Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello George,
Wednesday, July 26, 2006, 7:27:04 AM, you wrote:
GW> Additionally, I've just putback the latest feature set and bugfixes
GW> which will be part of s10u3_03. There were some additional performance
GW> fixes which may really benefit plus it will provide h
Hello zfs-discuss,
Is someone working on a backport (patch) to S10? Any timeframe?
--
Best regards,
Robert mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://milek.blogspot.com
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs depends on ldi_get_size(), which depends on the device being
accessed exporting one of the properties below. i guess the
the devices generated by IBMsdd and/or EMCpower/or don't
generate these properties.
ed
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 01:53:31PM -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 200
Hello George,
Wednesday, July 26, 2006, 7:27:04 AM, you wrote:
GW> Additionally, I've just putback the latest feature set and bugfixes
GW> which will be part of s10u3_03. There were some additional performance
GW> fixes which may really benefit plus it will provide hot spares support.
GW> Once
Hello Eric,
Wednesday, July 26, 2006, 8:44:55 PM, you wrote:
ES> And no, there is currently no way to remove a dynamically striped disk
ES> from a pool. We're working on it.
That's interesting (I mean that's something is actually being done
about it).
Can you give us some specifics (features,
Does format show these drives to be available and containing a non-zero
size?
Eric Schrock wrote:
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 02:11:44PM -0600, David Curtis wrote:
Eric,
Here is the output:
# ./dtrace2.dtr
dtrace: script './dtrace2.dtr' matched 4 probes
CPU IDFUNCTION:
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 02:11:44PM -0600, David Curtis wrote:
> Eric,
>
> Here is the output:
>
> # ./dtrace2.dtr
> dtrace: script './dtrace2.dtr' matched 4 probes
> CPU IDFUNCTION:NAME
> 0 17816 ldi_open_by_name:entry /dev/dsk/vpath1c
> 0 16197
There is manual, programmatic and start-up control of write cache on
SATA drives already available.
There is no drive-agnostic (i.e. for all types of drives) control that
covers all three ways of cache control - that was shifted into a lower
priority item than other sata development stuff. It
Eric,
Here is the output:
# ./dtrace2.dtr
dtrace: script './dtrace2.dtr' matched 4 probes
CPU IDFUNCTION:NAME
0 17816 ldi_open_by_name:entry /dev/dsk/vpath1c
0 16197 ldi_get_otyp:return 0
0 15546ldi_prop_exists:
So it does look like something's messed up here. Before we pin this
down as a driver bug, we should double check that we are indeed opening
what we think we're opening, and try to track down why ldi_get_size is
failing. Try this:
#!/usr/sbin/dtrace -s
ldi_open_by_name:entry
{
trace(stri
Eric,
Here is what the customer gets trying to create the pool using the
software alias: (I added all the ldi_open's to the script)
# zpool create -f extdisk vpath1c
# ./dtrace.script
dtrace: script './dtrace.script' matched 6 probes
CPU IDFUNCTION:NAME
0 7233
You want 'zpool attach' instead of 'zpool add'. What the customer did
was add it back, but as a dynamic stripe instead of a second half of a
mirror.
And no, there is currently no way to remove a dynamically striped disk
from a pool. We're working on it.
- Eric
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 02:12:11P
Customer created a pool with 2 disks that were mirrored.
He then wanted to see what would happen if he destroyed the mirror.
He offlined the disk c1t5d0 then "destroy" it.
Hi ZFS question.
He then added back to the pool with the intention of it replacing itself
as the mirror. However the pool d
Jesus Cea wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil Perrin wrote:
I suppose if you know
the disk only contains zfs slices then write caching could be
manually enabled using "format -e" -> cache -> write_cache -> enable
When will we have write cache control over ATA/SATA drives
zfs should work fine with disks under the control of solaris mpxio.
i don't know about any of the other multipathing solutions.
if you're trying to use a device that's controlled by another
multipathing solution, you might want to try specifying the full
path to the device, ex:
zpool creat
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 08:38:16AM -0600, Neil Perrin wrote:
>
>
> >GX620 on my desk at work and I run snv_40 on the Latitude D610 that I
> >carry with me. In both cases the machines only have one disk, so I need
> >to split it up for UFS for the OS and ZFS for my data. How do I turn on
> >writ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Neil Perrin wrote:
> I suppose if you know
> the disk only contains zfs slices then write caching could be
> manually enabled using "format -e" -> cache -> write_cache -> enable
When will we have write cache control over ATA/SATA drives? :-).
- --
Je
This suggests that there is some kind of bug in the layered storage
software. ZFS doesn't do anything special to the underlying storage
device; it merely relies on a few ldi_*() routines. I would try running
the following dtrace script:
#!/usr/sbin/dtrace -s
vdev_disk_open:return,
ldi_open_by_n
Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Background / configuration **
zpool will not create a storage pool on fibre channel storage. I'm
attached to an IBM SVC using the IBMsdd driver. I have no problem using
SVM metadevices and UFS on these devices.
List steps to reproduce th
Brian Hechinger wrote On 07/26/06 06:49,:
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 03:54:22PM -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
If you give zpool(1M) 'whole disks' (i.e. no 's0' slice number) and let
it label and use the disks, it will automatically turn on the write
cache for you.
What if you can't give ZFS whol
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 03:54:22PM -0700, Eric Schrock wrote:
>
> If you give zpool(1M) 'whole disks' (i.e. no 's0' slice number) and let
> it label and use the disks, it will automatically turn on the write
> cache for you.
What if you can't give ZFS whole disks? I run snv_38 on the Optiplex
GX
Richard Elling wrote:
Craig Morgan wrote:
Spare a thought also for the remote serviceability aspects of these
systems, if customers raise calls/escalations against such systems
then our remote support/solution centre staff would find such an
output useful in identifying and verifying the confi
> For a synchronous write to a pool with mirrored disks, does the write
> unblock after just one of the disks' write caches is flushed,
> or only after all of the disks' caches are flushed?
The latter. We don't consider a write to be committed until
the data is on stable storage at full replicati
23 matches
Mail list logo
