Re: [zfs-discuss] mv between ZFSs on same zpool

Yaniv Aknin wrote: > Thanks for the reference. > > I read that thread to the end, and saw there are some complex considerations > regarding changing st_dev on an open file, but no decision. Despite this > complexity, I think the situation is quite brain damanged - I'm moving large > files betwee

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs primarycache and secondarycache properties

Moved from PSARC to zfs-code...this discussion is seperate from the case. Eric kustarz wrote: > > On Jun 23, 2008, at 1:20 PM, Darren Reed wrote: > >> eric kustarz wrote: >>> >>> On Jun 23, 2008, at 1:07 PM, Darren Reed wrote: >>> >>>> Tim

Re: [zfs-discuss] Inode (dnode) numbers (Re: rename(2) (mv(1)) between ZFS filesystems in the same zpool)

Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 07:20:30PM +1100, Darren Reed wrote: > >> Frank Hofmann wrote: >> >>> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/rename.html >>> >>> ERRORS >>> The renam

Re: [zfs-discuss] rename(2) (mv(1)) between ZFS filesystems in the same zpool

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ... > That's a sad situation for backup utilities, by the way - a backup > tool would have no way of finding out that file X on fs A already > existed as file Z on fs B. So what ? If the file got copied, byte by > byte, the same situation exists, the contents are ident

Re: [zfs-discuss] rename(2) (mv(1)) between ZFS filesystems in the same zpool

Frank Hofmann wrote: > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2007, Darren Reed wrote: > [ ... ] >> Is this behaviour defined by a standard (such as POSIX or the >> VFS design) or are we free to innovate here and do something >> that allowed such a shortcut as required? > > Wrt. to

Re: [zfs-discuss] rename(2) (mv(1)) between ZFS filesystems in the same zpool

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> >>> >>> I would guess that this is caused by different st_dev values in the new >>> filesystem. In such a case, mv copies the files instead of renaming >>> them. >> >> >> No, it's because they are different filesystems a

[zfs-discuss] rename(2) (mv(1)) between ZFS filesystems in the same zpool

Having just done a largish mv from one ZFS filesystem to another ZFS filesystem in the same zpool, I was somewhat surprised at how long it took - I was expecting it to be near instant like it would be within the same filesystem. Are there optimisations possible here? Surely it should be possible

[zfs-discuss] Data retention (Re: ZFS/WAFL lawsuit)

This changed subject long ago... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >>That "but it existed only in RAM in my servers" should not be a defense >>for failing to retain discoverable evidence is distinct from the issue >>of what constitutes discoverable evidence. >> >> > >But only if you were told yo

Re: [zfs-discuss] Btrfs, COW for Linux [somewhat OT]

mike wrote: it's about time. this hopefully won't spark another license debate, etc... ZFS may never get into linux officially, but there's no reason a lot of the same features and ideologies can't make it into a linux-approved-with-no-arguments filesystem... Well, there's a dark horse here c

[zfs-discuss] Strange behaviour with sharenfs

Prior to rebooting my system (S10U2) yesterday, I had half a dozen ZFS shares active... Today, how that I look at this, I find I have only 1 of them is being exported through NFS. # zfs list -o name,sharenfs NAME SHARENFS biscuit off biscuit/crashes off biscu

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motley group of discs?

Al Hopper wrote: On Fri, 4 May 2007, mike wrote: Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to corrupt your data? Yes - I won't argue that ZFS can be applied exactly as you state above. Howe

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on FreeBSD vs Solaris...

Robert Milkowski wrote: Hello Darren, Monday, April 23, 2007, 9:14:35 PM, you wrote: DRSC> The environment that it is running in has less memory than I've used DRSC> it on with Solaris before, so I went to look at how to tune the ARC, DRSC> only to discover that it had already been capped to r

[zfs-discuss] ZFS on FreeBSD vs Solaris...

