by tmpfs ?
I have some vague recollection that
Roland Mainz wrote:
Ian Collins wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Norm Jacobs wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Does anyone know out-of-the-head whether tmpfs supports ACLs - and if
yes - which type(s) of ACLs (e.g. NFSv4/ZFS, old POSIX draft ACLs
etc.) are supported by tmpfs ?
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Dale Ghent wrote:
As someone who currently faces kernel panics with recent U7+ kernel patches
(on AMD64 and SPARC) related to PCI bus upset, I expect that Sun will take
the time to make sure that the implementation is as good as it can be and
is thoroughly tested before
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009, Eric Schrock wrote:
Actually, it's not one byte - the entire page is garbage (as we saw in
the dtrace output). But I'm guessing that smartctl (and hardware SATL)
is aborting on the first invalid record, while we keep going and blindly
translate one form of garbage into
Roland Mainz wrote:
Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually
test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any
other options ?
By all means, test with ZFS. But it's easy to do that:
# mkfile 64m /zpool.file
# zpool create test
On Sep 15, 2009, at 8:32 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote:
I updated to the new X25-E firmware, and I think it might have
resolved the
problem. smartctl under Linux no longer give a warning, and the
diskstat
check under Solaris no longer appears to have garbage. I attached
output
from smartctl,
Robert Thurlow wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually
test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any
other options ?
By all means, test with ZFS. But it's easy to do that:
# mkfile 64m /zpool.file
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Eric Schrock wrote:
I don't have the ATA spec in front of me, but that that looks like pretty
normal output to me. Glad to hear they addressed the issue.
Excellent; I reinstalled it in my test x4500, if no other issues show up I
can try to get my proposal to install them
Lori Alt wrote:
On 09/15/09 06:27, Luca Morettoni wrote:
On 09/15/09 02:07 PM, Mark J Musante wrote:
zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem
is possible to implement into a future version of ZFS a released
send command, like:
# zfs send -r2 snap ...
to send a specific release
Erik Trimble wrote:
Lori Alt wrote:
On 09/15/09 06:27, Luca Morettoni wrote:
On 09/15/09 02:07 PM, Mark J Musante wrote:
zfs create -o version=N pool/filesystem
is possible to implement into a future version of ZFS a released
send command, like:
# zfs send -r2 snap ...
to send a
Roland Mainz wrote:
Robert Thurlow wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Ok... does that mean that I have to create a ZFS filesystem to actually
test ([1]) an application which modifies ZFS/NFSv4 ACLs or are there any
other options ?
By all means, test with ZFS. But it's easy to do
37 matches
Mail list logo
