Hello,
I have the follwowing message:
# ./arcstat.pl 1
time read miss miss% dmis dm% pmis pm% mmis mm% arcsz c
Use of uninitialized value in division (/) at ./arcstat.pl line 262.
Use of uninitialized value in division (/) at ./arcstat.pl line 263.
Use of uninitialized value in d
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 01:40:03PM -0800, Brad wrote:
> "This doesn't make sense to me. You've got 32 GB, why not use it?
> Artificially limiting the memory use to 20 GB seems like a waste of
> good money."
>
> I'm having a hard time convincing the dbas to increase the size of the SGA to
> 20GB b
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 05:42:31AM -0700, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I like the new feature but I was thinking that maybe the keywords being used
> should be different?
>
> Currently it is:
>
> # zfs set logbias=latency {dataset}
> # zfs set logbias=throughput {dataset}
>
> Maybe it wou
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 12:33:52PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> > Now, the good filter could be to use MAGIC numbers within files or
> > approach btrfs come up with, or maybe even both combined.
>
> You are suggesting that ZFS should detect a GIF or
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:30:04AM +0100, Tim Foster wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 12:07 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:43:51AM +0200, Nils Goroll wrote:
>
> > Storage Checkpoints in Veritas software has this feature (removing
> > the oldest checkpoint in case of 1
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:43:51AM +0200, Nils Goroll wrote:
> > Before re-inventing the wheel, does anyone have any nice shell script to do
> > this
> > kind of thing (to be executed from cron)?
>
> http://blogs.sun.com/timf/entry/zfs_automatic_snapshots_0_10
> http://blogs.sun.com/timf/entry/z
Hello,
I have just done comparison of all the above filesystems
using the latest filebench. If you are interested:
http://przemol.blogspot.com/2008/02/zfs-vs-vxfs-vs-ufs-on-x4500-thumper.html
Regards
przemol
--
http://przemol.blogspot.com/
On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at 07:26:27PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> Some of us are still using Solaris 10 since it is the version of
> Solaris released and supported by Sun. The 'filebench' software from
> SourceForge does not seem to install or work on Solaris 10.
> [...]
I am not sure if you
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 10:21:44PM -0800, Jonathan Loran wrote:
>
> Hi List,
>
> I'm wondering if one of you expert DTrace guru's can help me. I want to
> write a DTrace script to print out a a histogram of how long IO requests
> sit in the service queue. I can output the results with the qua
bash-3.00# cat /etc/release
Solaris 10 8/07 s10x_u4wos_12b X86
Copyright 2007 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Use is subject to license terms.
Assembled 16 August 2007
(with all the latest patches)
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 11:40:13AM -0800, eric kustarz wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> przemol, did you set the recordsize to 8KB?
Yes. It is mentioned in the legend on the right side of the chart.
> What are the server's specs? (memory, CPU)
Memory: 24GB
CPU:8 x UltraSPARC-III+ 900 MHz
> Which vers
On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:02:43PM -0800, Tim Cook wrote:
> what firmware revision are you at?
Revision: 415G
Regards
przemol
--
http://przemol.blogspot.com/
--
A co by bylo, gdybys to TY rzadzil?
Kliknij
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 02:05:13PM -0800, Brendan Gregg - Sun Microsystems
wrote:
>
> I'd recommend running filebench for filesystem benchmarks, and see what
> the results are:
>
> http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/FileBench
>
> Filebench is able to purge the ZFS cache (expor
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 01:20:24PM -0600, eric kustarz wrote:
>
> On Oct 2, 2007, at 1:11 PM, David Runyon wrote:
>
> > We are using MySQL, and love the idea of using zfs for this. We
> > are used to using Direct I/O to bypass file system caching (let the
> > DB do this). Does this exist fo
On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 09:32:02AM +0200, Louwtjie Burger wrote:
> http://blogs.sun.com/realneel/entry/zfs_and_databases
>
> http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/tnb/parameters.jsp
>
> http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/tnb/applications_oracle.jsp
>
> Be careful with long running single qu
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 12:30:32PM -0700, Richard Elling wrote:
> Magesh R wrote:
> > We are looking at the alternatives to VXVM/VXFS. One of the feature
> > which we liked in Veritas, apart from the obvious ones is the
> > ability to call the disks by name and group them in to a disk group.
