On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 2:01 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
>
> It will cause huge waste in that all fragments will now be blocked
> to 128k. Given that most objects are around 15k we can expect
> to use 8x more memory.
>
> I think I'll just set the hardware sector size to min(8K, reported hw sector
> s
It will cause huge waste in that all fragments will now be blocked
to 128k. Given that most objects are around 15k we can expect
to use 8x more memory.
I think I'll just set the hardware sector size to min(8K, reported hw sector
size)
since Solaris is just lying anyway and it clearly doesn't caus
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>
> On 03/11/2011 09:42 AM, John Plevyak wrote:
>>
>> The largest hardware sector size that the cache supports is 8K.
>>
>> It seems that Solaris is highly configurable this way and can have a
>> 'hardware'
>> sector size up to 128k as a config
On 03/11/2011 09:42 AM, John Plevyak wrote:
The largest hardware sector size that the cache supports is 8K.
It seems that Solaris is highly configurable this way and can have a
'hardware'
sector size up to 128k as a configuration option for the OS.
Is this with the new Solaris patch?
What sort
The largest hardware sector size that the cache supports is 8K.
It seems that Solaris is highly configurable this way and can have a
'hardware'
sector size up to 128k as a configuration option for the OS.
Is this with the new Solaris patch?
What sort of a storage.config and filesystem are you on
I'm getting this on my Solaris VM, running current trunk:
Mar 8 19:44:41 solaris11 traffic_server[26419]: [ID 702911
daemon.error] {1} ERROR: bad hardware sector size
Does anyone else (using Solaris) see this too? This is using a cache on
the file system.
-- leif
