> > So if you get such a board be sure to avoid Samsung 750GB and
> > 1TB disks. Samsung never aknowledged the bug, nor have they released
> > a firmware update. And nVidia never said anything about it either.
[...]
> I'm a Hitachi disk user myself, and they work swell. The Seagates I have
> in
Volker A. Brandt wrote:
The MCP55 is the chipset currently in use in the Sun X2200 M2 series of
servers.
... which has big problems with certain Samsung SATA disks. :-(
So if you get such a board be sure to avoid Samsung 750GB and
1TB disks. Samsung never aknowledged the bug, nor have th
> The MCP55 is the chipset currently in use in the Sun X2200 M2 series of
> servers.
... which has big problems with certain Samsung SATA disks. :-(
So if you get such a board be sure to avoid Samsung 750GB and
1TB disks. Samsung never aknowledged the bug, nor have they released
a firmware updat
Simon Breden wrote:
Miles, thanks for helping clear up the confusion surrounding this subject!
My decision is now as above: for my existing NAS to leave the pool as-is, and
seek a 2+ SATA port card for the 2-drive mirror for 2 x 30GB SATA boot SSDs
that I want to add.
For the next NAS build l
Simon Breden wrote:
I think the confusion is because the 1068 can do "hardware" RAID, it
can and does write its own labels, as well as reserve space for replacements
of disks with slightly different sizes. But that is only one mode of
operation.
So, it sounds like if I use a 1068-based d
OK, thanks James.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:11:04 -0700 (PDT)
Simon Breden wrote:
> That sounds even better :)
>
> So what's the procedure to create a zpool using the 1068?
same as any other device:
# zpool create poolname vdev vdev vdev
> Also, any special 'tricks /tips' / commands required for using a 1068-ba
That sounds even better :)
So what's the procedure to create a zpool using the 1068?
Also, any special 'tricks /tips' / commands required for using a 1068-based
SAS/SATA device?
Simon
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailin
On Fri, Jun 26 at 8:55, James C. McPherson wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Simon Breden wrote:
> I think the confusion is because the 1068 can do "hardware" RAID,
> it can and does write its own labels, as well as reserve space
> for replacements of disks with slightly differe
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Simon Breden wrote:
> > I think the confusion is because the 1068 can do "hardware" RAID, it
> can and does write its own labels, as well as reserve space for replacements
> of disks with slightly different sizes. But that is only one mode of
> operation.
> I think the confusion is because the 1068 can do "hardware" RAID, it
can and does write its own labels, as well as reserve space for replacements
of disks with slightly different sizes. But that is only one mode of
operation.
So, it sounds like if I use a 1068-based device, and I *don't* want i
Miles, thanks for helping clear up the confusion surrounding this subject!
My decision is now as above: for my existing NAS to leave the pool as-is, and
seek a 2+ SATA port card for the 2-drive mirror for 2 x 30GB SATA boot SSDs
that I want to add.
For the next NAS build later on this summer, I
Miles Nordin wrote:
"sb" == Simon Breden writes:
sb> The situation regarding lack of open source drivers for these
sb> LSI 1068/1078-based cards is quite scary.
meh I dunno. The amount of confusion is a little scary, I guess.
sb> And did I understand you correctly w
> "sb" == Simon Breden writes:
sb> The situation regarding lack of open source drivers for these
sb> LSI 1068/1078-based cards is quite scary.
meh I dunno. The amount of confusion is a little scary, I guess.
sb> And did I understand you correctly when you say that these LSI
The situation regarding lack of open source drivers for these LSI
1068/1078-based cards is quite scary.
And did I understand you correctly when you say that these LSI 1068/1078
drivers write labels to drives, meaning you can't move drives from an LSI
controlled array to another arbitrary array
> "jl" == James Lever writes:
jl> I thought they were both closed source
yes, both are closed source / proprietary. If you are really confused
and not just trying to pick a dictionary fight, I can start saying
``closed source / proprietary'' on Solaris lists from now on.
On Linux list
Miles Nordin wrote:
There's also been talk of two tools, MegaCli and lsiutil, which are
both binary only and exist for both Linux and Solaris, and I think are
used only with the 1078 cards but maybe not.
lsiutil works with LSI chips that use the Fusion-MPT interface (SCSI,
SAS, and FC), inclu
On 25/06/2009, at 5:16 AM, Miles Nordin wrote:
and mpt is the 1068 driver, proprietary, works on x86 and SPARC.
then there is also itmpt, the third-party-downloadable closed-source
driver from LSI Logic, dunno much about it but someone here used it.
