Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send/receive to Solaris/FBSD/OpenIndiana/Nexenta VM guest?

[Nikola M.]

On 04/ 6/11 07:14 PM, Brandon High wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Joe Auty  > wrote:
>
> How about getting a little more crazy... What if this entire
> server temporarily hosting this data was a VM guest running ZFS? I
> don't foresee this being a problem either, but with so
>
>
> The only thing to watch out for is to make sure that the receiving
> datasets aren't a higher version that the zfs version that you'll be
> using on the replacement server. Because you can't downgrade a
> dataset, using snv_151a and planning to send to Nexenta as a final
> step will trip you up unless you explicitly create them with a lower
> version.
Yes, that is exactly why one thinking about using something with more
liberal license then Solaris11 with payed license, should first install
latest OpenSolaris form snv_134 (Or 2009.06 then upgrade to /dev
Opensolaris 134) and then it can choose upgrade path to Both openIndiana
oi_148(b) and S11Ex on same zpool.

That way, zpool and zfs versions can stay on versions supported by OI
and Nexenta (and Schillix and FreeBSD and ZFS-Fuse on Linux and Zfs
Native on Linux in development) and one can experiment with more systems
supporting ZFS then only being locked in S11Ex.

If you sadly choose to install from closed S11Ex disc and not from Osol
snv_134 CD
(www.genunix.org snv_134  .ISO) and upgrade to OpenIndiana OI_xxx dev.
release and/orS11ex, then you might loose ability to use anything but
closed Solaris from Oracle, so be clever and you can use upgrade path
explained.

Of course, you can have as much Boot Environments (BE) on same zpool as
you like, since they basically behave like separate OS installs to boot
from the same zpool, that is the beauty of ZFS/(Open)Solaris based
distributions.
Just do NOT do upgrade to newest closed zpool/zfs version from S11Ex!

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

Re: [zfs-discuss] Assessing health/performance of individual drives in ZFS pool

[Russ Price]

On 04/05/2011 03:01 PM, Tomas Ögren wrote:

On 05 April, 2011 - Joe Auty sent me these 5,9K bytes:

Has this changed, or are there any other techniques I can use to check
the health of an individual SATA drive in my pool short of what ZFS
itself reports?


Through scsi compat layer..

socker:~# smartctl -a -d scsi /dev/rdsk/c0t0d0s0


Note that you can get more complete information by using "-d sat,12" than by 
using "-d scsi". This works for me on both the onboard AHCI ports and the SATA 
drives connected to my Intel SASUC8I (LSI-based) HBA.

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

Re: [zfs-discuss] Assessing health/performance of individual drives in ZFS pool

[Tomas Ögren]

On 07 April, 2011 - Russ Price sent me these 0,7K bytes:

> On 04/05/2011 03:01 PM, Tomas Ögren wrote:
>> On 05 April, 2011 - Joe Auty sent me these 5,9K bytes:
>>> Has this changed, or are there any other techniques I can use to check
>>> the health of an individual SATA drive in my pool short of what ZFS
>>> itself reports?
>>
>> Through scsi compat layer..
>>
>> socker:~# smartctl -a -d scsi /dev/rdsk/c0t0d0s0
>
> Note that you can get more complete information by using "-d sat,12" than 
> by using "-d scsi". This works for me on both the onboard AHCI ports and 
> the SATA drives connected to my Intel SASUC8I (LSI-based) HBA.

Excellent. Works fine on the internal disks of a HP DL160G6 for example.

/Tomas
-- 
Tomas Ögren, st...@acc.umu.se, http://www.acc.umu.se/~stric/
|- Student at Computing Science, University of Umeå
`- Sysadmin at {cs,acc}.umu.se
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] Update LDOM bootdisk (ZFS) from control domain

[Arjun YK]

Hello,

I am trying to update files on LDOM boot disk from Control Domain, but I
can't get it working fully.

I have a setup that allows to quickly deploy LDOM guest domains. The Golden
OS Image of guest domain boot disk is on a ZFS Volume. This ZFS Volume has
been Snapshot and Cloned for the quick deployment of guest domains.
 Filesystem in both the control domain and guest domain is ZFS.

To make the build process more hands off, I am looking for a way to access
the ZFS Volume (new Clone) from Control Domain during the build,  and edit
files in ZFS  as required for giving a new hostname, IP, etc.

I have been able to mount volume on control domain, and edit the files:

 ### From control domain, import LDOM's rpool using its backend zvol device
file
 # zpool import -f -d /dev/zvol/rdsk/ldm1_bootvol/ -R /mnt
17625453751871434467 temp-name

 ## Mount and edit hosts file
 # zfs set mountpoint=/rootdir temp-name/ROOT/s10s_u8wos_08a
 # zfs mount temp-name/ROOT/s10s_u8wos_08a
 # edit /mnt/rootdir/etc/hosts

Issue I have now is how do I put this pool 'temp-name' back to its original
name 'rpool' so that LDOM can boot ? Could someone share some idea ?

