Re: [zfs-discuss] ?: 1/2 Billion files in ZFS

Orvar Korvar wrote: > Ouch, that seems slow. Do you think ZFS is still the best solution for this > work load, or would for instance Veritas do better? > Maybe this workload would be more appropriate for Postgress or Oracle? How big are the files, how much does their size vary, and how struc

Re: [zfs-discuss] disk names?

Carson Gaspar wrote: > And s2 isn't special in any way except convention. _Any_ slice that > starts at sector 0 (and ends far enough away) will behave the same. If > your disk label is broken/missing/whatever, you won't _have_ an s2. > So, can I build a working system without s2? I think the

Re: [zfs-discuss] disk names?

Luke Scharf wrote: >3. None of the grey-haired Solaris gurus that I've talked to have > ever been able to explain why. > I do realize that older architectures needed some way to record the disk geometry. But why do it th

Re: [zfs-discuss] disk names?

Volker A. Brandt wrote: > Hmmm... the current scheme seems to be "subject verb ". > E.g. > >disk list That would work fine for me! It would also be easy enough to put on a "rosetta stone" type reference card. >> [0] Including lspci and lsusb with Solaris would be a great idea -- >> > >

Re: [zfs-discuss] [caiman-discuss] disk names?

MC wrote: >> Putting into the zpool command would feel odd to me, but I agree that >> there may be a useful utility here. >> > > There MAY be a useful utility here? I know this isn't your fight Dave, but > this tipped me and I have to say something :) > > Can we agree that the format command

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Hardware Check, OS X Compatibility, NEWBIE!!

Darryl wrote: > Is there a consensus that seagate barracuda drives are worthwhile, stable, > etc...? > All drives suck. Use RAID. :-) -Luke ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Hardware Check, OS X Compatibility, NEWBIE!!

Brandon High wrote: > Inexpensive cases have inexpensive power supplies. > > Most of the Antec cases come with good power supplies. I have a > Thermaltake Matrix case that came with a PSU and it's been reliable > for 2 years. I believe the case and PSU was about $100. > I just picked up an Ante

Re: [zfs-discuss] [osol-discuss] The ZFS inventor and Linus sitting in a tree?

On Sunday 18 May 2008 2:30:30 pm Mario Goebbels wrote: > > Here's a link to a recent blog entry of Jeff Bonwick, lead engineer of > > ZFS, showing him with Linus Torvalds, making mysterious comments in a > > blog post that's tagged ZFS. > > Well, here's the link, anyhow. :S > > http://blogs.sun.com

Re: [zfs-discuss] Sanity check -- x4500 storage server for enterprise file service

Dave wrote: > On 05/08/2008 08:11 AM, Ross wrote: > >> It may be an obvious point, but are you aware that snapshots need to be >> stopped any time a disk fails? It's something to consider if you're >> planning frequent snapshots. >> > > I've never heard this before. Why would snapshots n

Re: [zfs-discuss] 24-port SATA controller options?

Maurice Volaski wrote: >> Perhaps providing the computations rather than the conclusions would >> be more persuasive on a technical list ;> >> > > 2 16-disk SATA arrays in RAID 5 > 2 16-disk SATA arrays in RAID 6 > 1 9-disk SATA array in RAID 5. > > 4 drive failures over 5 years. Of course, Y

Re: [zfs-discuss] Confused by compressratio

>>> zfs list /export/compress >>> >>> >> NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT >> export-cit/compress 90.4M 1.17T 90.4M /export/compress >> >> is 2GB/90.4M = 2048 / 90.4 = 22.65 >> >> >> That still leaves me puzzled what the precise definition of compressratio is? >>

Re: [zfs-discuss] Confused by compressratio

? > > > -Original Message- > From: Stuart Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 15:45:03 > To:Luke Scharf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc:zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Confused by compressratio > > > On Mon

Re: [zfs-discuss] Confused by compressratio

Stuart Anderson wrote: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 09:59:48AM -0400, Luke Scharf wrote: > >> Stuart Anderson wrote: >> >>> As an artificial test, I created a filesystem with compression enabled >>> and ran "mkfile 1g" and the reported compr

Re: [zfs-discuss] Confused by compressratio

Stuart Anderson wrote: > As an artificial test, I created a filesystem with compression enabled > and ran "mkfile 1g" and the reported compressratio for that filesystem > is 1.00x even though this 1GB file only uses only 1kB. > ZFS seems to treat files filled with zeroes as sparse files, regard

[zfs-discuss] Device naming weirdness -- possible bug report?

