On 07/29/12 14:52, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
My opinion is that complete hard drive failure and block-level media
failure are two totally different things.
That would depend on the recovery behavior of the drive for
block-level media failure. A drive whose firmware does excessive
(reports of up
On 07/19/12 19:27, Jim Klimov wrote:
However, if the test file was written in 128K blocks and then
is rewritten with 64K blocks, then Bob's answer is probably
valid - the block would have to be re-read once for the first
rewrite of its half; it might be taken from cache for the
second half's rew
On 07/10/12 19:56, Sašo Kiselkov wrote:
Hi guys,
I'm contemplating implementing a new fast hash algorithm in Illumos' ZFS
implementation to supplant the currently utilized sha256. On modern
64-bit CPUs SHA-256 is actually much slower than SHA-512 and indeed much
slower than many of the SHA-3 can
On 07/04/12 16:47, Nico Williams wrote:
I don't see that the munmap definition assures that anything is written to
"disk". The system is free to buffer the data in RAM as long as it likes
without writing anything at all.
Oddly enough the manpages at the Open Group don't make this clear. So
I
On 06/16/12 12:23, Richard Elling wrote:
On Jun 15, 2012, at 7:37 AM, Hung-Sheng Tsao Ph.D. wrote:
by the way
when you format start with cylinder 1 donot use 0
There is no requirement for skipping cylinder 0 for root on Solaris, and there
never has been.
Maybe not for core Solaris, but it i
On 06/15/12 15:52, Cindy Swearingen wrote:
Its important to identify your OS release to determine if
booting from a 4k disk is supported.
In addition, whether the drive is really 4096p or 512e/4096p.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolar
On 05/29/12 07:26, bofh wrote:
ashift:9 is that standard?
Depends on what the drive reports as physical sector size.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On 05/29/12 08:35, Nathan Kroenert wrote:
Hi John,
Actually, last time I tried the whole AF (4k) thing, it's performance
was worse than woeful.
But admittedly, that was a little while ago.
The drives were the seagate green barracuda IIRC, and performance for
just about everything was 20MB/s pe
On 05/28/12 08:48, Nathan Kroenert wrote:
Looking to get some larger drives for one of my boxes. It runs
exclusively ZFS and has been using Seagate 2TB units up until now (which
are 512 byte sector).
Anyone offer up suggestions of either 3 or preferably 4TB drives that
actually work well with Z
On 01/25/12 09:08, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
Assuming the failure rate of drives is not linear, but skewed toward higher
failure rate after some period of time (say, 3 yrs) ...
See section 3.1 of the Google study:
http://research.google.com/archive/disk_failures.pdf
although section 4.2 o
On 01/24/12 17:06, Gregg Wonderly wrote:
What I've noticed, is that when I have my drives in a situation of small
airflow, and hence hotter operating temperatures, my disks will drop
quite quickly.
While I *believe* the same thing and thus have over provisioned
airflow in my cases (for both dri
On 01/16/12 11:08, David Magda wrote:
The conclusions are hardly unreasonable:
While the reliability mechanisms in ZFS are able to provide reasonable
robustness against disk corruptions, memory corruptions still remain a
serious problem to data integrity.
I've heard the same thing said ("use
On 01/08/12 10:15, John Martin wrote:
I believe Joerg Moellenkamp published a discussion
several years ago on how L1ARC attempt to deal with the pollution
of the cache by large streaming reads, but I don't have
a bookmark handy (nor the knowledge of whether the
behavior is still acc
On 01/08/12 20:10, Jim Klimov wrote:
Is it true or false that: ZFS might skip the cache and
go to disks for "streaming" reads?
I don't believe this was ever suggested. Instead, if
data is not already in the file system cache and a
large read is made from disk should the file system
put this d
On 01/08/12 11:30, Jim Klimov wrote:
However for smaller servers, such as home NASes which have
about one user overall, pre-reading and caching files even
for a single use might be an objective per se - just to let
the hard-disks spin down. Say, if I sit down to watch a
movie from my NAS, it is
On 01/08/12 09:30, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
In the case of your MP3 collection... Probably the only thing you can do is
to write a script which will simply go read all the files you predict will
be read soon. The key here is the prediction - There's no way ZFS or
solaris, or any other OS in th
On 09/12/11 10:33, Jens Elkner wrote:
Hmmm, at least if S11x, ZFS mirror, ICH10 and cmdk (IDE) driver is involved,
I'm 99.9% confident, that "a while" turns out to be some days or weeks, only
- no matter what Platinium-Enterprise-HDDs you use ;-)
On Solaris 11 Express with a dual drive mirror,
http://wdc.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1397/~/difference-between-desktop-edition-and-raid-%28enterprise%29-edition-drives
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Is there a list of zpool versions for development builds?