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

[zfs-discuss] X4540 no next-gen product?

[Chris Banal]

While I understand everything at Oracle is "top secret" these days.

Does anyone have any insight into a next-gen X4500 / X4540? Does some 
other Oracle / Sun partner make a comparable system that is fully 
supported by Oracle / Sun?


http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/previous-products/index.html

What do X4500 / X4540 owners use if they'd like more comparable zfs 
based storage and full Oracle support?


I'm aware of Nexenta and other cloned products but am specifically 
asking about Oracle supported hardware. However, does anyone know if 
these type of vendors will be at NAB this year? I'd like to talk to a 
few if they are...


--
Thank you,
Chris Banal
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Assessing health/performance of individual drives in ZFS pool

[Joe Auty]

  
  

  

  

Tomas Ögren
  April 5, 2011 4:01 PM
  

  
  

  Through scsi compat layer..
  
  socker:~# smartctl -a -d scsi /dev/rdsk/c0t0d0s0
  smartctl 5.40 2010-10-16 r3189 [i386-pc-solaris2.10] (local
  build)
  Copyright (C) 2002-10 by Bruce Allen,
  http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net
  

  

Thank you, I've also enabled smartd via the package I installed via
pkgutil which should help too... By default it will email root on
failure, right?



  
Serial number: WCAT26836798
  Device type: disk
  Local Time is: Tue Apr 5 22:00:23 2011 MEST
  Device supports SMART and is Enabled
  Temperature Warning Disabled or Not Supported
  SMART Health Status: OK
  
  Current Drive Temperature: 29 C
  
  Error Counter logging not supported
  
  SMART Self-test log
  Num Test Status segment LifeTime LBA_first_err [SK ASC ASQ]
  Description number (hours)
  # 1 Default Completed - 293 - [- - -]
  ...
  
  /Tomas


  
  

  

Joe Auty
  April 5, 2011 3:53 PM
  

  
  

Hello,
  
  A while I was exploring running smartmontools in Solaris
  10 on my SATA drives, but at the time SATA drives were not
  supported.
  
  Has this changed, or are there any other techniques I can
  use to check the health of an individual SATA drive in my
  pool short of what ZFS itself reports?  


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

 



-- 
  
  Joe Auty, NetMusician
  NetMusician
  helps musicians, bands and artists create beautiful,
  professional, custom designed, career-essential websites that are
  easy
  to maintain and to integrate with popular social networks.
  www.netmusician.org
  j...@netmusician.org
  

  

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

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send/receive to Solaris/FBSD/OpenIndiana/Nexenta VM guest?

[Joe Auty]

  
  
Thanks for all of this info guys, I'm still digesting it...

My source computer is running Solaris 10 ZFS version 15. Does this
mean that I'd be asking for trouble doing a zfs send back to this
machine from any other ZFS machine running a version > 15? I just
want to make sure I understand all of this info...

If this is the case, what are my strategies? Solaris 10 for my
temporary backup machine? Is it possible to run OpenIndiana or
Nexenta or something and somehow set up these machines with ZFS v15
or something?


  

  

Nikola M.
  April 7, 2011 5:28 AM
  

  
  

Yes, that is exactly why one thinking about using something with
more liberal license then Solaris11 with payed license, should
first install latest OpenSolaris form snv_134 (Or 2009.06 then
upgrade to /dev Opensolaris 134) and then it can choose upgrade
path to Both openIndiana oi_148(b) and S11Ex on same zpool.

That way, zpool and zfs versions can stay on versions supported
by OI and Nexenta (and Schillix and FreeBSD and ZFS-Fuse on
Linux and Zfs Native on Linux in development) and one can
experiment with more systems supporting ZFS then only being
locked in S11Ex.

If you sadly choose to install from closed S11Ex disc and not
from Osol snv_134 CD 
(www.genunix.org snv_134 
.ISO) and upgrade to OpenIndiana OI_xxx dev. release
and/orS11ex, then you might loose ability to use anything but
closed Solaris from Oracle, so be clever and you can use upgrade
path explained.

Of course, you can have as much Boot Environments (BE) on same
zpool as you like, since they basically behave like separate OS
installs to boot from the same zpool, that is the beauty of
ZFS/(Open)Solaris based distributions.
Just do NOT do upgrade to newest closed zpool/zfs version from
S11Ex!

