Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS: clarification on meaning of the autoreplace propert

2010-03-17 Thread Dave Johnson
> Hi Dave, > > I'm unclear about the autoreplace behavior with one > spare that is > connected to two pools. I don't see how it could work > if the autoreplace > property is enabled on both pools, which formats and > replaces a spare Because I already partitioned the disk into slices. Then I ind

[zfs-discuss] ZFS: clarification on meaning of the autoreplace property

2010-03-17 Thread Dave Johnson
>From pages 29,83,86,90 and 284 of the 10/09 Solaris ZFS Administration guide, it sounds like a disk designated as a hot spare will: 1. Automatically take the place of a bad drive when needed 2. The spare will automatically be detached back to the spare pool when a new device is inserted and bro

Re: [zfs-discuss] 3ware support

2008-02-19 Thread Dave Johnson
Nice putrid spew of FUD regarding 3Ware cards. Regarding the SuperMicro 8-port SATA PCI-X card, yes, that is a good recommendation. -=dave - Original Message - From: Rob Windsor To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 12:39 PM Subject: Re: [zfs-discu

Re: [zfs-discuss] HAMMER

2007-11-06 Thread Dave Johnson
again i say (eventually) some "zfs sendndmp" type of mechanism seems the right way to go here *shrug* -=dave > Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 05:54:15 -0800> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] HAMMER> > Peter > Tribble wrote: > > I'm not worried ab

Re: [zfs-discuss] HAMMER

2007-10-17 Thread Dave Johnson
; codebase somewhere. thoughts (on either c9n and/or 'zfs send ndmp') ? -=dave - Original Message - From: "Robert Milkowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Dave Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "roland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent:

Re: [zfs-discuss] HAMMER

2007-10-16 Thread Dave Johnson
you mean c9n ? ;) does anyone actually *use* compression ? i'd like to see a poll on how many people are using (or would use) compression on production systems that are larger than your little department catch-all dumping ground server. i mean, unless you had some NDMP interface directly to Z

Re: [zfs-discuss] Direct I/O ability with zfs?

2007-10-05 Thread Dave Johnson
From: "Anton B. Rang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For many databases, most of the I/O is writes (reads wind up > cached in memory). 2 words: table scan -=dave ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listin

Re: [zfs-discuss] Need Help Choosing a Rackmount Chassis

2007-09-29 Thread Dave Johnson
While the density is only 3 drives per AT slot vs. 3.33 for the 5-drive Addonics or Supermicro units, the build quality is slightly better than the Addonics (as good as the Supermicro) and the convenience factor is superb as no tray mounting and unmounting is required: http://www.startech.com/P

Re: [zfs-discuss] New zfs pr0n server :)))

2007-09-07 Thread Dave Johnson
the up/down/up/down/... scenario should give the best results in minimizing accumulative rotation vibration. -=dave - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Dave Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Christopher Gibbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;

Re: [zfs-discuss] New zfs pr0n server :)))

2007-09-07 Thread Dave Johnson
Yes, if you have any MFM/RLL drives in your possession, please disregard my recomendation ;) -=dave - Original Message - From: "Paul Kraus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 5:31 AM Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] New zfs pr0n server :))) > On 9

Re: [zfs-discuss] New zfs pr0n server :)))

2007-09-06 Thread Dave Johnson
Agreed ! However, you may be able to lower the sound ever so slightly more by staggering the drives so that every other one is upside down, spinning the opposite direction and thus minimizing accumulative rotational vibration. I had to make a makeshift temporary server when our NAS gateway devi

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Compression algorithms - Project Proposal

2007-07-09 Thread dave johnson
"Richard Elling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dave Johnson wrote: >> "roland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >> > >> > there is also no filesystem based approach in >> compressing/decompressing a

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Compression algorithms - Project Proposal

2007-07-08 Thread Dave Johnson
"roland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > there is also no filesystem based approach in compressing/decompressing a > > whole filesystem. you can have 499gb of data on a 500gb partition - and if > > you need some more space you would think turning on compression on that fs > > would solve your pro

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs space efficiency

2007-07-08 Thread Dave Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:>> -=dave wrote:> > one other thing... the checksums for all files to send *could* be checked first in batch and known unique blocks prioritized and sent first, then the possibly duplicative data sent afterwards to be verified a dupe, thereby decreasing the possible data

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs space efficiency

2007-06-24 Thread dave johnson
How other storage systems do it is by calculating a hash value for said file (or block), storing that value in a db, then checking every new file (or block) commit against the db for a match and if found, replace file (or block) with duplicate entry in db. The most common non-proprietary hash

Re: [zfs-discuss] Holding disks for home servers

2007-06-08 Thread dave johnson
I only see 15 disks in your CM stacker. I designed and built a system for work with the CMStacker and relocated the power and IO panel from the top slot to the side cover (where the spot for a small fan is) and it works great. A single Seasonic 600AS powers the entire system nicely with PF of