Re: Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved

To clarify what has just been stated. With zil disabled I got 4MB/sec. With zil enabled I get 1.25MB/sec On 6/23/06, Tao Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/23/06, Roch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 04:22:22PM -0700, Joe Little wrote: > > > > On 6/22/06, Jeff Bonw

[zfs-discuss] Bandwidth disparity between NFS and ZFS

While dd'ing to an nfs filesystem, half of the bandwidth is unaccounted for. What dd reports amounts to almost exactly half of what zpool iostat or iostat show; even after accounting for the overhead of the two mirrored vdevs. Would anyone care to guess where it may be going? (This is measured

Re: [zfs-discuss] Priorities (moving forums...)

Please refer all followups to this thread over to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 11:27 -0700, Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-23 11:15]: > > It is a good start (yes, I know it's an interface to Bugster, just as > > the Java one I pointed out i

Re: [zfs-discuss] Priorities

* Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-23 11:28]: > On Jun 23, 2006, at 1:09 PM, eric kustarz wrote: > Third, much of end-to-end bug servicing from a non-Sun perspective is > still an uphill battle, from acronyms and terms used to policies and > coordination of work, e.g. "Is someone in Sun

Re: [zfs-discuss] Priorities

On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 02:20:54PM -0400, Dale Ghent wrote: > Second, while there is a way for Joe Random to submit a bug, there is > zero way for Joe Random to interact with a bug. No voting to bump or > drop a priority, no easy way to find hot topic bugs, no way to add > one's own notes to

Re: [zfs-discuss] Priorities

* Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-23 11:15]: > It is a good start (yes, I know it's an interface to Bugster, just as > the Java one I pointed out is too - in fact, it's probably the same > code). And, I'm certainly not complaining about how well people have > been taking to and addressin

Re: [zfs-discuss] Priorities

On Jun 23, 2006, at 1:09 PM, eric kustarz wrote: How about it folks - would it be a good idea for me to explore what it takes to get such a bug/RFE setup implemented for the ZFS community on OpenSolaris.org? what's wrong with http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/index.jsp for findin

Re: [zfs-discuss] Priorities

On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 10:09 -0700, eric kustarz wrote: > > How about it folks - would it be a good idea for me to explore what it > > takes to get such a bug/RFE setup implemented for the ZFS community on > > OpenSolaris.org? > > > what's wrong with http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/index

Re: [zfs-discuss] Priorities

[resend with corrected cc list -mdk] > "EK" == eric kustarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: EK> what's wrong with http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/index.jsp EK> for finding bugs? Unless they've fixed it recently, the "keywords" search doesn't actually check against the Bugster keywords fi

Re: [zfs-discuss] Priorities

> "EK" == eric kustarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: EK> what's wrong with http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/index.jsp EK> for finding bugs? Unless they've fixed it recently, the "keywords" search doesn't actually check against the Bugster keywords field. And the information presented is

Re: [zfs-discuss] recommended hardware for a zfs/nfs NAS?

>I think the issue with ZFS on 32-bit is revolving around the >efficient use of memory. If you have lots of memory, ZFS won't >use it. By contrast, in 64-bit systems, when you have lots of >memory, ZFS will use it. In either case, if you only have a >little bit of memory, ZFS may dominate. [my

Re: Fwd: Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved

On 6/23/06, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: comment on analysis below...Tao Chen wrote:>   === Top 5 Devices with largest number of I/Os ===>>   DEVICE  READ AVG.ms MBWRITE AVG.ms MB  IOs SEEK >   ---  --- -- --  --- -- -

Re: [zfs-discuss] add_install_client and ZFS and SMF incompatibility

On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 04:51:21PM +0200, Constantin Gonzalez wrote: > Hi, > > I just set up an install server on my notebook and of course all the installer > data is on a ZFS volume. I love the "zfs compression=on" command! > > It seems that the standard ./add_install_client script from the S10

Re: Fwd: Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved

comment on analysis below... Tao Chen wrote: I should copy this to the list. -- Forwarded message -- On 6/23/06, * Joe Little* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: I can post back to Roch what this latency is. I think the latency is a constant regard

Re: [zfs-discuss] Priorities

How about it folks - would it be a good idea for me to explore what it takes to get such a bug/RFE setup implemented for the ZFS community on OpenSolaris.org? what's wrong with http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/index.jsp for finding bugs? i think we've been really good about taking

Fwd: Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved

I should copy this to the list.-- Forwarded message --On 6/23/06, Joe Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I can post back to Roch what this latency is. I think the latency is aconstant regardless of the zil or not. all that I do by disabling thezil is that I'm able to submit larger

Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved

Joe Little wrote: On 6/23/06, Roch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Joe, you know this but for the benefit of others, I have to highlight that running any NFS server this way, may cause silent data corruption from client's point of view. Whenever a server keeps data in RAM this way and does not

Re: Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved

On 6/23/06, Roch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Joe Little writes: > On 6/22/06, Bill Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey Joe. We're working on some ZFS changes in this area, and if you > > could run an experiment for us, that would be great. Just do this: > > > > echo 'zil_disable/W

Re: [zfs-discuss] recommended hardware for a zfs/nfs NAS?