> >
>
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 09:34:22AM +0100, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello przemolicc,
>
> Monday, March 12, 2007, 8:50:57 AM, you wrote:
>
> ppf> On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 12:08:22AM +0100, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> >> Hello Carisdad,
> >>
> >>
On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 12:08:22AM +0100, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello Carisdad,
>
> Friday, March 9, 2007, 7:05:02 PM, you wrote:
>
> C> I have a setup with a T2000 SAN attached to 90 500GB SATA drives
> C> presented as individual luns to the host. We will be sending mostly
> C> large stre
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 08:29:04PM +1100, Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 27/02/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 12:21:50PM -0700, Jason J. W. Williams wrote:
> >> Hi Przemol,
> >>
> >> I think Casper had a good point bringing up the data integrity
> >> features
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 12:21:50PM -0700, Jason J. W. Williams wrote:
> Hi Przemol,
>
> I think Casper had a good point bringing up the data integrity
> features when using ZFS for RAID. Big companies do a lot of things
> "just because that's the certified way" that end up biting them in the
> rea
On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 04:43:34PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >I cannot let you say that.
> >Here in my company we are very interested in ZFS, but we do not care
> >about the RAID/mirror features, because we already have a SAN with
> >RAID-5 disks, and dual fabric connection to the hosts.
On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 06:55:39PM +0800, 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"?
If you think "remove a device from a zpool" = "to shrink a pool" then
it is really u
Ulrich,
in his e-mail Robert mentioned _two_ things regarding ZFS:
[1] ability to detect errors (checksums)
[2] using ZFS didn't caused data lost so far
I completely agree that [1] is wonderful and this is huge advantage. And you
also underlined [1] in you e-mail !
The _only_ thing I mentioned is
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 04:45:34PM +0100, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello Shawn,
>
> Thursday, December 21, 2006, 4:28:39 PM, you wrote:
>
> SJ> All,
>
> SJ> I understand that ZFS gives you more error correction when using
> SJ> two LUNS from a SAN. But, does it provide you with less features
>
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 02:08:34PM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:
> Also, "save-early-save-often" results in a version explosion, as does
> auto-save in the app. While this may indeed mean that you have all of
> your changes around, figuring out which version has them can be
> massively time-consu
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 11:57:36AM -0700, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 01:14:23AM -0600, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC
> >wrote:
> >>But I would dearly like to have a versioning capability.
> >
> >Me too.
> >Example (real life scenario): there is a samb
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 01:14:23AM -0600, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
>
> But I would dearly like to have a versioning capability.
Me too.
Example (real life scenario): there is a samba server for about 200
concurrent connected users. They keep mainly doc/xls files on the
server. From tim
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 08:37:23AM -0700, Neelakanth Nadgir wrote:
> We did an experiment where we placed the logs on UFS+DIO and the
> rest on ZFS. This was a write heavy benchmark. We did not see
> much gain in performance by doing that (around 5%). I suspect
> you would be willing to trade 5% fo
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 03:38:05PM +0200, Roch wrote:
>
>
> http://blogs.sun.com/roch/entry/zfs_and_oltp
After reading this page and taking into consideration my (not so big) knowledge
of ZFS it came to my mind that putting e.g. Oracle on both UFS+DIO _and_
ZFS would be the best solution _
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 11:05:07AM -0400, Krzys wrote:
> Hello folks, is there any way to get timestamps when doing "zpool iostat 1"
> for example?
>
> Well I did run zpool iostat 60 starting last night and I got some loads
> indicating along the way but without a time stamps I cant figure out a
On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 09:41:58AM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Richard, when I talk about cheap JBOD I think about home users/small
> >servers/small companies. I guess you can sell 100 X4500 and at the same
> >time 1000 (or even more) cheap JBODs to the small compani
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 12:14:20PM -0700, Richard Elling - PAE wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >This is the case where I don't understand Sun's politics at all: Sun
> >doesn't offer really cheap JBOD which can be bought just for ZFS. And
> >don't even tell me about 3310/3320 JBODs - they are ho
On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 01:59:53AM -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
> > My question is how efficient will ZFS be, given that
> > it will be layered on top of the hardware RAID and
> > write cache?
>
> ZFS delivers best performance when used standalone, directly on entire disks.