*Platform:* * OpenSolaris snv79 on an older beige-box Intel x86 * Apple XRaid disk box, with 7 JBOD disks * LSI FC controller - http://www.lsi.com/storage_home/products_home/host_bus_adapters/fibre_channel_hbas/lsi7404eplc/index.html?remote=1&locale=EN

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Device fail timeout?

Richard Elling wrote: > In general, ZFS doesn't manage device timeouts. The lower > layer drivers do. The timeout management depends on which OS, > OS version, and HBA you use. A fairly extreme example may be > Solaris using parallel SCSI and the sd driver, which uses a default > timeout of 60 s

[zfs-discuss] ZFS Device fail timeout?

I'm running ZFS in a test-server against a bunch of drives in an Apple XRaid (configured in the JBOD mode). It works pretty well, except that when I yank one of the drives, ZFS hangs -- presumably, it's waiting for a response from the the XRAID. Is there any way to set the device-failure timeout

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

Toby Thain wrote: On 7-May-07, at 3:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Lee, You can decide whether you want to use ZFS for a root file system now. You can find this info here: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/boot/ Bearing in mind that his machine is a G4 PowerPC. When Solaris 10 is

Re: [zfs-discuss] am I completely insane, or will this work?

Manoj Joseph wrote: Brian Hechinger wrote: After having set my desktop to install (to a pair of 140G SATA disks that zfs is mirroring) at work, I was trying to skip the dump slice since in this case, no, I don't really want it. ;) Don't underestimate the usefulness of a dump device. You might

Re: [zfs-discuss] XServe Raid & Complex Storage Considerations

Toby Thain wrote: On 25-Apr-07, at 12:17 PM, cedric briner wrote: hello the list, After reading the _excellent_ ZFS Best Practices Guide, I've seen in the section: ZFS and Complex Storage Consideration that we should configure the storage system to ignore command which will flush the memor

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS improvements

Anton B. Rang wrote: This might be impractical for a large file system, of course. It might be easier to have a 'zscavenge' that would recover data, where possible, from a corrupted file system. But there should be at least one of these. Losing a whole pool due to the corruption of a couple of

Re: [zfs-discuss] Convert raidz

Tim Foster wrote: And is it possible to add 1 new disk to raidz configuration without backups and recreating zpool from cratch. You can add a disk to a raidz configuration, but then that makes a pool containing 1 raidz + 1 additional disk in a dynamic stripe configuration (which ZFS will w

Re: [zfs-discuss] Promise Ultra133TX2?

isOS Cheers, James On 5 Mar 2007, at 03:45, Luke Scharf wrote: Has anyone made the Promise Ultra133TX2 2-port PCI<->IDE card work with Solaris x86 11/06? I've seen some references to the Ultra100TX2, but it doesn't seem to refer to the version that I'

[zfs-discuss] Promise Ultra133TX2?

Has anyone made the Promise Ultra133TX2 2-port PCI<->IDE card work with Solaris x86 11/06? I've seen some references to the Ultra100TX2, but it doesn't seem to refer to the version that I'm using. Thanks, -Luke smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature _

Re: [zfs-discuss] FAULTED ZFS volume even though it is mirrored

Frank Cusack wrote: On March 1, 2007 12:19:22 AM -0800 Jeff Bonwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: import it. Assuming this works, you can fix the stupid boot archive thank you. i hate the boot archive. i have just spent MANY unnecessary hours on some machines thanks to the stupid boot archive.

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Advice on a cheap home NAS machine using ZFS

Dave Sneddon wrote: Can anyone shed any light on whether the actual software side of this can be achieved? Can I share my entire ZFS pool as a "folder" or "network drive" so WinXP can read it? Will this be fast enough to read/write to at DV speeds (25mbit/s)? Once the pool is set up and I have it

Re: [zfs-discuss] hot spares - in standby?

David Magda wrote: On Jan 30, 2007, at 09:52, Luke Scharf wrote: "Hey, I can take a double-drive failure now! And I don't even need to rebuild! Just like having a hot spare with raid5, but without the rebuild time!" Theoretically you want to rebuild as soon as possible,

Re: [zfs-discuss] hot spares - in standby?