I found:
http://blogs.oracle.com/stw/entry/zfs_zpool_and_file_system
where it says Solaris 11 Express is zpool version 31, but my
system has BEs back to build 139 and I have not done a zpool upgrade
since installing this system but it
Tim Cook cook.ms> writes:
> You are not a court of law, and that statement has not been tested. It is
your opinion and nothing more. I'd appreciate if every time you repeated that
statement, you'd preface it with "in my opinion" so you don't have people
running around believing what they're doi
the anywhere in the internet. Any hint?
Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNBIw2AAoJEA6eiwqkMgR8vAcH/0jeBh0PvZdnjLK4FOY6/Xw1
JwAqdNbS5jvUn8pvYRxdA379gqyZNoFXMRTpPl5Xefw88rpXS+vqvDHoaM1A5Wov
the anywhere in the internet. Any hint?
Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNBIzZAAoJEA6eiwqkMgR8NhYIALeIA7VTTSP3PkpN+GaIwQ/e
Y5lVRTJCCY5jcj++g7WLniF9NmbrYrm/dGObXGL8WbkdsJSW1G0vUwVoW+lEYU9G
wFbXRtny5uklb7N7coy25aPioSGdJGaIBFk
ng before SSD-based drives where. I can not imagine, that NFS
performance used to be not more than 1/3 of the speed of a 10BaseT connection
ever before...
Martin
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
M/sec which is ok but on a GBit network, more should be
possible, since the servers disk performance reaches up to 120 M/sec.
Does anyone have a solution how I can at least speed up the writes?
Martin
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
're designed to be small and cute.
> Not reliable.
The MacMini and the disks themselves are just fine. The problem seems to be the
SATA-bridges to USB/FW. They just stall, when the load gets heavy.
Martin
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discu
table system without having
an enterprise solution: eSATA, USB, FireWire, FibreChannel?
Martin
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
After about 62 hours and 90%, the resilvering process got stuck. Since 12 hours
nothing happens anymore. Thus, I can not detach the spare device. Is there a
way to get the resilvering process back running?
Martin
Am 18.08.2010 um 20:11 schrieb Mark Musante:
> You need to let the resil
0 0
spares
c16t0d0 INUSE currently in use
errors: No known data errors
m...@iunis:~# zpool detach tank c16t0d0
cannot detach c16t0d0: no valid replicas
How can I solve the Problem?
Martin
___
zfs-discuss mailing
ctivity.
But sill: Why does the system get stuck? Even when a USB-Plug is unhooked, why
does the spare does not go online?
Martin
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
device faults?
2. Why does the hot spare not go online? (The manual says, that going online
automatically is the default behavior)
3. Why does the system not boot to the usual run level, when a zpool is in a
degraded state at boot time?
Regards,
Martin
The 4 disks attached to the ahci driver should be using NCQ. The two
cmdk disks will not have NCQ capability as they are under control of
the legacy ata driver. What does your pool topology look like? Can you
try removing the cmdk disks from your pool.
You can also verify if your disks are NCQ
the internal hard drive fails, can I reboot the
system with the detached internal drive but with the degraded mirror half on
the external drive?
The mac is definitely capable of booting from all kinds of devices. But does
OSOL support it in such a way, described above?
Regards,
Martin
in the bugreport does not exist before
the zfs set mountpoint command.
Greetings, Martin
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
.
We import the pool with the -R parameter, might that contribute to the problem?
Perhaps a zfs mount -a bug in correspondence with the -R parameter?
Greetings, Martin
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
he mount are created at import/mount time.
> That's what should be investigated in your case; i know there are some
> fixes in progress specially for the sharing part but more data is needed
> to see what's going on here.
what data do you need?
Greetings, Martin
--
This messag
We are also running into this bug.
Our system is a Solaris 10u4
SunOS sunsystem9 5.10 Generic_127112-10 i86pc i386 i86pc
ZFS version 4
We opened a Support Case (Case ID 71912304) which after some discussion came to
the "conclusion" that we should not use /etc/reboot for rebooting.
This leads me
/p...@0,0/pci10de,a...@16/pci11c1,5...@0/u...@00303c02e014fc9d/d...@0,0
When I scrub data, the devices c12t0d0, c13t0d0 and c14t0d0 re accessed and
c15t0d0 sleeps. I don't get it! How can such a mess happen and how do I get it
back straight?
Regards,
Martin
_
, is my hardware configuration worthless?
