Re: [zfs-discuss] surprisingly poor performance

[Roch]

roland writes:
 > >SSDs with capacitor-backed write caches
 > >seem to be fastest.
 > 
 > how to distinguish them from ssd`s without one?
 > i never saw this explicitly mentioned in the specs.


They probably don't have one then (or they should fire their
entire marketing dept).

Capacitors allows the device to function safely with
write cache enabled even while ignoring the cache flushes being
sent by ZFS. If the device firmware is not setup to ignore
the flushes, better make sure that sd.conf is setup to not
send them otherwise one looses the benefit.

Setting up sd.conf in ZFS Evil tuning guide :

http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide#How_to_Tune_Cache_Sync_Handling_Per_Storage_Device

-r

 > -- 
 > This message posted from opensolaris.org
 > ___
 > zfs-discuss mailing list
 > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
 > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz

[Darren J Moffat]

C. Bergström wrote:

glidic anthony wrote:
thanks but if it's experimental i prefer don't use. My server was use 
to an nfs share for an esxi so i prefer it was stable.
But i thnik the best way it's to add an other hdd to make the install 
and make my raidz with this 3 disks
  

Do you really consider OpenSolaris production ready?


Why not ?  You can by support for it from Sun ?
Why is OpenSolaris any less production ready than Fedora or CentOS or 
some other Linux distro ?


> After grub loads
the kernel image what bugs/regressions can it include?  You may want to 
consider many things before discarding options or not realize fully what 
you're getting into.


The main issue I see is that the OpenSolaris distributions don't know 
anything about grub2 they only know about the version of grub included 
in the distro.  This is really important for updating the menu when 
creating new boot environments.  Especially since the menu format of 
grub2 is different to the grub 0.97 that OpenSolaris currently uses.


--
Darren J Moffat
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] resizing zpools by growing LUN

[Sascha]

Hi Darren,

thanks for your quick answer.

> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 09:35:53AM -0700, Sascha
> wrote:
> > Then creating a zpool:
> > zpool create -m /zones/huhctmp huhctmppool
> c6t6001438002A5435A0001005Ad0
> > 
> > zpool list
> > NAME  SIZE   USED  AVAILCAP  HEALTH
>  ALTROOT
>  huhctmppool  59.5G   103K  59.5G 0%  ONLINE  -
> I recall your original question was about a larger
> disk (>1TB).

It wasn't me, I just have the same problem... ;-)

>  My assumption is that the zpool create has created an
> EFI label here, but
> it would be nice to confirm with 'format' or
> 'prtvtoc' output.

confirmed, it's really an EFI Label. (see below)

   format> label
   [0] SMI Label
   [1] EFI Label
   Specify Label type[1]: 0
   Warning: This disk has an EFI label. Changing to SMI label will erase all
   current partitions.

BTW: Is there a smarter way to find out what Label is in place ?

> [skipping ahead]
> 
> > format> type
> > 
> My fear is that with a small disk and not running
> 'format -e' it's
> placed an SMI label on the disk.  Again, confirming
> that would be nice.
> The label in this section must match the label in the
> first section.  If
> they're both EFI, you should be good.  If it put an
> SMI label on, the
> data won't line up.  If that's all that's wrong, you
> can repeat this
> step on your lun and should still be good.  
> 
> (use 'format -e' and when labeling it should prompt
> you for the label
> type).
> 
> > And in the end trying to import:
> > zpool import huhctmppool
> 
> Hmm, you've skipped the partitioning step (which
> should be done after
> applying the new label). 

Yes I skipped it, because I had no choice to choose the whole size.
There was only partition 0 and 8.
Even if select 0, delete the slice and newly errect it, it has the same size.
Also the number of disk sectors did not change and slice 8 has still it's 
starting cylinder at the "old" end of the disk (See below)

  format> label
  [0] SMI Label
  [1] EFI Label
  Specify Label type[1]:
  Ready to label disk, continue? yes
  
 partition> p
 Current partition table (original):
 Total disk sectors available: 146784222 + 16384 (reserved sectors)

 Part  TagFlag First Sector Size Last Sector
   0usrwm   256   69.99GB  146784222
   1 unassignedwm 0   0   0
   2 unassignedwm 0   0   0
   3 unassignedwm 0   0   0
   4 unassignedwm 0   0   0
   5 unassignedwm 0   0   0
   6 unassignedwm 0   0   0
   7 unassignedwm 0   0   0
   8   reservedwm 1467842238.00MB  146800606



> I would make sure that
> slice 0 encompasses the
> full 70G.  Basically, make the partitioning here look
> like it used to,
> but with more data in the slice.

I would like to, but how ?

> So
> #1.  Confirm you have EFI labels before and after
> running format

Ok, I can comfirm that.

> #2.  Partition the disk after the label to look like
> it used to (but
>  with a larger slice)

Well, that dosn't seem to work :-(

Sascha

> Darren
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discu
> ss
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] resizing zpools by growing LUN

[Sascha]

Darren, I want to give you a short overview of what I tried:

1.
created a zpool on a LUN
resized the LUN on the EVA
exported the zpool
used format -e and label
tried to enlarge slice 0 -> impossible  (see posting above)

2. 
Same like 1. but exported the zpool before resizing on the EVA
Same result...

3.
Created a zpool on a LUN
exported the LUN
resized the LUN on the EVA
relabled the LUN with EFI Label
made an auto-reconfigure
The partition tool showed the correct size and number of cylinders
Unfortunatly, I could not import the zpool (no zpool definded)

4. 
Tried several variations of 3., but ended always up with no zpool during import.

Sascha
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] zpool import -f rpool hangs

[Vladimir Novakovic]

I had the rpool with two sata disks in the miror. Solaris 10 5.10
Generic_141415-08 i86pc i386 i86pc

Unfortunately the first disk with grub loader has failed with unrecoverable
block write/read errors.

Now I have the problem to import rpool after the first disk has failed.

So I decided to do: "zpool import -f rpool" only with second disk, but it's
hangs and the system is rebooting.

I have tried to import to the fresh Solaris 10 05/09, also I've tried
Solaris CD in single user mode and OpenSolaris 2009.11 live CD but all
systems are panic and restarting.

I can see that pool is existing. Labels are readable from both disks.

What can I do to check and to recover data from the second disk.

I have few equal disks that I can use to make a clone of the second disk.

Would it be possible to do it with dd command and than try to use this clone
to find out how to recover from this situation?


Regards,
Vladimir
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz

[glidic anthony]

Yes i think to make an nfs server opensolaris it's good in particular for zfs 
raidz.
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool import -f rpool hangs

[HUGE | David Stahl]

I wonder if one prob is that you already have an rpool when you are booted of 
the CD.
  could you do 
zpool import rpool rpool2
to rename?

also if system keeps rebooting on crash you could add these to your /etc/system 
 (but not if you are booting from disk)
set zfs:zfs_recover=1 
set aok=1 

that solved a import/reboot loop I had a few months


-Original Message-
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org on behalf of Vladimir Novakovic
Sent: Wed 8/12/2009 8:49 AM
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: [zfs-discuss] zpool import -f rpool hangs
 
I had the rpool with two sata disks in the miror. Solaris 10 5.10
Generic_141415-08 i86pc i386 i86pc

Unfortunately the first disk with grub loader has failed with unrecoverable
block write/read errors.