Over the weekend I got ZFS up and running under FreeBSD and have had much the same experience with it that I have with Solaris - it works great out of the box and once configured, it is easy to forget about. So far the only real difference is anything you might tune via /etc/system (or mdb) is don

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS for Linux (NO LISCENCE talk, please)

Claus Guttesen wrote: Gents, how come this thread - without any relation to zfs at all - is discussed on this list? Do move this irrelevant thread to another fora. My intentions subscribing to this list was *not* to read about lay-man's perception of this nor that license! Because discussing

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and Linux

From: "Joerg Schilling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ignatich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Joerg Schilling writes: > There is a lot of missunderstandings with the GPL. > > Porting ZFS to Linux wouldnotmake ZFS a "derived work" from Linux. > I do not see why anyone could claim that there is a need to publ

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and Linux

From: "Toby Thain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On 11-Apr-07, at 8:25 PM, Ignatich wrote: Rich Teer writes: On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Rayson Ho wrote: Why does everyone need to be compatible with Linux?? Why not Linux changes its license and be compatible with *BSD and Solaris?? I agree with this sentime

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Something like spare sectors...

Mark Maybee wrote: Anton B. Rang wrote: This sounds a lot like: 6417779 ZFS: I/O failure (write on ...) -- need to reallocate writes Which would allow us to retry write failures on alternate vdevs. Of course, if there's only one vdev, the write should be retried to a different block on the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Gzip compression for ZFS

Erblichs wrote: My two cents, ... Secondly, if I can add an additional item, would anyone want to be able to encrypt the data vs compress or to be able to combine encryption with compression? Yes, I might want to encrypt all of my laptop's hard drive contents and I

Re: [zfs-discuss] Gzip compression for ZFS

From: "Darren J Moffat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ... The other problem is that you basically need a global unique registry anyway so that compress algorithm 1 is always lzjb, 2 is gzip, 3 is etc etc. Similarly for crypto and any other transform. I've two thoughts on that: 1) if there is to be

Re: [zfs-discuss] Gzip compression for ZFS

Robert Milkowski wrote: Hello Darren, Thursday, March 29, 2007, 12:01:21 AM, you wrote: DRSC> Adam, ... DRSC> 2) The question of whether or not to use bzip2 was raised in DRSC>the comment section of your blog. How easy would it be to DRSC>implement a plugable (or more generic) interfa

[zfs-discuss] Gzip compression for ZFS

Adam, With the blog entry[1] you've made about gzip for ZFS, it raises a couple of questions... 1) It would appear that a ZFS filesystem can support files of varying compression algorithm. If a file is compressed using method A but method B is now active, if I truncate the file and rewrit

Re: [zfs-discuss] C'mon ARC, stay small...

Jim Mauro wrote: All righty...I set c_max to 512MB, c to 512MB, and p to 256MB... > arc::print -tad { ... c02e29e8 uint64_t size = 0t299008 c02e29f0 uint64_t p = 0t16588228608 c02e29f8 uint64_t c = 0t33176457216 c02e2a00 uint64_t c_min = 0t10703

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS filesystem disappeared after reboot?

Robert Milkowski wrote: Hello Darren, Tuesday, March 20, 2007, 3:27:26 AM, you wrote: Using Solaris 10, Update 2 I've just rebooted my desktop and I have discovered that a ZFS filesystem appears to have gone missing. The filesystem in question was called "biscuit

[zfs-discuss] ZFS filesystem disappeared after reboot?

Using Solaris 10, Update 2 I've just rebooted my desktop and I have discovered that a ZFS filesystem appears to have gone missing. The filesystem in question was called "biscuit/home" and should have been modified to have its mountpoint set to /export/home. Before the reboot, I did a lot of

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS and Solaris as a VMWare guest

James Dickens wrote: On 3/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] * <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: What issues, if any, are likely to surface with using Solaris inside vmware as a guest os, if I choose to use ZFS? works great in vmware server, I

[zfs-discuss] ZFS and Solaris as a VMWare guest

What issues, if any, are likely to surface with using Solaris inside vmware as a guest os, if I choose to use ZFS? I'm assuming that ZFS's ability to maintain data integrity will prevail and protect me from any problems that the addition of vmware might introduce. Are there likely to be any issu

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: [security-discuss] Thoughts on ZFS Secure Delete - without using Crypto

Darren J Moffat wrote: ... Of course. I didn't mention it because I thought it was obvious but this would NOT break the COW or the transactional integrity of ZFS. One of the possible ways that the "to be bleached" blocks are dealt with in the face of a crash is just like everything else - t

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: [security-discuss] Thoughts on ZFS Secure Delete - without using Crypto

Darren J Moffat wrote: One other area where is is useful is when you are in a jurisdiction where a court order may require you to produce your encryption keys - yes such jurisdictions exist and I don't want to debate the "human rights" angle or social engineering aspects of this just state tha