Regards,
Martin
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
I already got my files back acctuay and the disc contains already new pools, so
i have no idea how it was set.
I have to make a virtualbox installation and test it.
Can you please tell me how-to set the failmode?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
I have no idea why this forum just makes files dissapear??? I will put a link
tomorrow...a file was attached before...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailm
I encountered the same problem...like i sed in the first post...zpool command
freezes. Anyone knows how to make it respond again?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolari
You might want to check out this thread:
http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=435420
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discu
The links work fine if you take the * off from the end...sorry bout that
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
I forgot to add the script
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
zfs_revert.py
Description: Binary data
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
I have written an python script that enables to get back already deleted files
and pools/partitions. This is highly experimental, but I managed to get back a
moths work when all the partitions were deleted by accident(and of course
backups are for the weak ;-)
I hope someone can pass this info
Did anyone reply to this question?
We have the same issue and our Windows admins do see why the iSCSI target
should be disconnected when the underlying storage is extended
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-dis
Bob wrote:
> Perhaps the problem is one of educating the customer
> so that they can
> ammend their accounting practices. Different
> business groups can
> share the same pool if necessary.
Bob, while I don't mean to pick on you, that statement captures a major
thinking flaw in IT when it com
richard wrote:
> Preface: yes, shrink will be cool. But we've been
> running highly
> available,
> mission critical datacenters for more than 50 years
> without shrink being
> widely available.
I would debate that. I remember batch windows and downtime delaying one's
career movement. Today w
C,
I appreciate the feedback and like you, do not wish to start a side rant, but
rather understand this, because it is completely counter to my experience.
Allow me to respond based on my anecdotal experience.
> What's wrong with make a new pool.. safely copy the data. verify data
> and then de
> You are the 2nd customer I've ever heard of to use shrink.
This attitude seems to be a common theme in ZFS discussions: "No enterprise
uses shrink, only grow."
Maybe. The enterprise I work for requires that every change be reversible and
repeatable. Every change requires a backout plan and
> With RAID-Z stripes can be of variable width meaning that, say, a
> single row
> in a 4+2 configuration might have two stripes of 1+2. In other words,
> there
> might not be enough space in the new parity device.
Wow -- I totally missed that scenario. Excellent point.
> I did write up the
> s
> Enterprises will not care about ease so much as they
> have dedicated professionals to pamper their arrays.
Enterprises can afford the professionals. I work for a fairly large bank which
can, and does, afford a dedicated storage team.
On the other hand, no enterprise can afford downtime. Whe
> I don't see much similarity between mirroring and raidz other than
> that they both support redundancy.
A single parity device against a single data device is, in essence, mirroring.
For all intents and purposes, raid and mirroring with this configuration are
one and the same.
> A RAID syste
> Don't hear about triple-parity RAID that often:
I agree completely. In fact, I have wondered (probably in these forums), why
we don't bite the bullet and make a generic raidzN, where N is any number >=0.
In fact, get rid of mirroring, because it clearly is a variant of raidz with
two devices
o know that it works ok :)
[1] http://www.sansdigital.com/towerraid/tr8mb.html
cheers,
/Martin
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
> Did anyone ever have success with this?
> I'm trying to add a usb flash device as rpool cache, and am hitting the same
> problem,
> even after working through the SMI/EFI label and other issues above.
I played with adding a USB stick as L2ARC a few versions ago of SXCE, pre 104.
At the time,
that he's
working on better recovery from inconsistent filesystems. I guess that's
something I should wait for.
--
Martin Blom --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eccl 1:18 http://martin.blom.org/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptograp
hile transferring the old content and when attaching the
third drive; what I'm worried about is if I'm risking it more than usual
when the procedure is done?
--
Martin Blom --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eccl 1:18
l
complains that the moved disk is part of an active zpool and -f didn't
help at all.
Any input would be greatly appreciated!
--
Martin Blom --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Eccl 1:18 http://martin.blom.org/
smime.p7s
Descriptio
systems. "
>
> Which is it? It works or it doesn't?
Solaris 10 for Sparc doesn't have a driver for the SATA chipset on this card.
It is listed as verified for Sparc Solaris because the USB and FireWire ports
will work on Sparc systems.
--
Martin Winkelman
> When I attempt again to import using zdb -e ztank
> I still get zdb: can't open ztank: I/O error
> and zpool import -f, whilst it starts and seems to
> access the disks sequentially, it stops al the 3rd
> one (no sure which precisely - it spins it up and the
> process stops right there, and the s
I will be out of the office starting 09/05/2008 and will not return until
09/08/2008.
