On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 07:10:52PM -0500, Mike Gerdts wrote:
> If it were unlink(3C) rather than unlink(2), an interposer library
> could make this functionality generally available. Surely there must
> be a dtrace hack that could redirect calls destined for unlink() to
> safe_unlink(), subject to
On 5/24/06, Scott Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was talking with some customers today and came up with several
questions that I don't know the answers to. I'll post these as separate
threads so as not to muddy things up too much.
It seems like ZFS has a lot more knowledge of what is goin
On 5/24/06, Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, our mythical system library (libundelete.so) should support a couple
of generic functions (say: int safe_unlink(const char *path), and void
empty_recyclebin(const char *path) which look for an ENV variable to
determine if they should recycl
Cool -
I can see my old fav's from Netware 3.12 making a comeback.
It was always great to be able to salvage things from a disk that
someone did not mean to kill. :)
ah - salvage - my old friend...
Does this also usher in the return of purge too? :)
Nathan.
Erik Trimble wrote:
On Wed, 2
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 12:01:18AM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello Scott,
>
> Wednesday, May 24, 2006, 9:42:06 PM, you wrote:
>
> SD> How does (or does) ZFS maintain sequentiality of the blocks of a file.
> SD> If I mkfile on a clean UFS, I likely will get contiguous blocks for my
> SD> fi
On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 14:43 -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
> No, this is not the point of this RFE. We are not trying to implement a
> wide-ranging subsystem that understands how to manage semantically valid
> undo points. This would never, ever, be supported by any significant
> number of applicatio
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 02:43:38PM -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
> No, this is not the point of this RFE. We are not trying to implement a
> wide-ranging subsystem that understands how to manage semantically valid
> undo points. This would never, ever, be supported by any significant
> number of app
Hello Scott,
Wednesday, May 24, 2006, 9:42:06 PM, you wrote:
SD> How does (or does) ZFS maintain sequentiality of the blocks of a file.
SD> If I mkfile on a clean UFS, I likely will get contiguous blocks for my
SD> file, right? A customer I talked to recently has a desire to access
SD> large vo
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 12:34:45PM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
> Where does the 12.5% compression rule in zio_compress_data() come from ?
> Given that this is in the generic function for all compression
> algorithms rather than in the implementation of lzjb I wonder where the
> number comes fro
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 12:18:48PM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:
>
> But my point being that "undo" is appropriate at the APPLICATION level,
> not the FILESYSTEM level. An application (whether Nautilus or "rm")
> should have the ability to call a system library to support "undo",
> which has the rel
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 03:43:54PM -0400, Scott Dickson wrote:
> I said I had several questions to start threads on
>
> What about ZFS and various HSM solutions? Do any of them already work
> with ZFS? Are any going to? It seems like HSM solutions that access
> things at a file level woul
It doesn't sound like they want to use filesystem-mgmt tools, they want to use
per-file tools. Wouldn't pax (or cpio) be a better tool to do these things?
Scott Dickson wrote:
A customer asked today about the ability to snapshot and rollback
individual files. They have an environment where us
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 03:35:13PM -0400, Scott Dickson wrote:
> A customer asked today about the ability to snapshot and rollback
> individual files. They have an environment where users might generate
> lots of files, but want only a portion of them to be included in a
> snapshot. Moreover,
I said I had several questions to start threads on
What about ZFS and various HSM solutions? Do any of them already work
with ZFS? Are any going to? It seems like HSM solutions that access
things at a file level would have little trouble integrating with ZFS.
But ones that work at a bl
How does (or does) ZFS maintain sequentiality of the blocks of a file.
If I mkfile on a clean UFS, I likely will get contiguous blocks for my
file, right? A customer I talked to recently has a desire to access
large volumes of sequential data. They were concerned about maintaining
this file
A customer asked today about the ability to snapshot and rollback
individual files. They have an environment where users might generate
lots of files, but want only a portion of them to be included in a
snapshot. Moreover, typically when they recover a file, they only want
one or two of them.
I was talking with some customers today and came up with several
questions that I don't know the answers to. I'll post these as separate
threads so as not to muddy things up too much.
It seems like ZFS has a lot more knowledge of what is going on all the
way down to the disk level than other
On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 11:31 -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 11:22:23AM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote
> > Isn't this an application feature, not a filesystem feature? I would
> > expect something like this behavior when using Nautilus, but certainly
> > not when using "rm".
>
> Th
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 11:22:23AM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:
> U.
>
> Remind me why we should support "undo" (or, more aptly named, "safe
> delete") in ZFS?
>
> Isn't this an application feature, not a filesystem feature? I would
> expect something like this behavior when using Nautilus, bu
U.
Remind me why we should support "undo" (or, more aptly named, "safe
delete") in ZFS?
Isn't this an application feature, not a filesystem feature? I would
expect something like this behavior when using Nautilus, but certainly
not when using "rm".
