Any idea when the installer integration for ZFS root/boot will happen?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
*snip snip*
> AFAIK
> only Adaptec and LSI Logic are making controllers
> today. With so few
> manufacturers it's a scary investment. (Of course,
> someone please
> correct me if you know of other players.)
There's a few others. Those are (of course) the major players (and with big
names like
> You can't actually use those adapters in the
> x2100/x2200 or even the
> x4100/x4200. The slots are "MD2" low profile slots
> and the 4 port adapters
> require a full height slot. Even the x4600 only has
> MD2 slots. So you can
> only use 2 port adapters. I think there are esata
> cards that
> I know it seems ridiculous to HAVE to buy a 3rd party
> card, but come
> on it is only $50 or so. Assuming you don't need
> both pci slots for
> other uses.
I do. Two would have gone to external access for a JBOD (if that ever gets
sorted out, haha) - most external adapters seem to support 4 d
> Hi David,
>
> Depending on the I/O you're doing the X4100/X4200 are
> much better
> suited because of the dual HyperTransport buses. As a
> storage box with
> GigE outputs you've got a lot more I/O capacity with
> two HT buses than
> one. That plus the X4100 is just a more solid box.
That much
> On January 22, 2007 11:19:40 AM -0800 "David J.
> Orman"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm very confused now. Do the x2200m2s support "hot
> plug" of drives or
> > not? I can't believe it's that confusing/difficult.
> They
> Not to be picky, but the X2100 and X2200 series are
> NOT
> designed/targeted for disk serving (they don't even
> have redundant power
> supplies). They're compute-boxes. The X4100/X4200
> are what you are
> looking for to get a flexible box more oriented
> towards disk i/o and
> expansion.
I
> Hi Frank,
>
> I'm sure Richard will check it out. He's a very good
> guy and not
> trying to jerk you around. I'm sure the hostility
> isn't warranted. :-)
>
> Best Regards,
> Jason
I'm very confused now. Do the x2200m2s support "hot plug" of drives or not? I
can't believe it's that confusing
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Frank Cusack wrote:
>
> > But x4100/x4200 only accept expensive 2.5" SAS
> drives, which have
> > small capacities. [...]
>
> ... and only 2 or 4 drives each. Hence my blog entry
> a while back,
> wishing for a Sun-badged 1U SAS JBOD with room for 8
> drives. I'm
> amaze
> Hi David,
>
> I don't know if your company qualifies as a startup
> under Sun's regs
> but you can get an X4500/Thumper for $24,000 under
> this program:
> http://www.sun.com/emrkt/startupessentials/
>
> Best Regards,
> Jason
I'm already a part of the Startup Essentials program. Perhaps I shou
Hi,
I'm looking at Sun's 1U x64 server line, and at most they support two drives.
This is fine for the root OS install, but obviously not sufficient for many
users.
Specifically, I am looking at the: http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x2200/
X2200M2.
It only has "Riser card assembly with two inte
Thanks, interesting read. It'll be nice to see the actual results if Sun ever
publishes them.
Cheers,
David
- Original Message -
From: Adrian Cockcroft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, August 7, 2006 3:23 pm
Subject: [zfs-discuss] ZFS/Thumper experiences
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Apple just released the Darwin Kernel code "xnu-792-10.96"
> the equivalent of 10.4.7 for intel machines.
>
> -- Robert.
Really? How odd. Seems to be counter-intuitive with this news:
http://opendarwin.org/en/news/shutdown.html
___
zfs-discuss mail
> David Magda wrote:
> > Well, they've ported Dtrace:
> >
> > "..now built into Mac OS X Leopard. Xray. Because it’s 2006."
>
> Uh right and they're actually shipping it in 2007. Apple marketing.
> Anyone want to start printing t-shirts:
>
> "DTrace & Time Machine in OpenSolaris. Because we had
or if they actually migrated to ZFS. The next weeks should
be interesting as people get ahold of the dev copies.
David
- Original Message -
From: Joseph Mocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, August 7, 2006 9:04 am
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Apple Time Machine
To: "David J
Reading that site, it sounds EXACTLY like snapshots. It doesn't sound to
require a second disk, it just gives you the option of backing up to one.
Sounds like it snapshots once a day (configurable) and then "sends" the
snapshot to another drive/server if you request it to do so. Looks like they
- Original Message -
From: Robert Milkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, June 1, 2006 1:17 pm
Subject: Re[2]: [zfs-discuss] question about ZFS performance for webserving/java
> Hello David,
>
> The system itself won't take too much space.
> You can create one large slice form the r
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Ahrens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, June 1, 2006 12:30 pm
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] question about ZFS performance for webserving/java
> Why would you use NFS? These zones are on the same machine as the
> storage, right? You can simply export
Just as a hypothetical (not looking for exact science here folks..), how would
ZFS fare (in your educated opinion) in this sitation:
1 - Machine with 8 10k rpm SATA drives. High performance machine of sorts (ie
dual proc, etc..let's weed out cpu/memory/bus bandwidth as much as possible
from the
> RAID-Z is single-fault tolerant. If if you take out two disks,
> then you
> no longer have the required redundancy to maintain your data.
> Build 42
> should contain double-parity RAID-Z, which will allow you to
> sustain two
> simulataneous disk failures without dataloss.
I'm not sure if t
20 matches
Mail list logo
