Joachim Pihl wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:11:33 +0100, MC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> I didn't expect miracles, but since WinRAR gave 13% compression
>> ZFS doesn't compress a block if it can't get a certain amount of return
>> on it.
>>
>> Since the default compression is less effective
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:11:33 +0100, MC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I didn't expect miracles, but since WinRAR gave 13% compression
>
> ZFS doesn't compress a block if it can't get a certain amount of return
> on it.
>
> Since the default compression is less effective than RAR, you can bet
>
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:39:40 +0100, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not create a sample dataset and throw some large .txt files out there
> and see what happens? That way you'll know for certain if there's some
> bug
> you're hitting, or if it's just not applicable to your current dataset.
Why not create a sample dataset and throw some large .txt files out there
and see what happens? That way you'll know for certain if there's some bug
you're hitting, or if it's just not applicable to your current dataset.
On 1/27/08, Joachim Pihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Jan 200
> I didn't expect miracles, but since WinRAR gave 13% compression
ZFS doesn't compress a block if it can't get a certain amount of return on it.
Since the default compression is less effective than RAR, you can bet ZFS is
seeing much less than 13% return.
I expect everything is working proper
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 23:33:16 +0100, Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26-Jan-08, at 2:24 AM, Joachim Pihl wrote:
>> So far so good, "zfs get all" reports compression to be active. Now for
>> the problem: After adding another 300GB of uncompressed .tif and
>> .bin/.cue
>> (audio CD) fil
On Jan 26, 2008, at 3:24 AM, Joachim Pihl wrote:
> So far so good, "zfs get all" reports compression to be active. Now
> for
> the problem: After adding another 300GB of uncompressed .tif
> and .bin/.cue
> (audio CD) files, compression ratio is still at 1.00, indicating
> that no
> compressi
On 26-Jan-08, at 2:24 AM, Joachim Pihl wrote:
> Running SXDE (snv_70) for a file server, and I must admit I'm new to
> Solaris and zfs. zfs does not appear to do any compression at all,
> here is
> what I did to set it up:
>
> I created a four drive raidz array:
>
> zpool create pool raidz c0d0
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 15:20:01 +0100, Rob Logan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it won't go back and compress old data, but if you copy
> the files, perhaps into a new folder, they will be
> compressed on that copy or move.
I can't see why that should help, since the 300GB I added after enabling
co
Running SXDE (snv_70) for a file server, and I must admit I'm new to
Solaris and zfs. zfs does not appear to do any compression at all, here is
what I did to set it up:
I created a four drive raidz array:
zpool create pool raidz c0d0 c0d1 c1d0 c1d1
then an extra file system on that:
zfs cre
10 matches
Mail list logo