Now I have the problem to import rpool after the first disk has failed.

So I decided to do: "zpool import -f rpool" only with second disk, but it's
hangs and the system is rebooting.

I have tried to import to the fresh Solaris 10 05/09, also I've tried
Solaris CD in single user mode and OpenSolaris 2009.11 live CD but all
systems are panic and restarting.

I can see that pool is existing. Labels are readable from both disks.

What can I do to check and to recover data from the second disk.

I have few equal disks that I can use to make a clone of the second disk.

Would it be possible to do it with dd command and than try to use this clone
to find out how to recover from this situation?


Regards,
Vladimir

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Pool iscsi /zfs performance in opensolaris 0906

[Stephen Green]

Stephen Green wrote:
I'll let you know 
how it works out.  Suggestions as to pre/post installation IO tests 
welcome.


The installation went off without a hitch (modulo a bad few seconds 
after reboot.)  Story here:


http://blogs.sun.com/searchguy/entry/homebrew_hybrid_storage_pool

I've got one problem that I need to deal with, but I'm going to put that 
in a separate thread.


Steve
--
Stephen Green  //   stephen.gr...@sun.com
Principal Investigator \\   http://blogs.sun.com/searchguy
Advanced Search Technologies Group //   Voice: +1 781-442-0926
Sun Microsystems Labs  \\   Fax:   +1 781-442-1692
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs fragmentation

[Ed Spencer]

I don't know of any reason why we can't turn 1 backup job per filesystem
into say, up to say , 26 based on the cyrus file and directory
structure.

The cyrus file and directory structure is designed with users located
under the directories A,B,C,D,etc to deal with the millions of little
files issue at the  filesystem layer.

Our backups will have to be changed to use this design feature.
There will be a little work on the front end  to create the jobs but
once done the full backups should finish in a couple of hours.

As an aside, we are currently upgrading our backup server to a sun4v
machine.
This architecture is well suited to run more jobs in parallel.
 
Thanx for all your help and advice.

Ed

On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 22:47, Mike Gerdts wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Ed Spencer wrote:
> > We backup 2 filesystems on tuesday, 2 filesystems on thursday, and 2 on
> > saturday. We backup to disk and then clone to tape. Our backup people
> > can only handle doing 2 filesystems per night.
> >
> > Creating more filesystems to increase the parallelism of our backup is
> > one solution but its a major redesign of the of the mail system.
> 
> What is magical about a 1:1 mapping of backup job to file system?
> According to the Networker manual[1], a save set in Networker can be
> configured to back up certain directories.  According to some random
> documentation about Cyrus[2], mail boxes fall under a pretty
> predictable hierarchy.
> 
> 1. http://oregonstate.edu/net/services/backups/clients/7_4/admin7_4.pdf
> 2. http://nakedape.cc/info/Cyrus-IMAP-HOWTO/components.html
> 
> Assuming that the way that your mailboxes get hashed fall into a
> structure like $fs/b/bigbird and $fs/g/grover (and not just
> $fs/bigbird and $fs/grover), you should be able to set a save set per
> top level directory or per group of a few directories.  That is,
> create a save set for $fs/a, $fs/b, etc. or $fs/a - $fs/d, $fs/e -
> $fs/h, etc.  If you are able to create many smaller save sets and turn
> the parallelism up you should be able to drive more throughput.
> 
> I wouldn't get too worried about ensuring that they all start at the
> same time[3], but it would probably make sense to prioritize the
> larger ones so that they start early and the smaller ones can fill in
> the parallelism gaps as the longer-running ones finish.
> 
> 3. That is, there is sometimes benefit in having many more jobs to run
> than you have concurrent streams.  This avoids having one save set
> that finishes long after all the others because of poorly balanced
> save sets.
> 
> -- 
> Mike Gerdts
> http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/
-- 
Ed 


___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] Copy a ZFS volume to external storage?

[Stephen Green]

I've been using a ZFS volume exported via iscsi as a Time Machine drive 
for my Mac Book.  After a reboot last night (after installing an SSD as 
ZIL for a pool), the Mac can't see the volume.  I think some combination 
of the iscsi target shutdown and the Mac's backup behavior has left the 
volume in a bad state (from the Mac file system point of view.)


The Mac can mount newly created iscsi volumes, but the problem appears 
to be that the Mac can't fsck the ZFS volume over iscsi (at least, it 
doesn't appear from the logs that it's trying to.)


I'd really like to not lose that backup data, so I'm wondering:

1) What's the best way to get that volume out onto an external drive 
that I can plug into the Mac?  Just dd the /dev/zvol out to the external 
drive?

2) How do I re-import the volume once fsck has worked?

I guess the other alternative is to clone one of the volume's snapshots 
from a time the backup was working and then see if that can be mounted.


Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Steve
--
Stephen Green  //   stephen.gr...@sun.com
Principal Investigator \\   http://blogs.sun.com/searchguy
Advanced Search Technologies Group //   Voice: +1 781-442-0926
Sun Microsystems Labs  \\   Fax:   +1 781-442-1692
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool import -f rpool hangs

[Vladimir Novakovic]

Hi David,

thank for a tip. but I could't use just "zpool import rpool" because it
always said that pool is already used by other system, than I could only try
with a force switch "-f".

Under Solaris 10 that I'm using now to recover this rpool I have rpool named
as mypool01 it should not collide with a affected rpool that I want to
recover and import or?

So, "zpool import rpool rpool2" should only rename and import the pool with
a new name? I'm wondering if I need to use -f to force it that I do not lose
or damage something if "zpool import -f rpool rpool2" hangs again.

Anyway, I will try this that you've suggested with settings in the
/etc/system and to mount using zpool import -f -R /mnt rpool

Do you know is there anyway to make the safe clone of affected disk?

Regards,
Vladimir


On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:24 PM, HUGE | David Stahl wrote:

>  I wonder if one prob is that you already have an rpool when you are
> booted of the CD.
>   could you do
> zpool import rpool rpool2
> to rename?
>
> also if system keeps rebooting on crash you could add these to your
> /etc/system  (but not if you are booting from disk)
> set zfs:zfs_recover=1
> set aok=1
>
> that solved a import/reboot loop I had a few months
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org on behalf of Vladimir Novakovic
> Sent: Wed 8/12/2009 8:49 AM
> To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Subject: [zfs-discuss] zpool import -f rpool hangs
>
> I had the rpool with two sata disks in the miror. Solaris 10 5.10
> Generic_141415-08 i86pc i386 i86pc
>
> Unfortunately the first disk with grub loader has failed with unrecoverable
> block write/read errors.
>
> Now I have the problem to import rpool after the first disk has failed.
>
> So I decided to do: "zpool import -f rpool" only with second disk, but it's
> hangs and the system is rebooting.
>
> I have tried to import to the fresh Solaris 10 05/09, also I've tried
> Solaris CD in single user mode and OpenSolaris 2009.11 live CD but all
> systems are panic and restarting.
>
> I can see that pool is existing. Labels are readable from both disks.
>
> What can I do to check and to recover data from the second disk.
>
> I have few equal disks that I can use to make a clone of the second disk.
>
> Would it be possible to do it with dd command and than try to use this
> clone
> to find out how to recover from this situation?
>
>
> Regards,
> Vladimir
>
>
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] NFS load balancing / was: ZFS, ESX , and NFS. oh my!