Re: [zfs-discuss] Thoughts on ZFS Secure Delete - without using Crypto

Darren, A point I don't yet believe that has been addressed in this discussion is: what is the threat model? Are we targetting NIST requirements for some customers or just general use by everyday folks? Darrn ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@

Re: [zfs-discuss] Thoughts on ZFS Secure Delete - without using Crypto

Darren J Moffat wrote: .. I think we need 5 distinct places to set the policy: 1) On file delete This would be a per dataset policy. The bleaching would happen in a new transaction group created by the one that did the normal deletion, and would run only if theoriginal one c

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs sharenfs inheritance

Robert Petkus wrote: Folks, When using sharenfs, do I really need to NFS export the parent zfs filesystem *and* all of its children? For example, if I have /zfshome /zfshome/user1 /zfshome/user1+n it seems to me like I need to mount each of these exported filesystems individually on the NFS cli

[zfs-discuss] zpool iostat - 0 read operations?

I'm doing a putback onto my local workstation, watching the disk activity with "zpool iostat", when I start to notice something quite strange... zpool iostat 1 capacity operationsbandwidth pool used avail read write read write -- - - -

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS panics with I/O failure

How I managed to make this happen, I'm now no longer sure of. After upgrading my workstation to Solaris 10, Update 2, I could not find any ZFS pools to import where I thought they were. Whether this is due to the partitioning not being correclty preserved or some other problem remains a mystery.

[zfs-discuss] ZFS panics with I/O failure

Hi, my box has started panic'ing in zpool. I'm using bits around a year old (which doesn't help) on S10FCS - when I can get a DVD with S10U2, I'll try that but... But my concern here is that this panic pops up at boot and the only way around this has been to rename /kernel/drv/amd64/zpool to

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

David Dyer-Bennet wrote: On 10/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There are tools around that can tell you if hardware is supported by Solaris. One such tool can be found at: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/hcts/install_check.html Beware of this tool. It reports "Y" for bo

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

Dick Davies wrote: On 11/10/06, Peter van Gemert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi There, You might want to check the HCL at http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl to find out which hardware is supported by Solaris 10. Greetings, Peter I tried that myself - there really isn't very much on there. I

[zfs-discuss] Loss of compression with send/receive

Using Solaris 10, Update 2 (b9a) I've just used "zfs send | zfs receive" to move some filesystems from one disk to another (I'm sure this is the quickest move I've ever done!) but in doing so, I lost "zfs set compression=on" on those filesystems. If I create the filesystems first and enable comp

Re: [zfs-discuss] Querying ZFS version?

Luke Scharf wrote: Although regular Solaris is good for what I'm doing at work, I prefer apt-get or yum for package management for a desktop. So, I've been playing with Nexenta / GnuSolaris -- which appears to be the open-sourced Solaris kernel and low-level system utilities with Debian pack

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Clones and "rm -rf"

Anton B. Rang wrote: I'd filed 6452505 (zfs create should set permissions on underlying mountpoint) so that this shouldn't cause problems in the future 6238072 might also be of interest. Darren ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opens

Re: [zfs-discuss] System hangs on SCSI error

Patrick Petit wrote: Hi, Using a ZFS emulated volume, I wasn't expecting to see a system [1] hang caused by a SCSI error. What do you think? The error is not systematic. When it happens, the Solaris/Xen dom0 console keeps displaying the following message and the system hangs. *Aug 3 11:11

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS performance using slices vs. entire disk?

Jeff Bonwick wrote: is zfs any less efficient with just using a portion of a disk versus the entire disk? As others mentioned, if we're given a whole disk (i.e. no slice is specified) then we can safely enable the write cache. With all of the talk about performance problems due to ZF

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS vs WAFL positioning

I've had people mention that WAFL does indeed support clones of snapshots. Is this a "what version of WAFL" problem? Darren ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs sucking down my memory!?

