Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS snapshot zvols/iscsi send backup

On 07/13/10 12:26 PM, Gary Leong wrote: I'm looking to use ZFS to export ISCSI volumes to a Windows/Linux client. Essentially, I'm looking to create two storage ZFS machines that I will export ISCSI targets from. Then from the client side, I will enable mirrorings. The two ZFS machines will

[zfs-discuss] ZIL SSD failed

I have/had Intel M25-E 32GB SSD drive as ZIL/cache device (2 GB ZIL slice0 and the rest is cache slice1) The SSD drive has failed and zpool is unavailable anymore. Is there any way to import the pool/recover data, even with some latest transactions lost? I've tried zdb -e -bcsvL but it didn't

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 05:05:41PM +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote: > Linder, Doug wrote: > >Out of sheer curiosity - and I'm not disagreeing with you, just wondering > >- how does ZFS make money for Oracle when they don't charge for it? Do > >you think it's such an important feature that it's a big

[zfs-discuss] ZFS snapshot zvols/iscsi send backup

I'm looking to use ZFS to export ISCSI volumes to a Windows/Linux client. Essentially, I'm looking to create two storage ZFS machines that I will export ISCSI targets from. Then from the client side, I will enable mirrorings. The two ZFS machines will be independent of each other. I had ques

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do I clean up corrupted files from zpool status -v?

Thanks for the reply.. I got derailed by a DBA while writing the email, I should have been more clear - I realize that the 'DEGRADED' states should resolve after I replace the disk, but what about the section that states: " errors: Permanent errors have been detected in the following files: "

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do I clean up corrupted files from zpool status -v?

On 07/13/10 11:10 AM, Kris Kasner wrote: Hi Folks.. I have a system that was inadvertently left unmirrored for root. We were able to add a mirror disk, resilver, and fix the corrupted files (nothing very interesting was corrupt, whew), but zpool status -v still shows errors.. Will this sel

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do I clean up corrupted files from zpool status -v?

Hey Kris (glad to see someone from my QCOM days!): It should automatically clear itself when you replace the disk. Right now you're still degraded since you don't have full redundancy. - Garrett On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 16:10 -0700, Kris Kasner wrote: > Hi Folks.. > > I have a system tha

[zfs-discuss] How do I clean up corrupted files from zpool status -v?

Hi Folks.. I have a system that was inadvertently left unmirrored for root. We were able to add a mirror disk, resilver, and fix the corrupted files (nothing very interesting was corrupt, whew), but zpool status -v still shows errors.. Will this self correct when we replace the degraded disk

Re: [zfs-discuss] Need ZFS master!

Hi John, Follow the steps in this section: http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Troubleshooting_Guide Replacing/Relabeling the Root Pool Disk If the disk is correctly labeled with an SMI label, then you can skip down to steps 5-8 of this procedure. Thanks, Cindy On 07/12/10 1

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send/recv hanging in 2009.06

Actually my current servers are 2008.05, and I noticed the problems I was having with 2009.06 BEFORE I put those up as the new servers, so my pools are not too new to revert back to 2008.11, I'd actually be upgrading from 2008.05. I do not have paid support, but it's just not going to go over we

[zfs-discuss] Need ZFS master!

Hello all. I am new...very new to opensolaris and I am having an issue and have no idea what is going wrong. So I have 5 drives in my machine. all 500gb. I installed open solaris on the first drive and rebooted. . Now what I want to do is ad a second drive so they are mirrored. How does one do t

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send/recv hanging in 2009.06

On 07/13/10 06:48 AM, BJ Quinn wrote: Yeah, it's just that I don't think I'll be allowed to put up a dev version, but I would probably get away with putting up 2008.11 if it doesn't have the same problems with zfs send/recv. Does anyone know? That would be a silly thing to do. Your pool

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to verify ecc for ram is active and enabled?

> From this output it appears as if Solaris, via the > BIOS I presume, it looks like my BIOS thinks it > doesn't have ECC RAM, even though all the memory > modules are indeed ECC modules. > > Might be time to check (1) my current BIOS settings, > even though I felt sure ECC was enabled in the BIOS

Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption?