I'm confused. Why do you say the mpt dr
> "jr" == Jacob Ritorto writes:
jr> I think this is the board that shipped in the original
jr> T2000 machines before they began putting the sas/sata onboard:
jr> LSISAS3080X-R
jr> Can anyone verify this?
can't verify but FWIW i fucked it up:
I thought the L
I think this is the board that shipped in the original T2000 machines
before they began putting the sas/sata onboard: LSISAS3080X-R
Can anyone verify this?
Justin Stringfellow wrote:
Richard Elling wrote:
Miles Nordin wrote:
"ave" == Andre van Eyssen writes:
"et" == Erik Trimble writes
Richard Elling wrote:
Miles Nordin wrote:
"ave" == Andre van Eyssen writes:
"et" == Erik Trimble writes:
"ea" == Erik Ableson writes:
"edm" == "Eric D. Mudama" writes:
ave> The LSI SAS controllers with SATA ports work nicely with
ave> SPARC.
I think what you mean is ``s
> "vab" == Volker A Brandt writes:
>> I thought the LSI 1068 do not work with SPARC (mfi driver, x86
>> only). I thought the 1078 are supposed to work with SPARC
>> (mega_sas).
vab> uname -a SunOS shelob 5.10
vab> Generic_137111-02 sun4v sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-T1000
vab>
Miles Nordin wrote:
"ave" == Andre van Eyssen writes:
"et" == Erik Trimble writes:
"ea" == Erik Ableson writes:
"edm" == "Eric D. Mudama" writes:
ave> The LSI SAS controllers with SATA ports work nicely with
ave> SPARC.
I think what you mean is ``some LSI SAS controllers
> I thought the LSI 1068 do not work with SPARC (mfi driver, x86 only).
> I thought the 1078 are supposed to work with SPARC (mega_sas).
Hmmm
uname -a
SunOS shelob 5.10 Generic_137111-02 sun4v sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-T1000
man mpt
Devices mpt(
> "ave" == Andre van Eyssen writes:
> "et" == Erik Trimble writes:
> "ea" == Erik Ableson writes:
> "edm" == "Eric D. Mudama" writes:
ave> The LSI SAS controllers with SATA ports work nicely with
ave> SPARC.
I think what you mean is ``some LSI SAS controllers work nicely
Volker A. Brandt schrieb:
2) disks that were attached once leave a stale /dev/dsk entry behind
that takes full 7 seconds to stat() with kernel running at 100%.
>>> Such entries should go away with an invocation of "devfsadm -vC".
>>> If they don't, it's a bug IMHO.
>> yes, they go away. B
> >> 2) disks that were attached once leave a stale /dev/dsk entry behind
> >> that takes full 7 seconds to stat() with kernel running at 100%.
> >
> > Such entries should go away with an invocation of "devfsadm -vC".
> > If they don't, it's a bug IMHO.
>
> yes, they go away. But the problem is wh
Volker A. Brandt schrieb:
>> 2) disks that were attached once leave a stale /dev/dsk entry behind
>> that takes full 7 seconds to stat() with kernel running at 100%.
>
> Such entries should go away with an invocation of "devfsadm -vC".
> If they don't, it's a bug IMHO.
>
>
> Regards -- Volker
y
> 2) disks that were attached once leave a stale /dev/dsk entry behind
> that takes full 7 seconds to stat() with kernel running at 100%.
Such entries should go away with an invocation of "devfsadm -vC".
If they don't, it's a bug IMHO.
Regards -- Volker
--
--
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Thomas Maier-Komor wrote:
1) Once the disks spin down due to idleness it can become impossible to
reactivate them without doing a full reboot (i.e. hot plugging won't help)
That's a good point - I don't think a second goes by without at least a
little I/O on those disks,
Andre van Eyssen schrieb:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009, Jacob Ritorto wrote:
>
>> Is there a card for OpenSolaris 2009.06 SPARC that will do SATA
>> correctly yet? Need it for a super cheapie, low expectations,
>> SunBlade 100 filer, so I think it has to be notched for 5v PCI slot,
>> iirc. I'm OK with
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009, Jacob Ritorto wrote:
Is there a card for OpenSolaris 2009.06 SPARC that will do SATA
correctly yet? Need it for a super cheapie, low expectations, SunBlade
100 filer, so I think it has to be notched for 5v PCI slot, iirc. I'm OK
with slow -- main goals here are power savi
Is there a card for OpenSolaris 2009.06 SPARC that will do SATA correctly yet?
Need it for a super cheapie, low expectations, SunBlade 100 filer, so I think
it has to be notched for 5v PCI slot, iirc. I'm OK with slow -- main goals here
are power saving (sleep all 4 disks) and 1TB+ space. Oh,
33 matches
Mail list logo