[Scott Meilicke]

Yes! That would be icing on the cake.
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] snapshots and open files

[Jon LaBadie]

On the Amanda backup mailing list, one poster said he was having a problem
using zfs snapshots as the source file-system for backups.

Gnutar is the actual archiving program in this case.

They said that files which were open on the active file system were still
listed as open in the snapshot.  This generates complaints from gnutar.

This surprised me.  I thought the zfs snapshot would be a static image
and I would not expect the snapshot to contain any information about
open files.  The snapshot should reflect the state of the data blocks,
either before the file opening, or including any written changes.

What am I missing?

Jon
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Live resize/grow of iscsi shared ZVOL

[Scott Meilicke]

My EqualLogic arrays do not disconnect when resizing volumes.

When I need to resize, on the Windows side I open the iSCSI control panel, and 
get ready to click the 'logon' button. I then resize the volume on the 
OpenSolaris box, and immediately after that is complete, on the Windows side, 
re-login to the target. Since the Windows initiator can tolerate brief 
disconnects, IO is not stopped or adversely affected, just paused for those few 
seconds. It works fine. Multi-path is a little more complicated as you would 
have to re-logon to all of your paths, but if you have at least one path 
active, you should be fine.

-Scott
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool import -f rpool hangs

[HUGE | David Stahl]

Make sure you reboot after adding that to /etc/system
for making a safe clone I know there must be other ways to do it, but you
could make a new zpool and do a zfs send/receive from old zvols to new ones.

zfs snapshot -r yourz...@snapshot
zfs send -R yourz...@snapshot | zfs recv -vFd yournewzvol


-- 
HUGE

David Stahl
Sr. Systems Administrator
718 233 9164 / F 718 625 5157

www.hugeinc.com 



From: Vladimir Novakovic 
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:45:11 +0200
To: zfs-discuss 
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool import -f rpool hangs

Hi David,

thank for a tip. but I could't use just "zpool import rpool" because it
always said that pool is already used by other system, than I could only try
with a force switch "-f".

Under Solaris 10 that I'm using now to recover this rpool I have rpool named
as mypool01 it should not collide with a affected rpool that I want to
recover and import or?

So, "zpool import rpool rpool2" should only rename and import the pool with
a new name? I'm wondering if I need to use -f to force it that I do not lose
or damage something if "zpool import -f rpool rpool2" hangs again.

Anyway, I will try this that you've suggested with settings in the
/etc/system and to mount using zpool import -f -R /mnt rpool

Do you know is there anyway to make the safe clone of affected disk?

Regards,
Vladimir


On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:24 PM, HUGE | David Stahl 
wrote:
> I wonder if one prob is that you already have an rpool when you are booted of
> the CD.
>   could you do
> zpool import rpool rpool2
> to rename?
> 
> also if system keeps rebooting on crash you could add these to your
> /etc/system  (but not if you are booting from disk)
> set zfs:zfs_recover=1
> set aok=1
> 
> that solved a import/reboot loop I had a few months
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org on behalf of Vladimir Novakovic
> Sent: Wed 8/12/2009 8:49 AM
> To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Subject: [zfs-discuss] zpool import -f rpool hangs
> 
> I had the rpool with two sata disks in the miror. Solaris 10 5.10
> Generic_141415-08 i86pc i386 i86pc
> 
> Unfortunately the first disk with grub loader has failed with unrecoverable
> block write/read errors.
> 
> Now I have the problem to import rpool after the first disk has failed.
> 
> So I decided to do: "zpool import -f rpool" only with second disk, but it's
> hangs and the system is rebooting.
> 
> I have tried to import to the fresh Solaris 10 05/09, also I've tried
> Solaris CD in single user mode and OpenSolaris 2009.11 live CD but all
> systems are panic and restarting.
> 
> I can see that pool is existing. Labels are readable from both disks.
> 
> What can I do to check and to recover data from the second disk.
> 
> I have few equal disks that I can use to make a clone of the second disk.
> 
> Would it be possible to do it with dd command and than try to use this clone
> to find out how to recover from this situation?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Vladimir
> 




___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs fragmentation

[Damjan Perenic]

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Richard
Elling wrote:
> On Aug 11, 2009, at 7:39 AM, Ed Spencer wrote:
>
>> I suspect that if we 'rsync' one of these filesystems to a second
>> server/pool  that we would also see a performance increase equal to what
>> we see on the development server. (I don't know how zfs send a receive
>> work so I don't know if it would address this "Filesystem Entropy" or
>> specifically reorganize the files and directories). However, when we
>> created a testfs filesystem in the zfs pool on the production server,
>> and copied data to it, we saw the same performance as the other
>> filesystems, in the same pool.
>
> Directory walkers, like NetBackup or rsync, will not scale well as
> the number of files increases.  It doesn't matter what file system you
> use, the scalability will look more-or-less similar. For millions of files,
> ZFS send/receive works much better.  More details are in my paper.

It would be nice if ZFS had something similar to VxFS File Change Log.
This feature is very useful for incremental backups and other
directory walkers, providing they support FCL.

Damjan
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] Procedure for Initial ZFS Replication to Remote Site by External HDD?

[Nathan Hudson-Crim]

What is the best way to use an external HDD for initial replication of a large 
ZFS filesystem?

System1 had filesystem; System2 needs to have a copy of filesystem.
Used send/recv on System1 to put filesys...@snap1 on connected external HDD.
Exported external HDD pool and connected/imported on System2; then used 
send/recv to copy it to System2.

Incremental send/recv from System1 for @snap1 to @snap2 fails.

Clearly I have failed to take some measure of preparation. Osol isn't 
recognizing that the destination filesystem is/should be the same as the source 
@snap1.

I didn't find this issue on the forums but I will continue searching.
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] resizing zpools by growing LUN

[A Darren Dunham]

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 04:53:20AM -0700, Sascha wrote:
> confirmed, it's really an EFI Label. (see below)
> 
>format> label
>[0] SMI Label
>[1] EFI Label
>Specify Label type[1]: 0
>Warning: This disk has an EFI label. Changing to SMI label will erase all
>current partitions.
> 
> BTW: Is there a smarter way to find out what Label is in place ?

Take a look at partitions.  If you have 0-7 or 0-15, you have an SMI
label.  If you have 0-6 and 8 (7 is skipped), then you have an EFI
label.