I will respond to your message when I return.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains
information which may be legally confidential and/or privileged and
does not in any case represent a firm
I have created a zvol. My client computer (windows) has the volume connected
fine.
But when I resize the zvol using:
zfs set volsize=20G pool/volumes/v1
.. it disconnects the client. Is this by design?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs
Hi,
in which opensolaris (nevada) version this fix is included
thanks,
Martin
On 13 Aug, 2008, at 18:52, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
I see that a driver patch has now been released for marvell88sx
hardware. I expect that this is the patch that Thumper owners have
been anxiously waiting
I read this (http://blogs.sun.com/roch/entry/when_to_and_not_to) blog regarding
when and when not to use raidz. There is an example of a plain striped
configuration and a mirror configuration. (See below)
M refers to a 2-way mirror and S to a simple dynamic stripe.
Config Blocks Available
Hello! I'm new to ZFS and have some configuration questions.
What's the difference, performance wise, in below configurations?
* In the first configuration, can I loose 1 disk? And, are the disks striped to
gain performance, as they act as one vdev?
* In the second configuration, can I loose 2 d
I have a server with a huge number of datasets (around 9000)
When the pool containing the datasets is imported on boot up, a few (<10)
datasets are not mounted and thus not exported via nfs. Which dataset is not
mounted is random.
All datasets are exported via nfs. A zfs import takes around 30
According to PerterB in #opensolaris, I'd need NFS4 mirror-mounts for that.
I decided to instead just setup the automounter on the clients and put the
directories in the automount-map :)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss maili
Hi everyone,
after using Linux for 12 years, I now decided to give OpenSolaris a try, using
it as OS for my new home-filer.
I've created a zpool, and multiple zfs on there, two of those are
NAMEUSED AVAIL REFER
MOUNTPOINT
tank/data
Hi Mark,
Sharemgr output:
-bash-3.2# sharemgr show -vp
default nfs=()
smb smb=()
zfs
zfs/rpool/export smb=()
export=/export
zfs/store/movies smb=()
Movies=/store/movies
zfs/store/overlord2 nfs=() smb=()
overlord2=/store/overlord2
zfs/store/tv smb=()
omething stupid somewhere?
Are sharesmb & sharenfs tied together somehow or can they be separated?
Cheers,
-Martin.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
12:51:07 2008
# eject unnamed_rmdisk
# mount |grep rmdisk
#
--
Martin Winkelman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 303-272-3122
http://www.sun.com/solarisready/
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
> umount: /rmdisk/unnamed_rmdisk not mounted
This disk is probably under volume manager control. Try running "eject
unnamed_rmdisk".
--
Martin Winkelman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 303-272-3122
http://www.sun.com/solarisready/
___
zfs-disc
Oh, it should say retryable and normal write errors - I have permanent
errors too
/Martin
On 2 apr 2008, at 00:55, Richard Elling wrote:
> Martin Englund wrote:
>> I've got a newly created zpool where I know (from the previous UFS)
>> that one of the disks has re
zpool online z2 c5t4d0
cheers,
/Martin
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
0 0 0
cheers,
/Martin
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
ONLINE 0 0 0
How do I get this back to normal?
cheers,
/Martin
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Bill Shannon wrote:
> Marty Itzkowitz wrote:
>> Interesting problem. I've used disk rattle as a measurement of io
>> activity before
>> there were such tools for measurement. It's crude, but effective.
>>
>> To answer your question: you could try er_kernel. It uses DTrace to
>> do statistical c
and when I re-created it, the duplicate disappeared...
# zpool destroy black
# zpool create -f newblack c5t0d0
# zpool export newblack
# zpool import
pool: newblack
id: 5325813934475784040
state: ONLINE
action: The pool can be imported using its name or numeric identifier.
config:
I used a usb stick, and the first time I used it, I used something similar to
zpool create black c5t0d0p0 # ie with the "p0" pseudo partition
and used it happily for some while.
Some weeks later, I wanted to use the stick again, starting afresh, but this
time used
zpool create black c5t0d0 # ie
Regarding the following that I also hit, see
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=180995
and if any further details or tests are required, I would be happy to assist.
> 3/ Problem with DMA under Xen ... e.g. my areca raid cards works
> perfect on a 8GB box without xen but because
I set /etc/system's zfs:zfs_arc_max = 0x1000 and it seems better now.
I had previously tried setting it to 2Gb rather than 256Mb as above without
success... I should have tried much lower!
