Re: [zfs-discuss] free space function

2008-11-13 Thread Pramod Batni
On 11/13/08 12:27, kavita wrote: > when and how is fop_space function called? > What is the system call trace? Actually wanted to get the flow of system > calls generated for the function call zfs_space. Have traced it back till > fop_space(or vop_space?) > Can anyone please explain? > VOP_

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS scalability in terms of file system count (or lack thereof) in S10U6

2008-10-24 Thread Pramod Batni
> I would greatly appreciate it if you could open the bug, I don't have an > opensolaris bugzilla account yet and you'd probably put better technical > details in it anyway :). If you do, could you please let me know the bug# > so I can refer to it once S10U6 is out and I confirm it has the same >

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS scalability in terms of file system count (or lack thereof) in S10U6

2008-10-23 Thread Pramod Batni
On 10/23/08 08:19, Paul B. Henson wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Pramod Batni wrote: Why does creating a new ZFS filesystem require enumerating all existing ones? This is to determine if any of the filesystems in the dataset are mounted. Ok, that leads to another question

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS scalability in terms of file system count (or lack thereof) in S10U6

2008-10-21 Thread Pramod Batni
On 10/21/08 04:52, Paul B. Henson wrote: On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Pramod Batni wrote: Yes, the implementation of the above ioctl walks the list of mounted filesystems 'vfslist' [in this case it walks 5000 nodes of a linked list before the ioctl returns] This in-kernel traver

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS scalability in terms of file system count (or lack thereof) in S10U6

2008-10-20 Thread Pramod Batni
Paul B. Henson wrote: > > > At about 5000 filesystems, it starts taking over 30 seconds to > create/delete additional filesystems. > > At 7848, over a minute: > > # time zfs create export/user/test > > real1m22.950s > user1m12.268s > sys 0m10.184s > > I did a little experiment with t

Re: [zfs-discuss] [Fwd: Re: ZSF Solaris]

2008-10-08 Thread Pramod Batni
Jens Elkner wrote: On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 11:35:47AM +0530, Pramod Batni wrote: The reason why the (implicit) truncation could be taking long might be due to 6723423 [6]UFS slow following large file deletion with fix for 6513858 installed To overcome this problem

Re: [zfs-discuss] [Fwd: Re: ZSF Solaris]

2008-10-06 Thread Pramod Batni
Jens Elkner wrote: On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 08:01:39PM +0530, Pramod Batni wrote: On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 09:44:21PM -0500, Al Hopper wrote: This behavior is common to tmpfs, UFS and I tested it on early ZFS releases. I have no idea why - I have not made the time to figure it out

Re: [zfs-discuss] [Fwd: Re: ZSF Solaris]

2008-10-06 Thread Pramod Batni
Original Message Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] ZSF Solaris Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 07:21:56 +0200 From: Jens Elkner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: [zfs-discuss] UC Davis Cyrus Incident September 2007

2007-10-18 Thread Pramod Batni
> > What's the command to show cross calls? > mpstat(1M) example o/p $ mpstat 1 CPU minf mjf xcal intr ithr csw icsw migr smtx srw syscl usr sys wt idl 0 16 0 0 416 316 485 16 0 0 0 618 7 3 0 90 0 6 0 0 425 324 488 2 0 0 0 579 4 2 0 94 ___ zfs-disc

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

2006-07-06 Thread Pramod Batni
Darren J Moffat wrote: Steven Sim wrote: Casper; Does this mean it would be a good practice to say increase the amount of memory and/or swap space we usually recommend if the customer intends to use ZFS very heavily? ZFS doesn't necessarily use more memory (physical or virtual) than UFS