> By using ZFS on top of a
On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 01:21:25PM -0600, Cindy Swearingen wrote:
> Hi Neal,
>
> The ZFS administration class, available in the fall, I think, covers
> basically the same content as the ZFS admin guide only with extensive
> lab exercises.
You could not give any ZFS class and advertise it as: "ZFS
On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 06:52:17PM +0200, Daniel Rock wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >Does anybody use Oracle on ZFS in production (but not as a
> >background/testing database but as a front line) ?
[ ... ]
Robert and Daniel,
How did you put oracle on ZFS:
- one zpool+
Hi all,
Does anybody use Oracle on ZFS in production (but not as a
background/testing database but as a front line) ?
I am interesting especially in:
- how does it behave after a long time of using it. Becasue COW nature
of ZFS I don't know how it influences performance of queries.
- general opi
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 06:15:08AM -0700, Tony Galway wrote:
> A question (well lets make it 3 really) ??? Is vdbench a useful tool when
> testing file system performance of a ZFS file system? Secondly - is ZFS write
> performance really much worse than UFS or VxFS? and Third - what is a good
>
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 05:25:11PM -0700, Peter Looyenga wrote:
> I looked into backing up ZFS and quite honostly I can't say I am convinced
> about its usefullness here when compared to the traditional ufsdump/restore.
> While snapshots are nice they can never substitute offline backups. And
>
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 11:33:28AM -0500, Tao Chen wrote:
> On 8/8/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Hello,
> >
> >Solaris 10 GA + latest recommended patches:
> >
> >while runing dtrace:
> >
> >bash-3.00# dtrace -n 'io:::start [EMAIL PROTECTED], args[2]->fi_pathname] =
> >coun
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 04:47:51PM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello przemolicc,
>
> Tuesday, August 8, 2006, 3:54:26 PM, you wrote:
>
> ppf> Hello,
>
> ppf> Solaris 10 GA + latest recommended patches:
>
> ppf> while runing dtrace:
>
> pp
Hello,
Solaris 10 GA + latest recommended patches:
while runing dtrace:
bash-3.00# dtrace -n 'io:::start [EMAIL PROTECTED], args[2]->fi_pathname] =
count();}'
...
vim
/zones/obsdb3/root/opt/sfw/bin/vim 296
tnslsnr
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 05:07:35PM +0800, Darren Reed wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >Hello,
> >
> >because creating/using filesystems in ZFS becoms "cheap" it is useful now
> >to create/organize filesystems in hierarchy:
> >
> >bash-3.00# zfs list
> >NAME USED AVAIL REF
Hello,
because creating/using filesystems in ZFS becoms "cheap" it is useful now
to create/organize filesystems in hierarchy:
bash-3.00# zfs list
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
dns-pool 136K 43.1G 25.5K /dns-pool
dns-pool/zones 50K 43.1G 25.5K /
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 11:59:29AM +0800, Raymond Xiong wrote:
> It doesn't. Page 11 of the following slides illustrates how COW
> works in ZFS:
>
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/docs/zfs_last.pdf
>
> "Blocks containing active data are never overwritten in place;
> instead, a new bl
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 10:01:15AM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello przemolicc,
>
> Thursday, June 29, 2006, 8:01:26 AM, you wrote:
>
> ppf> On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 03:30:28PM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> >> ppf> What I wanted to point out is th
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 03:30:28PM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> ppf> What I wanted to point out is the Al's example: he wrote about damaged
> data. Data
> ppf> were damaged by firmware _not_ disk surface ! In such case ZFS doesn't
> help. ZFS can
> ppf> detect (and repair) errors on disk surf
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 09:30:25AM -0400, Jeff Victor wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 02:23:32PM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> >
> >What I wanted to point out is the Al's example: he wrote about damaged
> >data. Data
> >were damaged by firmware _not_ disk surface !
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 02:23:32PM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello przemolicc,
>
> Wednesday, June 28, 2006, 10:57:17 AM, you wrote:
>
> ppf> On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 04:16:13PM -0500, Al Hopper wrote:
> >> Case in point, there was a gentleman who posted
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 04:16:13PM -0500, Al Hopper wrote:
> Case in point, there was a gentleman who posted on the Yahoo Groups solx86
> list and described how faulty firmware on a Hitach HDS system damaged a
> bunch of data. The HDS system moves disk blocks around, between one disk
> and another
49 matches
Mail list logo