> > Hmm, you've skipped the partitioning step (which
> > should be done after
> > applying the new label). 
> 
> Yes I skipped it, because I had no choice to choose the whole size.
> There was only partition 0 and 8.
> Even if select 0, delete the slice and newly errect it, it has the same size.
> Also the number of disk sectors did not change and slice 8 has still it's 
> starting cylinder at the "old" end of the disk (See below)
> 
>   format> label
>   [0] SMI Label
>   [1] EFI Label
>   Specify Label type[1]:
>   Ready to label disk, continue? yes
>   
>  partition> p
>  Current partition table (original):
>  Total disk sectors available: 146784222 + 16384 (reserved sectors)
> 
>  Part  TagFlag First Sector Size Last Sector
>0usrwm   256   69.99GB  146784222

Okay, you had done that, you just hadn't confirmed that in the first
email.

Assuming the first sector is the same before and after, this should all
be correct.

Can you do zdb -l  after the resize?  Do you get any data?

-- 
Darren
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] file change long - was zfs fragmentation

[Mike Gerdts]

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Damjan
Perenic wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Richard
> Elling wrote:
>> On Aug 11, 2009, at 7:39 AM, Ed Spencer wrote:
>>
>>> I suspect that if we 'rsync' one of these filesystems to a second
>>> server/pool  that we would also see a performance increase equal to what
>>> we see on the development server. (I don't know how zfs send a receive
>>> work so I don't know if it would address this "Filesystem Entropy" or
>>> specifically reorganize the files and directories). However, when we
>>> created a testfs filesystem in the zfs pool on the production server,
>>> and copied data to it, we saw the same performance as the other
>>> filesystems, in the same pool.
>>
>> Directory walkers, like NetBackup or rsync, will not scale well as
>> the number of files increases.  It doesn't matter what file system you
>> use, the scalability will look more-or-less similar. For millions of files,
>> ZFS send/receive works much better.  More details are in my paper.
>
> It would be nice if ZFS had something similar to VxFS File Change Log.
> This feature is very useful for incremental backups and other
> directory walkers, providing they support FCL.

I think this tangent deserves its own thread.  :)

To save a trip to google...

http://sfdoccentral.symantec.com/sf/5.0MP3/linux/manpages/vxfs/man1m/fcladm.html

This functionality would come in very handy.  It would seem that it
isn't too big of a deal to identify the files that changed, as this
type of data is already presented via "zpool status -v" when
corruption is detected.

http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/gbctx?a=view

-- 
Mike Gerdts
http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] Can ZFS dynamically grow pool sizes? (re: Windows Home Server)

[John Klimek]

I'm a software developer with a little bit of experience in Linux but I've been 
wanting to build a fileserver and I've recently heard about ZFS.

Right now I'm considering Windows Home Server because I really don't need every 
file mirrored/backed-up but I do like what I heard about ZFS.

Anyways, if I have a bunch of different size disks (1.5 TB, 1.0 TB, 500 GB, 
etc), can I put them all into one big array and have data redundancy, etc?  
(RAID-Z?)

Can I also expand that array at any time?

One thing that I definitely want is one single network share (\\server\movies) 
that I can transfer files to and have ZFS figure out how to place them across 
my disks.  I'd then like to able to add any size disk to my server and expand 
that storage space.

Is this possible with ZFS?
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] SSD (SLC) for cache...

[Adam Leventhal]

My question is about SSD, and the differences between use SLC for  
readzillas instead of MLC.


Sun uses MLCs for Readzillas for their 7000 series. I would think  
that if SLCs (which are generally more expensive) were really  
needed, they would be used.


That's not entirely accurate. In the 7410 and 7310 today (the members  
of the Sun Storage 7000 series that support Readzilla) we use SLC  
SSDs. We're exploring the use of MLC.


Perhaps someone on the Fishworks team could give more details, but  
by going what I've read and seen, MLCs should be sufficient for the  
L2ARC. Save your money.



That's our assessment, but it's highly dependent on the specific  
characteristics of the MLC NAND itself, the SSD controller, and, of  
course, the workload.


Adam

--
Adam Leventhal, Fishworkshttp://blogs.sun.com/ahl

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Procedure for Initial ZFS Replication to Remote Site by External HDD?

[Nathan Hudson-Crim]

I figured out what I did wrong. The filesystem as received on the external HDD 
had multiple snapshots, but I failed to check for them. So I had created a 
snapshot in order to send/recv on System2. That doesn't work, obviously.

A new local send/recv of the filesystem's correct snapshot did the trick. Now 
System1 is replicating incrementals from San Diego to Seattle. Huzzah!
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can ZFS dynamically grow pool sizes? (re: Windows Home Server)

[Erik Trimble]

Take a look back through the mail archives for more discussion about 
this topic (expanding zpools). 


The short answers are:

John Klimek wrote:

I'm a software developer with a little bit of experience in Linux but I've been 
wanting to build a fileserver and I've recently heard about ZFS.

Right now I'm considering Windows Home Server because I really don't need every 
file mirrored/backed-up but I do like what I heard about ZFS.

Anyways, if I have a bunch of different size disks (1.5 TB, 1.0 TB, 500 GB, 
etc), can I put them all into one big array and have data redundancy, etc?  
(RAID-Z?)

  
Yes.  RAID-Z requires a minimum of 3 drives, and it can use different 
drives. Depending on the size differences, it will do the underlying 
layout in different ways.  Depending on the number and size of the 
disks, ZFS is likely the best bet for using the most total space.



Can I also expand that array at any time?

  
Not in the traditional "I'm adding 1 drive to a 3-disk RAIDZ to make it 
a 4-disk RAIDZ".   See the archives for how zpool expansion is done.

One thing that I definitely want is one single network share (\\server\movies) 
that I can transfer files to and have ZFS figure out how to place them across 
my disks.  I'd then like to able to add any size disk to my server and expand 
that storage space.

  
This is more a function of Samba (the sharing portion).  How the data is 
stored on disk is a function of any volume manager (ZFS included), and 
will be done automatically.

Is this possible with ZFS?
Not really. Adding random size disks in random amounts isn't optimal for 
ANY volume manager, not just ZFS. Due to the way raid sets are set up in 
a volume manager, you may or may not be able to use the entire new disk 
space, you may or may not be able to add it to the RAID volume at all, 
and/or you may or may not be able to migrate the existing RAID set to a 
different kind of RAID set (i.e. move a RAID5 to RAID6, etc.)   No 
current volume manager or hardware RAID card can do what you want - 
that's an incredibly difficult thing to ask.


ZFS works best with groups of identical disks, and can be expanded by 
adding groups of identical disks (not necessarily of the same size as 
the originals). 

Once again, please read the archives for more information about 
expanding zpools.



--
Erik Trimble
Java System Support
Mailstop:  usca22-123
Phone:  x17195
Santa Clara, CA

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can ZFS dynamically grow pool sizes? (re: Windows Home Server)

[Eric D. Mudama]

On Wed, Aug 12 at 12:11, Erik Trimble wrote:

Anyways, if I have a bunch of different size disks (1.5 TB, 1.0 TB,
500 GB, etc), can I put them all into one big array and have data
redundancy, etc?  (RAID-Z?)