Dick Davies wrote: I was wondering if anyone could recommend hardware forr a ZFS-based NAS for home use. The 'zfs on 32-bit' thread has scared me of a mini-itx fanless setup, so I'm looking at sparc or opteron. Ideally it would: I think the issue with ZFS on 32-bit is revolving around the effi

Re: [zfs-discuss] http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/version/3

Hi Chris, I fixed the immediate problem, which is to include a version/3 page. I think your other suggestion below is a good one. We'll work on that as well. Regards, Cindy Chris Gerhard wrote: having just upgraded to nv42 zpool status tells me I need to upgrade the ondisk version. zpool

[zfs-discuss] Re: Re: recommended hardware for a zfs/nfs NAS?

> > > >Saturating 100Mbit with a 64-bit CPU and redundant > disks for $300-400 Pounds may be tough. > > Anything in the market can saturate 100Mbit easily; > even with a single > cheap IDE disk. The disks are generally a factor > 5-10 faster than the > 100Mbit network. > > Casper > Indeed, I

Re: [zfs-discuss] recommended hardware for a zfs/nfs NAS?

Dick Davies wrote: I was wondering if anyone could recommend hardware forr a ZFS-based NAS for home use. The 'zfs on 32-bit' thread has scared me of a mini-itx fanless setup, so I'm looking at sparc or opteron. Ideally it would: a) run quiet (blade 100/150 is ok, x4100 ain't :) ) b) take advant

Re: [zfs-discuss] add_install_client and ZFS and SMF incompatibility

Constantin Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is this a known issue? Yes, I've raised this during ZFS Beta as SDR-0192. For some reason, I don't have a CR here. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Faculty of Technolo

[zfs-discuss] Priorities (was: ZFS on 32bit x86)

Darren J Moffat wrote: This is an @opensolaris.org alias it is about working together as a community and identifying problems and discovering solutions. I don't think it is at all appropriate to bring up Sun business choices here. Where that is appropriate is when Sun employees need to justify

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: recommended hardware for a zfs/nfs NAS?

>Saturating 100Mbit with a 64-bit CPU and redundant disks for $300-400 Pounds >may be tough. Anything in the market can saturate 100Mbit easily; even with a single cheap IDE disk. The disks are generally a factor 5-10 faster than the 100Mbit network. Casper __

[zfs-discuss] add_install_client and ZFS and SMF incompatibility

Hi, I just set up an install server on my notebook and of course all the installer data is on a ZFS volume. I love the "zfs compression=on" command! It seems that the standard ./add_install_client script from the S10U2 Tools directory creates an entry in /etc/vfstab for a loopback mount of the So

[zfs-discuss] Re: recommended hardware for a zfs/nfs NAS?

> I was wondering if anyone could recommend hardware > forr a ZFS-based NAS for home use. > > setup, so I'm looking at sparc or opteron. Ideally it > would: > > a) run quiet (blade 100/150 is ok, x4100 ain't :) ) Not much space in a Blade 100/150 for multiple disks, but it is quiet and cheap. Fo

Re: Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved

On 6/23/06, Roch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Joe Little writes: > On 6/22/06, Bill Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey Joe. We're working on some ZFS changes in this area, and if you > > could run an experiment for us, that would be great. Just do this: > > > > echo 'zil_disable/W

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: where has all my space gone? (with zfs mountroot + b38)

Mark Shellenbaum wrote: ... So we have a bunch of stuff in the in-core delete queue, but no threads to process them. The fact that we don't have the threads is related to the bug that Tabriz is working on. Hi Mark, after installing your fixes from three days ago and (cough!) ensuring that my

[zfs-discuss] http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/version/3

having just upgraded to nv42 zpool status tells me I need to upgrade the ondisk version. zpool version points me at http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/version/3 : : sigma TS 6 $; zpool upgrade -v This system is currently running ZFS version 3. The following versions are suppored: VER

[zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS and Virtualization

Hello Nate, > > I have few issues about ZFS and virtualization: > > > > [b]Virtualization and performance[/b] > > When filesystem traffic occurs on a zpool > containing > > only spindles dedicated to this zpool i/o can be > > distributed evenly. When the zpool is located on a > > lun sliced from a

Re: Re: [zfs-discuss] 15 minute fdsync problem and ZFS: Solved

Joe Little writes: > On 6/22/06, Bill Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey Joe. We're working on some ZFS changes in this area, and if you > > could run an experiment for us, that would be great. Just do this: > > > > echo 'zil_disable/W1' | mdb -kw > > > > We're working on some f

[zfs-discuss] recommended hardware for a zfs/nfs NAS?

I was wondering if anyone could recommend hardware forr a ZFS-based NAS for home use. The 'zfs on 32-bit' thread has scared me of a mini-itx fanless setup, so I'm looking at sparc or opteron. Ideally it would: a) run quiet (blade 100/150 is ok, x4100 ain't :) ) b) take advantage of cheap disks

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on 32bit x86

Erik Trimble wrote: Artem Kachitchkine wrote: AMD Geodes are 32-bit only. I haven't heard any mention that they will _ever_ be 64-bit. But, honestly, this and the Via chip aren't really ever going to be targets for Solaris. That is, they simply aren't (any substantial) part of the audience

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on 32bit x86

Erik Trimble wrote: AMD Geodes are 32-bit only. I haven't heard any mention that they will _ever_ be 64-bit. But, honestly, this and the Via chip aren't really ever going to be targets for Solaris. That is, they simply aren't (any substantial) part of the audience we're trying to reach with S