Re: Debian/kFreeBSD vs linux jail?
Hi! Joshua Isom writes: > Considering Debian's ported the "standard Linux userland" to the > FreeBSD kernel, I'm wondering if it's possible/practical to use Debian > inside of a jail instead of a Linux CentOS jail, which has been > documented. I know some applications are linux specific, but are they > really linux specific or gnu specific? I'm going to retry getting a > printer driver working with cups that had issues with FreeBSD in the > past, but I don't know if it's FreeBSD userland or FreeBSD kernel that > caused the quirks. Has anyone tried using Debian's kFreeBSD userland > inside a jail? Is it just pointless on a FreeBSD system? If it is a free software CUPS driver, chances are it is a GNU thing and Debian GNU/kFreeBSD might work for you. For all the proprietary stuff (say flash, acrobat, ..) Debian GNU/kFreeBSD usually is worse of than either GNU/Linux or pure FreeBSD systems (because no comercial vendor ever builds for this platform). Christoph ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Debian/kFreeBSD vs linux jail?
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 19:50:40 -0500 Joshua Isom wrote: > Considering Debian's ported the "standard Linux userland" to the FreeBSD > kernel, I'm wondering if it's possible/practical to use Debian inside of > a jail instead of a Linux CentOS jail, which has been documented. I > know some applications are linux specific, but are they really linux > specific or gnu specific? I'm going to retry getting a printer driver > working with cups that had issues with FreeBSD in the past, but I don't > know if it's FreeBSD userland or FreeBSD kernel that caused the quirks. > Has anyone tried using Debian's kFreeBSD userland inside a jail? Is > it just pointless on a FreeBSD system? A bit old tutorial (2011) about this topic http://blog.vx.sk/archives/22-Updated-Tutorial-Debian-GNUkFreeBSD-in-a-FreeBSD-jail.html --- --- Eduardo Morras ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [ZFS] recover destroyed zpool - what are the available options?
04.04.2013 19:26, Beeblebrox: test them with `zdb -l device`. When the output would be correct - you guessed your slice! LABEL 1 version: 28 name: 'bsdr' state: 2 txg: 10 pool_guid: 12018916494219117471 hostid: 2193536600 hostname: 'mfsbsd' top_guid: 17860002997423999070 guid: 17860002997423999070 vdev_children: 1 vdev_tree: type: 'disk' id: 0 guid: 17860002997423999070 path: '/dev/ad6p2' phys_path: '/dev/ad6p2' whole_disk: 1 metaslab_array: 30 metaslab_shift: 31 ashift: 9 asize: 287855869952 is_log: 0 create_txg: 4 Do you mean that in this case 'asize 287855869952' is what I should look at? But 287855869952 /1024 /1024 /2 => 137.260GB is far smaller than I recall the geom part to be... I can't has the math. But looking at ashift I can guess your disk should be 287855869952/2**9 == 562218496. Is this one right? Actually if you see all 4 labels correctly you can try to proceed as ZFS would guess the correct disk size anyway. -- Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[ZFS] recover destroyed zpool - what are the available options?
>>Actually if you see all 4 labels correctly you can try to proceed as ZFS would guess the correct disk size anyway. I should clarify: # zdb -l /dev/ada0p2 => all 4 LABELS visible and correct (zpool name: bsdr) # zdb -l /dev/ada0p1 => all 4 LABELS visible and correct (zpool name: asp) # zdb -l /dev/ada0 => only LABEL #2 visible (this is an OLDER zpool with GUID 5853256800575798014, also named bsdr, the pool was whole-disk-as-raw) This is the gpt table + partitions as I re-created them immediately after the gpt delete. It looks like I have re-created the gpt partitions correctly... I don't understand what you mean by "you can try to proceed"? # zpool import -D -f -R /bsdr -N -F -n -X bsdr cannot import 'bsdr': a pool with that name already exists. use the form 'zpool import ' to give it a new name -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/ZFS-recover-destroyed-zpool-what-are-the-available-options-tp5800299p5801716.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Regarding zfs send / receive
sounds like a good idea, I might look into that, thnx. Terje: zpool.cache is only 860 bytes, I don't think that should cause any problems (?) -- -- Joar Jegleim Homepage: http://cosmicb.no Linkedin: http://no.linkedin.com/in/joarjegleim fb: http://www.facebook.com/joar.jegleim AKA: CosmicB @Freenode -- On 5 April 2013 02:52, Waitman Gobble wrote: > Waitman Gobble > San Jose California USA > > On Apr 4, 2013 2:07 PM, "Joar Jegleim" wrote: > > > > Hi Terje ! > > sorry for late reply, I've been checking my mail, forgetting that all my > > mailing list mail are sorted into their own folders skipping inbox :p > > > > the zfs sync setup is a huge advantage over rsync simply because > > incremental rsync of the volume takes ~12 hours, while the zfs > differential > > snapshot's usually take less than a minute . Though it's only ~1TB of > data, > > it's more than 2 million jpegs which rsync have to stat ... > > I'm guessing my predecessor who chose this setup, over for instance HAST, > > didn't feel confident enough regarding HAST in production ( I'm looking > > into that for a future solution) . > > > > There's no legacy stuff on the receiving end, old pools are deleted for > > every sync. I haven't got my script here but google pointed me too > > https://github.com/hoopty/zfs-sync/blob/master/zfs-sync which look like > a > > script very similar to the one I'm using . > > In fact, I'm gonna take a closer look at that script and see what differs > > from my script (apart from it being much prettier :p ) > > I didn't know about zpool.cache, gonna check that tomorrow, thanks. > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > Joar > > Jegleim > > Homepage: http://cosmicb.no > > Linkedin: http://no.linkedin.com/in/joarjegleim > > fb: http://www.facebook.com/joar.jegleim > > AKA: CosmicB @Freenode > > > > -- > > > > On 2 April 2013 14:40, Terje Elde wrote: > > > > > On 2. apr. 2013, at 13.44, Joar Jegleim wrote: > > > > So my question(s) to the list would be: > > > > In my setup have I taken the use case for zfs send / receive too far > > > > (?) as in, it's not meant for this kind of syncing and this often, so > > > > there's actually nothing 'wrong'. > > > > > > I'm not sure if you've taken it too far, but I'm not entirely sure if > > > you're getting any advantage over using rsync or similar for this kind > of > > > thing. > > > > > > First two things that spring to mind: > > > > > > Do you have any legacy stuff on the receiving machine? Things like > > > physically removed old zpools, that are still in zpool.cache, seems to > slow > > > down various operations, including creation of new stuffs (such as the > > > snapshots you receive). > > > > > > Also, you don't mention if you're deleting old snapshots on the > receiving > > > end? If you're doing an incremental run every 15 minutes, that's > something > > > like 3000 snapshots pr. month, pr. filesystem. > > > > > > Terje > > > > > > > > > > hi, > i have a similar situation. its better to only rsync new stuff in this > case, because you should know when somebody ads something new. > > for example, a user uploads 200 new images, these are marked 'to sync' and > are transferred to the other servers. letting rsync figure out what's new > just isnt practical. > > an idea, works for me. hope it helps. > > Waitman Gobble > San Jose California ___ > > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [ZFS] recover destroyed zpool - what are the available options?