Yes.  RAID-Z requires a minimum of 3 drives, and it can use
different drives. Depending on the size differences, it will do the
underlying layout in different ways.  Depending on the number and
size of the disks, ZFS is likely the best bet for using the most
total space.


I don't believe this is correct, as far as I understand it, RAID-Z
will use the lowest-common-denominator for sizing the overall array.
You'll get parity across all three drives, but it won't alter parity
schemes for different regions of the disks.

Best bet for a "throw a bunch of random disks in it and don't worry
about it" would probably be a Drobo.  Not smoking fast by any stretch,
but they appear to create an underlying parity scheme that can
maximize space without sacrificing the ability to survive any
single-disk failure.


Can I also expand that array at any time?


Not in the traditional "I'm adding 1 drive to a 3-disk RAIDZ to make
it a 4-disk RAIDZ".  See the archives for how zpool expansion is
done.


This is correct.  The smallest unit of easy pool expansion in ZFS is
adding vdev.  To have redundancy, mirrored vdevs use the fewest
physical devices, and you can add mirrored pairs to your pool quite
easily.  This is what we use on our server in this branch office.

--eric

--
Eric D. Mudama
edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] Question about mirror vdev performance considerations

[Charles Menser]

With four drives A,A,B,B where A is fast access and/or
high-throughput, and B is either slow to seek and/or has slower
transfer speed, what are the implications for mirrored ZFS pools?

In particular I am wondering how the IO performance will compare between:

zpool create mypool mirror A A mirror B B

and

zpool create mypool mirror A B mirror A B

and

zpool create mypool mirror A B mirror B A

Thanks,
Charles Menser
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs fragmentation

[Scott Lawson]

Ed Spencer wrote:

I don't know of any reason why we can't turn 1 backup job per filesystem
into say, up to say , 26 based on the cyrus file and directory
structure.
  
No reason whatsoever. Sometimes the more the better as per the rest of 
this thread. The key
here is to test and tweak till you get the optimal arrangement of backup 
window time and performance.


Performance tuning is a little bit of a Journey, that sooner or later 
has a final destination. ;)

The cyrus file and directory structure is designed with users located
under the directories A,B,C,D,etc to deal with the millions of little
files issue at the  filesystem layer.
  
The sun messaging server actually hashes the user names into a structure 
which looks quite similar
to a squid cache store. This has a top level of 128 directories, which 
each in turn contain 128 directories,
which then contain a folder for each user that has been mapped into that 
structure by the hash algorithm
on the user name. I use a wildcard mapping to split this into 16 
streams to cover the 0-9, a-f of the hexadecimal

directory structure names. eg. /mailstore1/users/0*

Our backups will have to be changed to use this design feature.
There will be a little work on the front end  to create the jobs but
once done the full backups should finish in a couple of hours.
  
The nice thing about this work is it really is only a one off 
configuration in the backup software
and then it is done. Certainly works a lot better than something like 
ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES

in Netbackup which effectively forks one backup thread per file system.

As an aside, we are currently upgrading our backup server to a sun4v
machine.
This architecture is well suited to run more jobs in parallel.
  
I use a T5220 with staging to a J4500 with 48 x 1 TB disks in a zpool 
with 6 file systems. This then gets streamed
to 6 LTO4 tape drives in a SL500 .Needless to say this supports a high 
degree of parallelism  and generally
finds the source server to be the bottleneck. I also take advantage of 
the 10 GigE capability
built straight into the Ultrasparc T2. Only major bottleneck in this 
system is the SAS interconnect to the J4500.
 
Thanx for all your help and advice.


Ed

On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 22:47, Mike Gerdts wrote:
  

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Ed Spencer wrote:


We backup 2 filesystems on tuesday, 2 filesystems on thursday, and 2 on
saturday. We backup to disk and then clone to tape. Our backup people
can only handle doing 2 filesystems per night.

Creating more filesystems to increase the parallelism of our backup is
one solution but its a major redesign of the of the mail system.
  

What is magical about a 1:1 mapping of backup job to file system?
According to the Networker manual[1], a save set in Networker can be
configured to back up certain directories.  According to some random
documentation about Cyrus[2], mail boxes fall under a pretty
predictable hierarchy.

1. http://oregonstate.edu/net/services/backups/clients/7_4/admin7_4.pdf
2. http://nakedape.cc/info/Cyrus-IMAP-HOWTO/components.html

Assuming that the way that your mailboxes get hashed fall into a
structure like $fs/b/bigbird and $fs/g/grover (and not just
$fs/bigbird and $fs/grover), you should be able to set a save set per
top level directory or per group of a few directories.  That is,
create a save set for $fs/a, $fs/b, etc. or $fs/a - $fs/d, $fs/e -
$fs/h, etc.  If you are able to create many smaller save sets and turn
the parallelism up you should be able to drive more throughput.

I wouldn't get too worried about ensuring that they all start at the
same time[3], but it would probably make sense to prioritize the
larger ones so that they start early and the smaller ones can fill in
the parallelism gaps as the longer-running ones finish.

3. That is, there is sometimes benefit in having many more jobs to run
than you have concurrent streams.  This avoids having one save set
that finishes long after all the others because of poorly balanced
save sets.


Couldn't agree more Mike.

--
Mike Gerdts
http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/



--
___


Scott Lawson
Systems Architect
Manukau Institute of Technology
Information Communication Technology Services Private Bag 94006 Manukau
City Auckland New Zealand

Phone  : +64 09 968 7611
Fax: +64 09 968 7641
Mobile : +64 27 568 7611

mailto:sc...@manukau.ac.nz

http://www.manukau.ac.nz




perl -e 'print
$i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(115),10);'

 


___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Question about mirror vdev performance considerations

[Richard Elling]

Your example is too simple :-)

On Aug 12, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Charles Menser wrote:


With four drives A,A,B,B where A is fast access and/or
high-throughput, and B is either slow to seek and/or has slower
transfer speed, what are the implications for mirrored ZFS pools?

In particular I am wondering how the IO performance will compare  
between:


zpool create mypool mirror A A mirror B B

and

zpool create mypool mirror A B mirror A B

and

zpool create mypool mirror A B mirror B A


Largely the same.  Think of it this way, the expected average latency
is a function of the probability (p) that an IOP would be serviced by  
the

fast disk.  Since you only have two types of disks and one RAID
configuration, the probability of an IOP being satisfied by a fast
disk is 50% any way you slice it.
  expected_latency = p * fast_latency + (p-1) * slow_latency

You'd need something more complex to change the expected
latency equation.