Garrett wrote: >I don't know about ramifications (though I suspect that a broadening >error scope would decrease ZFS' ability to isolate and work around >problematic regions on the media), but one thing I do know. If you use >FreeBSD disk encryption below ZFS, then you won't be able able to import

Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption?

On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 12:55 -0700, Brandon High wrote: > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Garrett D'Amore > wrote: > Btw, if you want a commercially supported and maintained > product, have > you looked at NexentaStor? Regardless of what happens with > OpenSolaris

Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption?

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Btw, if you want a commercially supported and maintained product, have > you looked at NexentaStor? Regardless of what happens with OpenSolaris, > we aren't going anywhere. (Full disclosure: I'm a Nexenta Systems > employee. :-) > I'm tr

Re: [zfs-discuss] Cache flush (or the lack of such) and corruption

ZFS is a copy-on-write filesystem. The important point is that if a single byte in a file is changed then the containing block is rewritten elsewhere, requiring that the file block pointers be rewritten - and when these are rewritten they are likewise written elsewhere and pointers to *them* ne

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send/recv hanging in 2009.06

Yeah, it's just that I don't think I'll be allowed to put up a dev version, but I would probably get away with putting up 2008.11 if it doesn't have the same problems with zfs send/recv. Does anyone know? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org __

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send/recv hanging in 2009.06

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:04 AM, BJ Quinn wrote: > I'm actually only running one at a time.  It is recursive / incremental (and > hundreds of GB), but it's only one at a time.  Was there still problems in > 2009.06 in that scenario? > > Does 2008.11 have these problems?  2008.05 didn't, and I'm

Re: [zfs-discuss] Recovering from an apparent ZFS Hang

Hi Brian, What are you trying to determine? How the pool behaves when a drive is yanked out? Its hard to tell how a pool will react with external USB drives. I think it will also depend on how the system handles a device removal. I created a similar raidz pool with non-USB devices, offlined a d

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send/recv hanging in 2009.06

I'm actually only running one at a time. It is recursive / incremental (and hundreds of GB), but it's only one at a time. Was there still problems in 2009.06 in that scenario? Does 2008.11 have these problems? 2008.05 didn't, and I'm considering moving back to that rather than using a develo

Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption?

On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 09:41 -0700, Michael Johnson wrote: > Nikola M wrote: > >Freddie Cash wrote: > >> You definitely want to do the ZFS bits from within FreeBSD. > >Why not using ZFS in OpenSolaris? At least it has most stable/tested > >implementation and also the newest one if needed? > > > I'

[zfs-discuss] Recovering from an apparent ZFS Hang

Hi, I'm currently trying to work with a quad-bay USB drive enclosure. I've created a raidz pool as follows: bleon...@opensolaris:~# zpool status r5pool pool: r5pool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM r5poolONLINE

Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption?

Nikola M wrote: >Freddie Cash wrote: >> You definitely want to do the ZFS bits from within FreeBSD. >Why not using ZFS in OpenSolaris? At least it has most stable/tested >implementation and also the newest one if needed? I'd love to use OpenSolaris for exactly those reasons, but I'm wary of using

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: Precisely. A private license, with support and indemnification from Sun, would shield Apple from any lawsuit from Netapp. This sort of statement illustrates a lack of knowledge of how indemnification and patents work. The patent holder is not c

Re: [zfs-discuss] SATA 6G controller for OSOL

Well, it is good to hear that there likely isn't a patent problem with the SATA functionality of the card. Hopefully the filed bug will be addressed, and support added to the AHCI driver. On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 2:43 AM, Vladimir Kotal wrote: > Brandon High wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 2:4

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

On 7/12/2010 9:09 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: And, the next release of Solaris (whenever it comes out) is supposed to make far more use of zfs for things like its packaging system (upgrades using snapshots, etc.) and zones. Indeed, its possible (I've not checked in a long time) that S10 makes of