05.04.2013 11:54, Beeblebrox: Actually if you see all 4 labels correctly you can try to proceed as ZFS would guess the correct disk size anyway. I should clarify: # zdb -l /dev/ada0p2 => all 4 LABELS visible and correct (zpool name: bsdr) # zdb -l /dev/ada0p1 => all 4 LABELS visible and correct (zpool name: asp) # zdb -l /dev/ada0 => only LABEL #2 visible (this is an OLDER zpool with GUID 5853256800575798014, also named bsdr, the pool was whole-disk-as-raw) This is the gpt table + partitions as I re-created them immediately after the gpt delete. It looks like I have re-created the gpt partitions correctly... I don't understand what you mean by "you can try to proceed"? # zpool import -D -f -R /bsdr -N -F -n -X bsdr cannot import 'bsdr': a pool with that name already exists. use the form 'zpool import ' to give it a new name Ok, let's check a few things: zpool import zpool import -D From your previous mails I saw that pool bsdr is FAULTED but not deleted. If the system would list bsdr on `zpool import` you should remove -D from the command. -- Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[ZFS] recover destroyed zpool - what are the available options?
Thank you for your help Volodymyr, 1. ZPOOL LIST shows that the pool is listed NAMESIZE ALLOC FREECAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT bsdr - - - - - FAULTED - tank0 49.8G 13.3G 36.5G26% 1.00x ONLINE - 2. ZPOOL IMPORT => no pools available to import 3. zpool import -D -f -R /bsdr -N -F -n -X bsdr => Gives error because of condition (#1) 4. ZPOOL IMPORT -D shows 2 BSDR pools: A) config: bsdr UNAVAIL insufficient replicas 5853256800575798014 UNAVAIL cannot open (THIS IS NOT THE POOL I WANT - THIS ONE IS OLDER POOL, WHOLE-DISK-RAW) B) config: bsdrUNAVAIL insufficient replicas 17860002997423999070 UNAVAIL cannot open (THIS SHOULD BE THE POOL I NEED, BUT LOOK AT PROBLEM IN #5) 5. ZPOOL STATUS -V BSDR shows different guid!! config: bsdrUNAVAIL 0 0 0 12606749387939346898 UNAVAIL 0 0 0 was /dev/ada0p2 (THIS GUID DOES NOT MATCH THE GUID OF 4-B) It is normal in my opinion that the guid should not match, but that is why I cannot import pool 4-B. I must either delete the BSDR POOL that is shown as "on-line", or import 4-B with another name I think. Thanks and Regards. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/ZFS-recover-destroyed-zpool-what-are-the-available-options-tp5800299p5801734.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[ZFS] recover destroyed zpool - what are the available options?
I think I might have a better understanding of the situation. 'zpool status' and 'zdb -C' commands both show bsdr properties as: pool_guid: 17852168552651762162 children[0]: \ type: 'disk' \ guid: 12606749387939346898 Whereas 'zpool import -D' and 'zdb -l' commands give the bsdr properties as: pool_guid: 12018916494219117471 vdev_tree: \ type: 'disk \ top_guid: 17860002997423999070 Since the LABEL info on the HDD is the more relevant data, I should be using the output of zdb -l, and disregard the pool that shows itself as "already imported - albeit faulted". I therefore plan to import the bsdr pool with a newname and should run the import command as: zpool import -D -f -R /bsdr -N -F -n -X 12018916494219117471 newname Any objections? We must also keep in mind that '-D' flag is showing TWO deleted bsdr pools, so I must use the unique ID. Please let me know if I should go ahead and run above command. Thanks and Regards. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/ZFS-recover-destroyed-zpool-what-are-the-available-options-tp5800299p5801834.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[ZFS] recover destroyed zpool - what are the available options?
Sadly, the command I ran did nothing - no error message, no output, no result: # zpool import -D -f -R /bsdr -N -F -n -X 12018916494219117471 newname -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/ZFS-recover-destroyed-zpool-what-are-the-available-options-tp5800299p5801851.html Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