That is, maybe there should be a library w
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 10:38:34AM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
> mv seems to be able to rename a snapshot. Maybe we could have cp on a
> snapshot mean clone eg:
> $ cd .zfs/snapshot
> $ mv foo bar
> $ cp bar baz
> $ rm may
Hmm, why not a .clones in snapshots' .zfs? Then
Other possibilities:
- put a .deleted directory in every directory (not on by default, for
POSIX compliance)
- put a link in .deleted named after the file's dnode and append a text
({fname, dnode#}) entry to a log file so it can more easily be found
Ultimately deleted files' space has to
> The other option is to allow users to this by doing operations in the
> special ".zfs" directory. This should even be possible over NFS or CIFS.
> For example creation, rename and delete of snapshots using normal file
> system tools, in .zfs/snapshot.
>
> mv seems to be able to rename a sna
Hello Phil,
Wednesday, May 24, 2006, 7:28:51 PM, you wrote:
PC> Will the ability to import a destroyed ZFS pool and the fsstat
PC> command that's part of the latest Solaris Express release (B38)
PC> make it into Solaris 10 Update-2 when it's released in
PC> June/July??? Also has any decision been
On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 12:22, James Dickens wrote:
> how about changing the name of the file to uid or username-filename
> this atleast gets you the ability to let each user the ability to
> delete there own file, shouldn't be much work. Another possible
> enhancement would be adding anything field
Will the ability to import a destroyed ZFS pool and the fsstat command that's
part of the latest Solaris Express release (B38) make it into Solaris 10
Update-2 when it's released in June/July??? Also has any decision been made yet
what build Update-2 will be taken from to give an idea of what ca
On 5/24/06, Jeremy Teo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
with reference to bug id #4852821: user undo
I have implemented a basic prototype that has the current functionality:
1) deleted files/directories are moved to /your_pool/your_fs/.zfs/deleted
Unfortunately, it is non-trivial to completel
Jeremy Teo wrote:
Hello,
with reference to bug id #4852821: user undo
I have implemented a basic prototype that has the current functionality:
1) deleted files/directories are moved to /your_pool/your_fs/.zfs/deleted
Unfortunately, it is non-trivial to completely reproduce the namespace
of del
Hello All,
Do we have an FAQ regarding ZFS and removable media? IHAC who's looking
to know if a single ZFS can span several removable devices.
Matt
--
Matt Sweeney
Engagement Architect
Sun Microsystems
585-368-5930/x29097 desk
585-727-0573cell
Hello,
with reference to bug id #4852821: user undo
I have implemented a basic prototype that has the current functionality:
1) deleted files/directories are moved to /your_pool/your_fs/.zfs/deleted
Unfortunately, it is non-trivial to completely reproduce the namespace
of deleted files: for now
Matthew Ahrens wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 02:34:30PM -0700, Jeff Victor wrote:
* When you share a ZFS fs via NFS, what happens to files and
filesystems that exceed the limits of NFS?
What limits do you have in mind? I'm not an NFS expert, but I think
that NFSv4 (and probably v3) supports
Jeff Bonwick wrote:
For example, if I gave you the right to snapshot ~darrenm, I might
want to only allow you 10 snapshots. Is that a worthwhile restriction
or is it better to just let quotas take care of that?
At issue here is the potential for (again :) zfs to spam df output
through potential
> For example, if I gave you the right to snapshot ~darrenm, I might
> want to only allow you 10 snapshots. Is that a worthwhile restriction
> or is it better to just let quotas take care of that?
>
> At issue here is the potential for (again :) zfs to spam df output
> through potentially acciden
Rainer Orth wrote:
Mark Shellenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yes we do need something like this.
This is already covered by the following CRs 6280676, 6421209.
These RFE's are currently being investigated. The basic idea is that
an adminstrator will be allowed to grant specific users/gro
Mark Shellenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Yes we do need something like this.
> >
> > This is already covered by the following CRs 6280676, 6421209.
>
> These RFE's are currently being investigated. The basic idea is that
> an adminstrator will be allowed to grant specific users/groups
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Darren J Moffat wrote:
James Dickens wrote:
I think ZFS should add the concept of ownership to a ZFS filesystem,
so if i create a filesystem for joe, he should be able to use his
space how ever he see's fit, if he wants to turn on compression or
t
Matthew Ahrens wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 02:34:30PM -0700, Jeff Victor wrote:
* When you share a ZFS fs via NFS, what happens to files and
filesystems that exceed the limits of NFS?
What limits do you have in mind? I'm not an NFS expert, but I think
that NFSv4 (and probably v3) supports
Roland Mainz wrote:
Darren J Moffat wrote:
James Dickens wrote:
I think ZFS should add the concept of ownership to a ZFS filesystem,
so if i create a filesystem for joe, he should be able to use his
space how ever he see's fit, if he wants to turn on compression or
take 5000 snapshots its his f
>On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 02:34:30PM -0700, Jeff Victor wrote:
>> * When you share a ZFS fs via NFS, what happens to files and
>> filesystems that exceed the limits of NFS?
>
>What limits do you have in mind? I'm not an NFS expert, but I think
>that NFSv4 (and probably v3) supports 64-bit file siz
39 matches
Mail list logo