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 17:05 +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote: >> Linder, Doug wrote: >> > Out of sheer curiosity - and I'm not disagreeing with you, just wondering >> > - how does ZFS make money for Oracle when they don't charge for it?  Do >

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 17:05 +0100, Andrew Gabriel wrote: > Linder, Doug wrote: > > Out of sheer curiosity - and I'm not disagreeing with you, just wondering - > > how does ZFS make money for Oracle when they don't charge for it? Do you > > think it's such an important feature that it's a big fac

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

Linder, Doug wrote: Out of sheer curiosity - and I'm not disagreeing with you, just wondering - how does ZFS make money for Oracle when they don't charge for it? Do you think it's such an important feature that it's a big factor in customers picking Solaris over other platforms? Yes, it

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

On 7/12/2010 8:49 AM, Linder, Doug wrote: Erik Trimble wrote: it does look like they'll win, I would bet huge chunks of money that Oracle cross-licenses the patents or pays for a license, rather than kill ZFS (it simply makes too much money for Oracle to abandon). Out of sheer curios

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

Erik Trimble wrote: > it does look like they'll win, I would bet huge chunks of money that > Oracle cross-licenses the patents or pays for a license, rather than > kill ZFS (it simply makes too much money for Oracle to abandon). Out of sheer curiosity - and I'm not disagreeing with you, just wond

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

On 7/12/2010 8:13 AM, David Magda wrote: On Mon, July 12, 2010 10:03, Tim Cook wrote: Everyone's SNAPSHOTS are copy on write BESIDES ZFS and WAFL's. The filesystem itself is copy-on-write for NetApp/Oracle, which is why there is no performance degradation when you take them. Per Microsof

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

On Mon, July 12, 2010 10:03, Tim Cook wrote: > Everyone's SNAPSHOTS are copy on write BESIDES ZFS and WAFL's. The > filesystem itself is copy-on-write for NetApp/Oracle, which is why there > is no performance degradation when you take them. > > Per Microsoft: > When a change to the original volu

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: > > From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms] > > > > Because VSS isn't doing anything remotely close to what WAFL is doing > > when it takes snapshots. > > It may not do what you want it to do, but it's still copy on write, as > evidenced by th

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

> From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms] > > Because VSS isn't doing anything remotely close to what WAFL is doing > when it takes snapshots. It may not do what you want it to do, but it's still copy on write, as evidenced by the fact that it takes instantaneous snapshots, and snapshots don't get o

Re: [zfs-discuss] Legality and the future of zfs...

> From: David Magda [mailto:dma...@ee.ryerson.ca] > > On Jul 10, 2010, at 14:20, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: > > >> A few companies have already backed out of zfs > >> as they cannot afford to go through a lawsuit. > > > > Or, in the case of Apple, who could definitely afford a lawsuit, but > > choo

Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption?

> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Freddie Cash > > ZFS-FUSE is horribly unstable, That may be true. I couldn't say. > although that's more an indication of > the stability of the storage stack on Linux. But this, I take

Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption?

on 11/07/2010 14:21 Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk said the following: > > > > I'm planning on running FreeBSD in VirtualBox (with a Linux host) > and giving it raw disk access to four drives, which I plan to > configure a

[zfs-discuss] Zfs pool / iscsi lun with windows initiator.

Hi friends, i have a problem. I have a file server which initiates large volumes with iscsi initiator. Problem is, zfs side it shows non aviable space, but i am %100 sure there is at least, 5 TB space. Problem is, because zfs pool shows as 0 aviable all iscsi connection got lost and all sharing

Re: [zfs-discuss] SATA 6G controller for OSOL

Brandon High wrote: On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Vladimir Kotal > wrote: Could you be more specific about the problems with 88SE9123, especially with SATA ? I am in the process of setting up a system with AD2SA6GPX1 HBA based on this chipset (at leas

Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption?

Freddie Cash wrote: > You definitely want to do the ZFS bits from within FreeBSD. Why not using ZFS in OpenSolaris? At least it has most stable/tested implementation and also the newest one if needed? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.