It "seems" that when I perform I/O though a WindowsXP hvm, I get a "reasonable"
I/O rate, but I'm not
IIn this PC, I'm using the PCI card
http://www.intel.com/network/connectivity/products/pro1000gt_desktop_adapter.htm
, but, more recentlyI'm using the PCI Express card
http://www.intel.com/network/connectivity/products/pro1000pt_desktop_adapter.htm
Note that the latter didn't have PXE and the b
Well, I've tried the latest OpenSolaris snv_76 release, and it displays the
same symptoms.
(so b66-0624-xen, 75a and 76 all have the same problem)
But, the good news is that is behaves well if there is only 2Gb of memory in
the system.
So, in summary
The command time dd if=/dev/zero of=myfile.
kugutsum
I tried with just 4Gb in the system, and the same issue. I'll try 2Gb
tomorrow and see if any better.(ps, how did you determine that was the
problem in your case)
cheers
Martin
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
e later, a single "dd if=/dev/zero
of=myfile bs=16k count=15" would. So I guess this latter case is a mostly
write pattern to the disk, especially after it is noted that the command
returns after around 5 seconds, leaving the rest buffered in memory.
best regards
Martin
This
> The behaviour of ZFS might vary between invocations, but I don't think that
> is related to xVM. Can you get the results to vary when just booting under
> "bare metal"?
It's pretty consistently displays the behaviors of good IO (approx 60Mb/s -
80Mb/s) for about 10-20 seconds, then always drops
shows 22 records with an IO rate of around
80M, then 209 records of 2.5M (pretty consistent), then the final 11 records
climbing to 2.82, 3.29, 3.05, 3.32, 3.17, 3.20, 3.33, 4.41, 5.44, 8.11
regards
Martin
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_
Hello
I've got Solaris Express Community Edition build 75 (75a) installed on an Asus
P5K-E/WiFI-AP (ip35/ICH9R based) board. CPU=Q6700, RAM=8Gb, disk=Samsung
HD501LJ and (older) Maxtor 6H500F0.
When the O/S is running on bare metal, ie no xVM/Xen hypervisor, then
everything is fine.
When it'
that, reported? being worked on?
> -Wade
thanx,
Martin
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Menno Lageman wrote:
> Martin Man wrote:
>>
>> I insert the stick, and how can I figure out what poools are available
>> for 'zpool import' without knowing their name?
>>
>> zpool list does not seem to be listing those,
>>
>
> A plain '
Hi all,
again might be a FAQ, but imagine that I have a pool on USB stick,
I insert the stick, and how can I figure out what poools are available
for 'zpool import' without knowing their name?
zpool list does not seem to be listing those,
tha
way...
it might be a faq or known problem, but it's rather dangerous, is this
being worked ON? usb stick removal should not panic the kernel, should it?
thanx,
Martin
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolari
> Quoth Steven Sim on Thu, May 17, 2007 at 09:55:37AM
> +0800:
> >Gurus;
> >I am exceedingly impressed by the ZFS although
> it is my humble opinion
> >that Sun is not doing enough evangelizing for
> it.
>
> What else do you think we should be doing?
>
>
> David
I'll jump in here.
are multiple postings about Drobo on the web, including:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/04/09/drobo-the-worlds-first-storage-robot/
---8<---
cheers,
/Martin
--
Martin Englund, Java Security Engineer, Java SE, Sun Microsystems Inc.
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Time Zone: GMT+2 PGP: 1024D/AA514677
"
Hi,
I have a zpool with only one disk. No mirror.
I have some data in the file system.
Is it possible to make my zpool redundant by adding a new disk in the pool
and making it a mirror with the initial disk?
If yes, how?
Thanks
Martin
This message posted from opensolaris.org
> Jeremy Teo wrote:
> > On the issue of the ability to remove a device from
> a zpool, how
> > useful/pressing is this feature? Or is this more
> along the line of
> > "nice to have"?
>
> This is a pretty high priority. We are working on
> it.
Good news! Where is the discussion on the best appr
> Hello Kyle,
>
> Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 5:33:12 PM, you wrote:
>
> KM> Remember though that it's been mathematically
> figured that the
> KM> disadvantages to RaidZ start to show up after 9
> or 10 drives. (That's
>
> Well, nothing like this was proved and definitely not
> mathematicall
> I agree for non enterprise users the expansion of
> raidz vdevs is a critical missing feature.
Now you've got me curious. I'm not trying to be inflammatory here, but how is
online expansion a non-enterprise feature? From my perspective, enterprise
users are the ones most likely to keep legac
> I want to setup a ZFS server with RAID-Z. Right now
> I have 3 disks. In 6 months, I want to add a 4th
> drive and still have everything under RAID-Z without
> a backup/wipe/restore scenario. Is this possible?
I am trying to figure out how to code this right now, as I see it being one of
mos
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
