From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Robert Milkowski
On 24/04/2010 13:51, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
But what you might not know: If any pool fails, the system will
crash.
This actually depends on the failmode property
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Peter Tripp
here, I'll swap it in for the sparse file and let it resilver.
Can someone with a stronger understanding of ZFS tell me why a degraded
RaidZ2 (minus one disk) is less efficient
From: Richard Elling [mailto:richard.ell...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 10:43 AM
Nope. That discussion seems to be concluded now. And the netapp
does not
have the problem that was suspected.
I do not recall reaching that conclusion. I think the definition of
the
From: Ragnar Sundblad [mailto:ra...@csc.kth.se]
Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 5:18 PM
To answer the question you linked to:
.shapshot/snapname.0/a/b/c/d.txt from the top of the filesystem
a/.snapshot/snapname.0/b/c/d.txt
a/e/.shapshot/snapname.0/c/d.txt
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Freddie Cash
From the sounds of it, the .snapshot directory is just a pointer to the
corresponding directory in the actual snapshot tree. The snapshots are
not actually saved per-directory.
From: Richard Elling [mailto:richard.ell...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 7:42 PM
Next,
mv /a/e /a/E
ls -l a/e/.snapshot/snaptime
ENOENT?
ls -l a/E/.snapshot/snapname/d.txt
this should be ENOENT because d.txt did not exist in a/E at snaptime.
On 25/04/2010 13:08, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
The system should boot-up properly even if some pools are not
accessible
(except rpool of course).
If it is not the case then there is a bug - last time I checked it
worked perfectly fine.
This may be different in the latest opensolaris, but
One of my pools (backup pool) has a disk which I
suspect may be going south. I have a replacement disk
of the same size. The original pool was using one of
the partitions towards the end of the disk. I want to
move the partition to the beginning of the disk on
the new disk.
Does ZFS
On Apr 25, 2010, at 5:45 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: Richard Elling [mailto:richard.ell...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 7:42 PM
Next,
mv /a/e /a/E
ls -l a/e/.snapshot/snaptime
ENOENT?
ls -l a/E/.snapshot/snapname/d.txt
this should be ENOENT
I wonder if this is the right place to ask, as the Filesystem in User Space
implementation is a separate project. In Solaris ZFS runs in kernel. FUSE
implementations are slow, no doubt. Same goes for other FUSE implementations,
such as for NTFS.
Regards,
Tonmaus
--
This message posted from
On 04/26/10 12:08 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
[why do you snip attributions?]
On 04/26/10 01:45 AM, Robert Milkowski wrote:
The system should boot-up properly even if some pools are not
accessible
(except rpool of course).
If it is not the case then there is a bug - last time I checked it
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010, Mike Mackovitch wrote:
Oh, and the kernel.log should at least have the lockd not responding
messages in it. So, I presume you meant nothing *else* interesting.
I think it's time to look at the packets...
I'll double check later (my wife is currently using the lpatop).
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Alex Blewitt wrote:
For your information, the ZFS project lives (well, limps really) on
at http://code.google.com/p/mac-zfs. You can get ZFS for Snow Leopard
from there and we're working on moving forwards from the ancient pool
support to something more recent.
The correct URL is:
http://code.google.com/p/maczfs/
-Original Message-
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org
[mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Rich Teer
Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 7:11 PM
To: Alex Blewitt
Cc: ZFS discuss
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Mac OS X
I have a few old drives here that I thought might help me a little, though not
at much as a nice SSD, for those uses. I'd like to speed up NFS writes, and
there have been some mentions that even a decent HDD can do this, though not to
the same level a good SSD will.
The 3 drives are older LVD
On 4/25/10 6:07 PM, Rich Teer rich.t...@rite-group.com wrote:
Sounds fair enough! Let's move this to email; meanwhile, what's the
packet sniffing incantation I need to use? On Solaris I'd use snoop,
but I don't htink Mac OS comes with that!
Use Wireshark (formerly Ethereal); works great for
On 4/25/10 6:11 PM, Rich Teer rich.t...@rite-group.com wrote:
I tried going to that URL, but got a 404 error... :-( What's the correct
one, please?
http://code.google.com/p/maczfs/
--
Dave Pooser, ACSA
Manager of Information Services
Alford Media http://www.alfordmedia.com
I'm building another 24-bay rackmount storage server, and I'm considering
what drives to put in the bays. My chassis is a Supermicro SC846A, so the
backplane supports SAS or SATA; my controllers are LSI3081E, again
supporting SAS or SATA.
Looking at drives, Seagate offers an enterprise
Travis Tabbal wrote:
I have a few old drives here that I thought might help me a little, though not
at much as a nice SSD, for those uses. I'd like to speed up NFS writes, and
there have been some mentions that even a decent HDD can do this, though not to
the same level a good SSD will.
The
I have one storage server with 24 drives, spread across three controllers
and split into three RAIDz2 pools. Unfortunately, I have no idea which bay
holds which drive. Fortunately, this server is used for secondary storage so
I can take it offline for a bit. My plan is to use zpool export to take
20 matches
Mail list logo