NB, ZFS does not currently schedule IOPS based on a preferred
side.  It may be relatively easy to implement, at least for a directed
preference, but I suspect it is low enough on the priority list that the
fastest way to get there is via the community.
 -- richard

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can ZFS dynamically grow pool sizes? (re: Windows Home Server)

[Erik Trimble]

Eric D. Mudama wrote:

On Wed, Aug 12 at 12:11, Erik Trimble wrote:

Anyways, if I have a bunch of different size disks (1.5 TB, 1.0 TB,
500 GB, etc), can I put them all into one big array and have data
redundancy, etc?  (RAID-Z?)


Yes.  RAID-Z requires a minimum of 3 drives, and it can use
different drives. Depending on the size differences, it will do the
underlying layout in different ways.  Depending on the number and
size of the disks, ZFS is likely the best bet for using the most
total space.


I don't believe this is correct, as far as I understand it, RAID-Z
will use the lowest-common-denominator for sizing the overall array.
You'll get parity across all three drives, but it won't alter parity
schemes for different regions of the disks.

Yes, if you stick (say) a 1.5TB, 1TB, and .5TB drive together in a 
RAIDZ, you will get only 1TB of usable space.   Of course, there is 
always the ability to use partitions instead of the whole disk, but I'm 
not going to go into that.  Suffice to say, RAIDZ (and practically all 
other RAID controllers, and volume managers) don't easily deal 
maximizing space with different size disks.


--
Erik Trimble
Java System Support
Mailstop:  usca22-123
Phone:  x17195
Santa Clara, CA

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can ZFS dynamically grow pool sizes? (re: Windows Home Server)

[Adam Sherman]

I believe you will get .5 TB in this example, no?

A.

--  
Adam Sherman

+1.613.797.6819

On 2009-08-12, at 16:44, Erik Trimble  wrote:


Eric D. Mudama wrote:

On Wed, Aug 12 at 12:11, Erik Trimble wrote:

Anyways, if I have a bunch of different size disks (1.5 TB, 1.0 TB,
500 GB, etc), can I put them all into one big array and have data
redundancy, etc?  (RAID-Z?)


Yes.  RAID-Z requires a minimum of 3 drives, and it can use
different drives. Depending on the size differences, it will do the
underlying layout in different ways.  Depending on the number and
size of the disks, ZFS is likely the best bet for using the most
total space.


I don't believe this is correct, as far as I understand it, RAID-Z
will use the lowest-common-denominator for sizing the overall array.
You'll get parity across all three drives, but it won't alter parity
schemes for different regions of the disks.

Yes, if you stick (say) a 1.5TB, 1TB, and .5TB drive together in a  
RAIDZ, you will get only 1TB of usable space.   Of course, there is  
always the ability to use partitions instead of the whole disk, but  
I'm not going to go into that.  Suffice to say, RAIDZ (and  
practically all other RAID controllers, and volume managers) don't  
easily deal maximizing space with different size disks.


--
Erik Trimble
Java System Support
Mailstop:  usca22-123
Phone:  x17195
Santa Clara, CA

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] file change long - was zfs fragmentation

[Ross Walker]

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Mike Gerdts wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Damjan
> Perenic wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Richard
>> Elling wrote:
>>> On Aug 11, 2009, at 7:39 AM, Ed Spencer wrote:
>>>
 I suspect that if we 'rsync' one of these filesystems to a second
 server/pool  that we would also see a performance increase equal to what
 we see on the development server. (I don't know how zfs send a receive
 work so I don't know if it would address this "Filesystem Entropy" or
 specifically reorganize the files and directories). However, when we
 created a testfs filesystem in the zfs pool on the production server,
 and copied data to it, we saw the same performance as the other
 filesystems, in the same pool.
>>>
>>> Directory walkers, like NetBackup or rsync, will not scale well as
>>> the number of files increases.  It doesn't matter what file system you
>>> use, the scalability will look more-or-less similar. For millions of files,
>>> ZFS send/receive works much better.  More details are in my paper.
>>
>> It would be nice if ZFS had something similar to VxFS File Change Log.
>> This feature is very useful for incremental backups and other
>> directory walkers, providing they support FCL.
>
> I think this tangent deserves its own thread.  :)
>
> To save a trip to google...
>
> http://sfdoccentral.symantec.com/sf/5.0MP3/linux/manpages/vxfs/man1m/fcladm.html
>
> This functionality would come in very handy.  It would seem that it
> isn't too big of a deal to identify the files that changed, as this
> type of data is already presented via "zpool status -v" when
> corruption is detected.
>
> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/gbctx?a=view

In fact ZFS has a good transaction log, maybe the issue is there isn't
software out there yet that uses it.

-Ross
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can ZFS dynamically grow pool sizes? (re: Windows Home Server)

[Carson Gaspar]

Erik Trimble wrote:

Yes, if you stick (say) a 1.5TB, 1TB, and .5TB drive together in a 
RAIDZ, you will get only 1TB of usable space.   Of course, there is 
always the ability to use partitions instead of the whole disk, but I'm 
not going to go into that.  Suffice to say, RAIDZ (and practically all 
other RAID controllers, and volume managers) don't easily deal 
maximizing space with different size disks.


In the example above, The best you can get out of ZFS is 1.5TB. You'd get that 
by creating 2 mirrors - a (.5TB of 1.5TB partition) + .5TB mirror, and a (1TB of 
1.5TB partition) + 1TB mirror. I _think_ that's also the best you can get, 
period, but I may be wrong. The absolute cap is 2TB (2/3 of the 3TB total), but 
in that spindle config I think the cap is 1.5TB.


While the "figure it out for me and make it as big as you can while still being 
safe" magic of drobo is nice for home users, it's less than ideal for enterprise 
users that require performance guarantees.


It would be nice if somebody created a simple tool that, fed a set of disks, 
computed the configuration required for maximum usable redundant space.


--
Carson



___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can ZFS dynamically grow pool sizes? (re: Windows Home Server)

[A Darren Dunham]

> >Yes, if you stick (say) a 1.5TB, 1TB, and .5TB drive together in a  
> >RAIDZ, you will get only 1TB of usable space.

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:30:14PM -0400, Adam Sherman wrote:
> I believe you will get .5 TB in this example, no?

The slices used on each of the three disks will be .5TB.  Multiply by
(3-1) for a total of 1TB usable.

-- 
Darren
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] file change long - was zfs fragmentation

[Mattias Pantzare]

>>> It would be nice if ZFS had something similar to VxFS File Change Log.
>>> This feature is very useful for incremental backups and other
>>> directory walkers, providing they support FCL.
>>
>> I think this tangent deserves its own thread.  :)
>>
>> To save a trip to google...
>>
>> http://sfdoccentral.symantec.com/sf/5.0MP3/linux/manpages/vxfs/man1m/fcladm.html
>>
>> This functionality would come in very handy.  It would seem that it
>> isn't too big of a deal to identify the files that changed, as this
>> type of data is already presented via "zpool status -v" when
>> corruption is detected.
>>
>> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/gbctx?a=view
>
> In fact ZFS has a good transaction log, maybe the issue is there isn't
> software out there yet that uses it.