Bart Smaalders wrote: ... I just swap on a zvol w/ my ZFS root machine. I haven't been watching...what's the current status of using ZFS for swap/dump? Is a/the swap solution to use mkswap and then specify that file in vfstab? Darren ___ zfs-dis

Re: [zfs-discuss] Enabling compression/encryption on a populated filesystem

Bill La Forge wrote: One thing I've seen time and again that could easily (a relative term!) be done here is to have an extended bit. Just dedicate one of the currently unused bits to be the extended bit. When set, the 128 byte pointer is actually 256 bytes long. And use the same bit in ever

Re: [zfs-discuss] Enabling compression/encryption on a populated filesystem

Eric Schrock wrote: On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 12:38:01PM +0800, Darren Reed wrote: Of course this can change (grow) in the future if the ZFS version number changes? ... Another possibility is to use the block birth time and some pool-wide metadata to determine when an upgrade took place

Re: [zfs-discuss] Enabling compression/encryption on a populated filesystem

Bill Moore wrote: On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 03:10:00AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So how many of the 128 bits of the blockpointer are used for things other than to point where the block is? 128 *bits*? What filesystem have you been using? :) We've got luxury-class block pointers

Re: [zfs-discuss] Proposal: delegated administration

Jeff Bonwick wrote: PERMISSION GRANTING zfs allow [-l] [-d] <"everyone"|user|group> [,...] \ ... zfs unallow [-r] [-l] [-d] If we're going to use English words, it should be "allow" and "disallow". The problem with 'disallow' is that it implies precluding a beha

Re: [zfs-discuss] Proposal: delegated administration

Mark Shellenbaum wrote: Glenn Skinner wrote: The following is a nit-level comment, so I've directed it onl;y to you, rather than to the entire list. Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 09:57:35 -0600 From: Mark Shellenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [zfs-discuss] Proposal: delegated administ

Re: [zfs-discuss] Proposal: delegated administration

Mark Shellenbaum wrote: The following is the delegated admin model that Matt and I have been working on. At this point we are ready for your feedback on the proposed model. -Mark PERMISSION GRANTING zfs a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Enabling compression/encryption on a populated filesystem

Joseph Mocker wrote: Jeff Victor wrote: And if that file system is multiple terrabytes would you be okay with there being a read and write lock while this runs ? I am only guessing, but when encryption is "important enough" the answer is "yes." But the next question is then "is this s

Re: [zfs-discuss] Enabling compression/encryption on a populated filesystem

Darren J Moffat wrote: The problem with encrypting in place is knowing when the system is "safe", ie when it is done. There are lots of things in this area that are possible but they certainly aren't in the first deliveries for this project and with all due respect no amount of pushing by an

Re: [zfs-discuss] Enabling compression/encryption on a populated filesystem

Darren J Moffat wrote: Darren Reed wrote: Hmmm, well, I suppose the same problem might apply to encrypting data too...so maybe what I need is a zfs command that will walk the filesystem's data tree, read in data and write it back out according to the current data policy. And if that

[zfs-discuss] Enabling compression/encryption on a populated filesystem

When ZFS compression is enabled, although the man page doesn't explicitly say this, my guess is that only new data that gets written out is compressed - in keeping with the COW policy. This is all well and good, if you enable compression when you create the ZFS filesystem. If I enable compressio

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs list - column width

Darren J Moffat wrote: Jeff Victor wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: bash-3.00# zfs list NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT dns-pool 136K 43.1G 25.5K /dns-pool dns-pool/zones 50K 43.1G 25.5K /dns-pool/zones dns-pool/zones/dns1 24.5K 43.1G 24.

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs list - column width

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, because creating/using filesystems in ZFS becoms "cheap" it is useful now to create/organize filesystems in hierarchy: bash-3.00# zfs list NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT dns-pool 136K 43.1G 25.5K /dns-pool dns-pool/zones

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS needs a viable backup mechanism

To put the cat amongst the pigeons here, there were those within Sun that tried to tell the ZFS team that a backup program such as zfsdump was necessary but we got told that amanda and other tools were what people used these days (in corporate accounts) and therefore zfsdump and zfsrestore wasn't

Re: [zfs-discuss] Most stupid Ten reasons not to use ZFS

Darren J Moffat wrote: The rest is just uninformed licensing related fud. More fool them for not getting it! Indeed. There was a followup to that email that went through and debunked that posting along exactly those lines and to which the OP did not respond. Darren _

Re: [zfs-discuss] x86 CPU Choice for ZFS

Siegfried Nikolaivich wrote: Hello, What kind of x86 CPU does ZFS prefer? In particular, what kind of CPU is optimal when using RAID-Z with a large number of disks (8)? My experience is that for hardware that will be used in a server orientated role, there are a lot of considerations tha