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


  
  

  

Brandon High
  April 6, 2011 1:14 PM
  

  
  

  
How
about getting a little more crazy... What if this
entire server temporarily hosting this data was a VM
guest running ZFS? I don't foresee this being a
problem either, but with so
  
  
  
  The only thing to watch out for is to make sure that the
receiving datasets aren't a higher version that the zfs
version that you'll be using on the replacement server.
Because you can't downgrade a dataset, using snv_151a and
planning to send to Nexenta as a final step will trip you up
unless you explicitly create them with a lower version.
   
  -B


-- 
Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com

  
  

  

Joe Auty
  April 5, 2011 3:38 PM
  

  
  

Hello,
  
  I'm debating an OS change and also thinking about my
  options for data migration to my next server, whether it
  is on new or the same hardware.
  
  Migrating to a new machine I understand is a simple matter
  of ZFS send/receive, but reformatting the existing drives
  to host my existing data is an area I'd like to learn a
  little more about. In the past I've asked about this and
  was told that it is possible to do a send/receive to
  accommodate this, and IIRC this doesn't have to be to a
  ZFS server with the same number of physical drives?
  
  How about getting a little more crazy... What if this
  entire server temporarily hosting this data was a VM guest
  running ZFS? I don't foresee this being a problem either,
  but with so much at stake I thought I would double check
  :) When I say temporary I mean simply using this machine
  as a place to store the data long enough to wipe the
  original server, install the new OS to the original
  server, and restore the data using this VM as the data
  source.
  
  Also, more generally, is ZFS send/receive mature enough
  that when you do data migrations you don't stress about
  this? Piece of cake? The difficulty of this whole

[zfs-discuss] ZFS on MIPS

[Learner Study]

Hello,

I was thinking of moving (porting) ZFS into my linux environment
(2.6.30sh kernel) on MIPS architecture i.e. instead of using native
ext4/xfs file systems, I'd like to try out ZFS.

I tried to google for it but couldn't find anything relevant. Has
someone done this? Does it make sense? The key motivation of doing
this is de-duplication support that comes along with ZFS.

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

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send/receive to Solaris/FBSD/OpenIndiana/Nexenta VM guest?

[Brandon High]

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Joe Auty  wrote:
> My source computer is running Solaris 10 ZFS version 15. Does this mean that 
> I'd be asking for trouble doing a zfs send back to this machine from any 
> other ZFS machine running a version > 15? I just want to make sure I 
> understand all of this info...

There are two versions when it comes to ZFS - The zpool version and
the zfs version.

bhigh@basestar:~$ zpool list -o name,version
NAME   VERSION
rpool   31

bhigh@basestar:~$ zfs list -o name,version
NAME   VERSION
rpool5
rpool/ROOT   5
rpool/ROOT/snv_151   5
rpool/dump   -
rpool/rsrv   5
rpool/swap   -

I think that the version that matters (for your purposes) is the ZFS
version. It should be set when using 'send -R' and having 'zfs
receive' create the destination datasets. I recommend testing however.

> If this is the case, what are my strategies? Solaris 10 for my temporary 
> backup machine? Is it possible to run OpenIndiana or Nexenta or something and 
> somehow set up these machines with ZFS v15 or something?

You can set the zpool version when you create the pool, and you can
set the zfs version when you create the dataset. I'm not sure that
you'll need to set the pool version to anything lower if the dataset
version is correct though. You should test this, however.

-B

--
Brandon High : bh...@freaks.com
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on MIPS

[Toby Thain]

On 07/04/11 7:53 PM, Learner Study wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I was thinking of moving (porting) ZFS into my linux environment
> (2.6.30sh kernel) on MIPS architecture i.e. instead of using native
> ext4/xfs file systems, I'd like to try out ZFS.
> 
> I tried to google for it but couldn't find anything relevant. Has
> someone done this? Does it make sense? The key motivation of doing
> this is de-duplication support that comes along with ZFS.
> 

The existing ZFS on Linux projects should be relevant. See fairly recent
list postings.

--Toby


> Thanks for any pointers...
> ___
> 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] X4540 no next-gen product?

[Erik Trimble]

On 4/7/2011 10:25 AM, Chris Banal wrote:

While I understand everything at Oracle is "top secret" these days.

Does anyone have any insight into a next-gen X4500 / X4540? Does some 
other Oracle / Sun partner make a comparable system that is fully 
supported by Oracle / Sun?


http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/previous-products/index.html 



What do X4500 / X4540 owners use if they'd like more comparable zfs 
based storage and full Oracle support?


I'm aware of Nexenta and other cloned products but am specifically 
asking about Oracle supported hardware. However, does anyone know if 
these type of vendors will be at NAB this year? I'd like to talk to a 
few if they are...




The move seems to be to the Unified Storage (aka ZFS Storage) line, 
which is a successor to the 7000-series OpenStorage stuff.


http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/storage/unified-storage/index.html

--
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