Where is that log? ZIL does not log all transactions and is cleared
very quickly.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] utf8only and normalization properties

[Haudy Kazemi]

Hello,

I'm wondering what are some use cases for ZFS's utf8only and 
normalization properties.  They are off/none by default, and can only be 
set when the filesystem is created.  When should they specifically be 
enabled and/or disabled?  (i.e. Where is using them a really good idea?  
Where is using them a really bad idea?)


Looking forward, starting with Windows XP and OS X 10.5 clients, is 
there any reason to change the defaults in order to minimize problems?


From the documentation at 
http://dlc.sun.com/osol/docs/content/ZFSADMIN/gazss.html :


utf8only
Boolean
Off
This property indicates whether a file system should reject file names 
that include characters that are not present in the UTF-8 character code 
set. If this property is explicitly set to off, the normalization 
property must either not be explicitly set or be set to none. The 
default value for the utf8only property is off. This property cannot be 
changed after the file system is created.


normalization
String
None
This property indicates whether a file system should perform a unicode 
normalization of file names whenever two file names are compared, and 
which normalization algorithm should be used. File names are always 
stored unmodified, names are normalized as part of any comparison 
process. If this property is set to a legal value other than none, and 
the utf8only property was left unspecified, the utf8only property is 
automatically set to on. The default value of the normalization property 
is none. This property cannot be changed after the file system is created


Background: I've built a test system running OpenSolaris 2009.06 (b111) 
with a ZFS RAIDZ1, with CIFS in workgroup mode.  I'm testing with 
Windows XP and Mac OS X 10.5 clients connecting via CIFS (no NFS or AFP).

I've set these properties during zfs create or immediately afterwards:
casesensitivity=mixed
compression=on
snapdir=visible

and ran this to set up nonrestrictive ACLs as suggested by Alan Wright 
at the thread "[cifs-discuss] CIFS and permission mapping" at 
http://opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=365620#365947

chmod A=everyone@:full_set:fd:allow /tank/home

Thanks!

-hk
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] file change long - was zfs fragmentation

[Ross Walker]

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:49 PM, Mattias Pantzare wrote:
 It would be nice if ZFS had something similar to VxFS File Change Log.
 This feature is very useful for incremental backups and other
 directory walkers, providing they support FCL.
>>>
>>> I think this tangent deserves its own thread.  :)
>>>
>>> To save a trip to google...
>>>
>>> http://sfdoccentral.symantec.com/sf/5.0MP3/linux/manpages/vxfs/man1m/fcladm.html
>>>
>>> This functionality would come in very handy.  It would seem that it
>>> isn't too big of a deal to identify the files that changed, as this
>>> type of data is already presented via "zpool status -v" when
>>> corruption is detected.
>>>
>>> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/gbctx?a=view
>>
>> In fact ZFS has a good transaction log, maybe the issue is there isn't
>> software out there yet that uses it.
>
> Where is that log? ZIL does not log all transactions and is cleared
> very quickly.

Isn't the txg tags recorded during the block updates in ZFS?

-Ross
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] utf8only and normalization properties

[Nicolas Williams]

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 06:17:44PM -0500, Haudy Kazemi wrote:
> I'm wondering what are some use cases for ZFS's utf8only and 
> normalization properties.  They are off/none by default, and can only be 
> set when the filesystem is created.  When should they specifically be 
> enabled and/or disabled?  (i.e. Where is using them a really good idea?  
> Where is using them a really bad idea?)

These are for interoperability.

The world is converging on Unicode for filesystem object naming.  If you
want to exclude non-Unicode strings then you should set utf8only (some
non-Unicode strings in some codesets can look like valid UTF-8 though).

But Unicode has multiple canonical and non-canonical ways of
representing certain characters (e.g., ´).  Solaris and Windows
input methods tend to conform to NFKC, so they will interop even if you
don't enable the normalization feature.  But MacOS X normalizes to NFD.

Therefore, if you need to interoperate with MacOS X then you should
enable the normalization feature.

> Looking forward, starting with Windows XP and OS X 10.5 clients, is 
> there any reason to change the defaults in order to minimize problems?

You should definetely enable normalization (see above).

It doesn't matter what normalization form you use, but "nfd" runs faster
than "nfc".

The normalization feature doesn't cost much if you use all US-ASCII file
names.  And it doesn't cost much if your file names are mostly US-ASCII.

Nico
-- 
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool import -f rpool hangs

[Vladimir Novakovic]

I tried to rename and import rpool and to use those /etc/system settings,
but without success. :-(

I've tried also to do this use installed OpenSolaris 5.11 snv_111b and I
have the same result as with Solaris 10.

vladi...@opensolaris:~# zpool import
  pool: rpool
id: 8451126758019843293
 state: DEGRADED
status: The pool was last accessed by another system.
action: The pool can be imported despite missing or damaged devices.  The
fault tolerance of the pool may be compromised if imported.
   see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-EY
config:

rpoolDEGRADED
  mirror DEGRADED
c8d0s0   UNAVAIL  cannot open
c10d0s0  ONLINE

Command "zpool import -f 8451126758019843293 rpool2" didn't change the name
of the pool in rpool2, but it updated labels with hostid before server
kernel panic came:

old labels have:

hostid=459264558
hostname=''

new label have:

hostid=12870168
hostname='opensolaris'

I didn't notice other changes in labels.

I'm lost now but I still have a hope that I will be able to recover and
import this rpool.

Is there any other possibility to test and to check zfs consistency for this
pool using some tools as zdb. The problem is hat system is panic and
rebooting. So I'm not sure how to check and catch those outputs because I
have several seconds, to monitor "zpool import" PID.

Please find below a messages output in the moment of hanging and the labels
list at the end.

Regards,
Vladimir


vladi...@opensolaris:/# less /var/adm/messages
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris zfs: [ID 517898 kern.warning] WARNING: can't
open objset for rpool2/ROOT/s10x_u6wos_07b
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris unix: [ID 836849 kern.notice]
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris ^Mpanic[cpu1]/thread=d507edc0:
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 697804 kern.notice]
vmem_hash_delete(d2404690, fe9471bf, 1411362336): bad free
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris unix: [ID 10 kern.notice]
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507ea28
genunix:vmem_hash_delete+d2 (d2404690, fe9471bf,)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507ea68
genunix:vmem_xfree+29 (d2404690, fe9471bf,)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507ea88
genunix:vmem_free+21 (d2404690, fe9471bf,)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507eac8
genunix:kmem_free+36 (fe9471bf, 541fae20,)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507eb08
zfs:dmu_buf_rele_array+a6 (fe9471bf, d507eb88,)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507eb68
zfs:dmu_write+160 (d6d19a98, be, 0, 98)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507ec08
zfs:space_map_sync+304 (dee3a838, 1, dee3a6)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507ec78
zfs:metaslab_sync+284 (dee3a680, 970be, 0,)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507ecb8
zfs:vdev_sync+c6 (dd858000, 970be, 0)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507ed28
zfs:spa_sync+3d0 (d9fcf700, 970be, 0,)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507eda8
zfs:txg_sync_thread+308 (e5914380, 0)
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 353471 kern.notice] d507edb8
unix:thread_start+8 ()
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris unix: [ID 10 kern.notice]
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 672855 kern.notice] syncing file
systems...
Aug 13 06:34:32 opensolaris genunix: [ID 904073 kern.notice]  done
Aug 13 06:34:33 opensolaris genunix: [ID 111219 kern.notice] dumping to
/dev/zvol/dsk/rpool/dump, offset 65536, content: kernel
Aug 13 06:34:50 opensolaris genunix: [ID 409368 kern.notice] ^M100% done:
122747 pages dumped, compression ratio 1.87,
Aug 13 06:34:50 opensolaris genunix: [ID 851671 kern.notice] dump succeeded
Aug 13 06:35:21 opensolaris genunix: [ID 540533 kern.notice] ^MSunOS Release
5.11 Version snv_111b 32-bit
Aug 13 06:35:21 opensolaris genunix: [ID 943908 kern.notice] Copyright
1983-2009 Sun Microsystems, Inc.  All rights reserved.