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs filesystem/path names args with leading /

Tim Foster wrote: On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 18:02 +0800, Darren Reed wrote: What danger is there in stripping off the leading / from zfs command args and using what is left as a filesystem name? If I'm understanding you correctly, then you can't do that, as the mountpoint is

[zfs-discuss] zfs filesystem/path names args with leading /

What danger is there in stripping off the leading / from zfs command args and using what is left as a filesystem name? Quite often I do a quick copy-paste to get from df output to the zfs command line and every time I need to re-edit the command line because the copy-paste takes the leading / wit

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS + NFS perfromance ?

grant beattie wrote: On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 10:14:06AM +0200, Patrick wrote: Hi, I've just started using ZFS + NFS, and i was wondering if there is anything i can do to optimise it for being used as a mailstore ? ( small files, lots of them, with lots of directory's and high concurrent ac

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS questions (hybrid HDs)

Anton B. Rang wrote: Actually, while Seagate's little white paper doesn't explicitly say so, the FLASH is used for a write cache and that provides one of the major benefits: Writes to the disk rarely need to spin up the motor. Probably 90+% of all writes to disk will fit into the cache in a t

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS questions

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, options such as "-nomtime" and "-noctime" have been introduced alongside "-noatime" in some free operating systems to limit the amount of meta data that gets written back to disk. Those seem rather pointless. (mtime and ctime generally imply other changes,

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS questions

Jonathan Adams wrote: On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 09:32:58AM -0700, Richard Elling wrote: Flash is (can be) a bit more sophisticated. The problem is that they have a limited write endurance -- typically spec'ed at 100k writes to any single bit. The good flash drives use block relocation, spares,

Re: [zfs-discuss] fdsync(5, FSYNC) problem and ZFS

Sean Meighan wrote: ... Everything has been working perfectly until two days ago, now it can take 10 minutes to exit from vi. The following truss shows that the 3 line file that is sitting on the ZFS volume (/archives) took almost 15 minutes in fdsync. For those of you inside of Sun you can s

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS questions

Mike Gerdts wrote: On 6/17/06, Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The concept of shifting blocks in a zpool around in the background as part of a scrubbing process and/or on the order of a explicit command to populate newly added devices seems like it could be right up ZFS's alley. Perhaps

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: user undo

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm, I think I'd rather see this built into programs, such as 'rm', rather than into the filesystem itself. For example, if I'm using ZFS for my OpenSolaris development, I might want to enable this delete-history, just in case I rm a .c file that I need. But I don't w

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: user undo

But it is likely that in at least some situations promiscuously retaining *everything* even for a limited time would be a real problem, and that in a lot more it would be at least sub-optimal. Creating a directory attribute inheritable by subdirectories and files controlling temporary undelete-

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Big IOs overhead due to ZFS?

Jeff Bonwick wrote: ... Since we know that intent log blocks don't live for more than a single transaction group (which is about five seconds), there's no reason to allocate them space-efficiently. It would be far better, when allocating a B-byte intent log block in an N-disk RAID-Z group, to

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Life after the pool party

Tatjana S Heuser wrote: You may want to give Joergs sformat a try. I'm using it (since SunOS 4.1.1) as replacement for format at home, and prefer it for a number of reasons. # sformat --version sformat 3.6 (sparc-sun-solaris2.10.1) Copyright (C) 1986-1991, 93-97, 2000-2004 Jörg Schilling

Re: [zfs-discuss] RFE filesystem ownership

Darren J Moffat wrote: Roland Mainz wrote: Darren J Moffat wrote: James Dickens wrote: I think ZFS should add the concept of ownership to a ZFS filesystem, so if i create a filesystem for joe, he should be able to use his space how ever he see's fit, if he wants to turn on compression or t

Re: [zfs-discuss] Remote Mirror?

Matthew Ahrens wrote: On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 01:33:33PM -0700, Darren Reed wrote: Eric Schrock wrote: ... Asynchronous remote replication can be done today with 'zfs send' and zfs receive', though it needs some more work to be truly useful. It has the properties that

Re: [zfs-discuss] Remote Mirror?

Eric Schrock wrote: ... Asynchronous remote replication can be done today with 'zfs send' and zfs receive', though it needs some more work to be truly useful. It has the properties that it doesn't tax local activity, but your data will be slightly out of sync (depending on how often you sync yo