David Magda wrote: What about a rotating spare? When setting up a pool a lot of people would (say) balance things around buses and controllers to minimize single points of failure, and a rotating spare could disrupt this organization, but would it be useful at all? Functionally, that sound

Re: [zfs-discuss] Access to ZFS checksums would be nice and very useful feature

Luke Scharf wrote: It sounded to me like he wanted to implement tripwire, but save some time and CPU power by querying the checksumming-work that was already done by ZFS. Nevermind. The e-mail client that I chose to use broke up the thread, and I didn't see that the issue had already

Re: [zfs-discuss] Access to ZFS checksums would be nice and very useful feature

Matthew Ahrens wrote: Bady, Brant RBCM:EX wrote: Actually to clarify - what I want to do is to be able to read the associated checksums ZFS creates for a file and then store them in an external system e.g. an oracle database most likely Rather than storing the checksum externally, you could si

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs share=".foo-internal.bar.edu" on multiple interfaces?

Luke Scharf wrote: The problem is that when I mount from a client, I can only mount if I specify the IP address 1st network interface. If I use the 2nd or 3rd interface (both also on the internal network), then I get the following error: kernel: nfs server 10.1.5.10:/xr7/group/ntnt: not

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs share=".foo-internal.bar.edu" on multiple interfaces?

Dale Ghent wrote: On Sep 11, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Luke Scharf wrote: Luke Scharf wrote: zfs set sharenfs='rw=.foo-internal.bar.edu insecure no_root_squash' xr7/group/ntnt ; zfs share -a Also, is this the proper syntax for the no_root_squash? no_root_squash is a Linux-ism. W

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs share=".foo-internal.bar.edu" on multiple interfaces?

Luke Scharf wrote: zfs set sharenfs='rw=.foo-internal.bar.edu insecure no_root_squash' xr7/group/ntnt ; zfs share -a Also, is this the proper syntax for the no_root_squash? Thanks, -Luke smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic

[zfs-discuss] zfs share=".foo-internal.bar.edu" on multiple interfaces?

I have a Sun x4200 with 4x gigabit ethernet NICs. I have several of them configured with distinct IP addresses on an internal (10.0.0.0) network. I have shared the ZFS filesystem with the following command: zfs set sharenfs='rw=.foo-internal.bar.edu insecure no_root_squash' xr7/group/ntnt

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Re: zpool status panics server

Neal Miskin wrote: Your best best is to run a replicated pool. Thanks George, will do BTW is the best way to learn ZFS reading the ZFS Admin Guide or do Sun run more in-depth courses? I found the ZFS Administration Guide to be very-much worth the time I spent reading it,

Re: [zfs-discuss] Tape backup

Karen Chau wrote: I understand Legato doesn't work with ZFS yet. I looked through the email archives, cpio and tar were mentioned. What's is my best option if I want to dump approx 40G to tape? Am I correct in saying that the issue was not getting the files to tape, but properly storing comp

Re: [zfs-discuss] Porting ZFS file system to FreeBSD.

Ricardo Correia wrote: Wow, congratulations, nice work! I'm the one porting ZFS to FUSE and seeing you doing such progress so fast is very very encouraging :) I'd like to throw a "me too" into the pile of thank-you messages! I spent part of the weekend expanding and manipulating a set of L

Re: [zfs-discuss] Querying ZFS version?

Darren Reed wrote: On Solaris, pkginfo -l SUNWzfsr would give you a package version for that part of ZFS.. and "modinfo | grep zfs" will tell you something about the kernel module rev. No such luck. Modinfo doesn't show the ZFS module as loaded; that's probably because I'm not running anythi

Re: [zfs-discuss] Querying ZFS version?

George Wilson wrote: Luke, You can run 'zpool upgrade' to see what on-disk version you are capable of running. If you have the latest features then you should be running version 3: hadji-2# zpool upgrade This system is currently running ZFS version 3. Unfortunately this won

[zfs-discuss] Querying ZFS version?

5.11.40-1 5.11.40-1 ZFS (Root) Is there a zfs version command that I don't see? Thanks, -Luke -- Luke Scharf Virginia Tech Unix Administration Services Terascale Computing Facility smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature __

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

Darren J Moffat wrote: Buth the reason thing is how do you tell the admin "its done now the filesystem is safe".   With compression you don't generally care if some old stuff didn't compress (and with the current implementation it has to compress a certain amount or it gets written uncompressed

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Expanding raidz2

David Dyer-Bennet wrote: It's easy to corrupt the volume, though -- just copy random data over *two* disks of a RAIDZ volume. Okay, you have to either do the whole volume, or get a little lucky to hit both copies of some piece of information before you get corruption. Or pull two disks out of t

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Expanding raidz2

David Abrahams wrote: I've seen people wondering if ZFS was a scam because the claims just seemed too good to be true. Given that ZFS *is* really great, I don't think it would hurt to prominently advertise limitations like this one it would probably benefit credibility considerably, and it's a r