vladi...@opensolaris:/# zdb -l /dev/dsk/c10d0s0

LABEL 0

version=10
name='rpool'
state=0
txg=618685
pool_guid=8451126758019843293
hostid=12870168
hostname='opensolaris'
top_guid=12565539731591116699
guid=7091554162966221179
vdev_tree
type='mirror'
id=0
guid=12565539731591116699
whole_disk=0
metaslab_array=15
metaslab_shift=31
ashift=9
asize=400031744000
is_log=0
children[0]
type='disk'
id=0
guid=12840919567323880481
path='/dev/dsk/c8d0s0'
devid='id1,c...@awdc_wd4000yr-01plb0=_wd-wmamy1259386/a'
phys_path='/p...@0,0/pci-...@1f,2/i...@0/c...@0,0:a'
whole_disk=0
DTL=71
children[1]
type='disk'
 

[zfs-discuss] unsetting/resetting ZFS properties

[Haudy Kazemi]

Hello,

I recently asked myself this question: Is it possible to unset ZFS 
properties?  Or reset one to its default state without looking up what 
that default state is?
I believe the answer is yes, via the zfs inherit command (I haven't 
verified yet, but I think a case could be made to add functionality to 
the zfs set command...or the documentation...to make this clearer.)


An example:
You have a pool named tank.
You have created a filesystem called 'home' and it has a child 
filesystem called 'smith'.

You run: zfs set compression=on tank/home
which turns on compression on the 'home' filesystem (it is a local 
property) and on the 'smith' filesystem (as an inherited property).  
(You inspect the properties with 'zfs get'.)


You then run: zfs set compression=on tank/home/smith
which makes compression on the 'smith' filesystem also be a local property.

At this point you decide you would rather that the compression property 
for filesystem 'smith' be inherited after all, not be a local property 
anymore.


You run:
zfs set compression=off tank/home/smith
but that doesn't unset the compression setting for filesystem 'smith', 
it just overrides the inheritance of compression=on (as expected).


So how to unset/reset?

In looking for an answer I went back to the page where I found the 
available properties and their valid parameters:

Introducing ZFS Properties
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-2271/gazss?l=en&a=view

I didn't see anything under 'zfs set' or under the 'compression' section 
for how to unset a property.  I did find a link to this page:

Setting ZFS Properties
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-2271/gazsp?l=en&a=view

which had a link to this page:
man pages section 1M: System Administration Commands
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2240/zfs-1m?l=en&a=view

which talked about 'zfs inherit' and 'zfs set':
zfs inherit [-r] property filesystem|volume|snapshot ...
zfs set property=value filesystem|volume|snapshot ...

*
In short, I think an alias for 'zfs inherit' could be added to 'zfs set' 
to make it more clear to those of us still new to ZFS.  Either that, or 
add some additional pointers in the Properties documentation that the 
set command can't unset/reset properties.

The alias could work like this:
If someone issues a command like this:
zfs set property=inherit filesystem|volume|snapshot
then run this code path:
zfs inherit property filesystem|volume|snapshot

The -r command could be added to 'zfs set' as well, to allow 'zfs set' 
to recursively set local properties on child filesystems.

zfs set -r property=inherit filesystem|volume|snapshot
then run this code path:
zfs inherit -r property filesystem|volume|snapshot

Another example if zfs set was extended:
zfs set -r compression=on tank/home
would set a local property of compression=on for 'home' and each of its 
child filesystems.  (new functionality)


zfs set -r compression=inherit tank/home
would set the property of compression to default for 'home' and each of 
its child filesystems.  (alias of zfs inherit -r compression tank/home)


zfs set compression=inherit tank/home
would set the property of compression to default for 'home' and leave 
the child filesystems properties untouched (alias of zfs inherit 
compression tank/home)



___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, ESX ,and NFS. oh my!

[James Hess]

> The real benefit of the of using a
> separate zvol for each vm is the instantaneous
> cloning of a machine, and the clone will take almost
> no additional space initially. In our case we build a

You don't have to use ZVOL devices to do that.
As mentioned by others...

> zfs create my_pool/group1
> zfs create my_pool/group1/vm1
> zfs create my_pool/group1/vm2

In this case,  'vm1'  and 'vm2'  are on separate filesystems, that will show up 
in 'zfs list',  since 'zfs create' was used to make them.  But they are still 
both under the common mount point  '/my_pool/group1'

Now, you could
zfs snapshot  my_pool/group1/v...@snap-1-2009-06-12
zfs clone  my_pool/group1/v...@snap-1-2009-06-12   my_pool/group1/vm3
zfs promote  my_pool/group1/vm3

And you would then have your clone, also under the common mount point..
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, ESX ,and NFS. oh my!

[Tristan Ball]

In my testing, vmware doesn't see the vm1 and vm2 filesystems. Vmware
doesn't have an automounter, and doesn't traverse NFS4 sub-mounts
(whatever the formal name for them is). Actually, it doesn't support
NFS4 at all! 

Regards,
Tristan.

-Original Message-
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org
[mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of James Hess
Sent: Thursday, 13 August 2009 3:38 PM
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, ESX ,and NFS. oh my!

> The real benefit of the of using a
> separate zvol for each vm is the instantaneous
> cloning of a machine, and the clone will take almost
> no additional space initially. In our case we build a

You don't have to use ZVOL devices to do that.
As mentioned by others...

> zfs create my_pool/group1
> zfs create my_pool/group1/vm1
> zfs create my_pool/group1/vm2

In this case,  'vm1'  and 'vm2'  are on separate filesystems, that will
show up in 'zfs list',  since 'zfs create' was used to make them.  But
they are still both under the common mount point  '/my_pool/group1'

Now, you could
zfs snapshot  my_pool/group1/v...@snap-1-2009-06-12
zfs clone  my_pool/group1/v...@snap-1-2009-06-12   my_pool/group1/vm3
zfs promote  my_pool/group1/vm3

And you would then have your clone, also under the common mount point..
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss