See zpool(1M):
This command reports actual physical space available to
the storage pool. The physical space can be different
from the total amount of space that any contained
datasets can actually use. The amount of space used in a
raidz conf
Just joined this group, this may have been asked.
But after creating two zfs file system, I used 'zfs list' and 'zpool
list'. Why are the answers different. Is this a bug? Example:
# zfs list
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
archive 78K 2.93G 24.5K /ar
Today ZFS proved its mettle at our site. We've a set of Sun servers (25k and
2900s) that are all connected to a DMX3500 via a SAN. Different servers use the
storage differently; some of the storage on the server side was configured with
ZFS while others were configured as UFS filesystems while s
Latest plan is to release zfs boot with U5. It definitely isn't going
to make U4.
We have new prototype bits, but they haven't been putback yet. There are
a number of design decisions that have hinged on syncing up our strategy
with other projects, or allowing some other projects to "gel". Ma
Hi,
I've read the blog on how to config ZFS as root manually. That's cool.
Given that this is targeted for U4 though, and U3 should be released anytime
now, I'm wondering when we might see even more up to date support in Nevada?
Will more changes be put back soon? - Or have they already been pu
[ Sorry, this bounced the first time so I subscribed to the list ]
Sanjeev Bagewadi wrote:
>Jim,
>>
>We did hit similar issue yesterday on build 50 and build 45 although the
>node did not hang.
>In one of the cases we saw that the hot spare was not of the same
>size... can you check
>if this true
On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 06:11 -0800, Marlanne DeLaSource wrote:
> What is even stranger is that if I copy a file in a raidz configuration
> (let's say /usr/bin/ls), we have different results out of regular commands :
>
> ls -l /usr/bin/ls /mapool/ls => same size
> ls -s /usr/bin/ls /mapool/ls => Di
What is even stranger is that if I copy a file in a raidz configuration (let's
say /usr/bin/ls), we have different results out of regular commands :
ls -l /usr/bin/ls /mapool/ls => same size
ls -s /usr/bin/ls /mapool/ls => Different sizes
du -s /usr/bin/ls /mapool/ls = > different sizes
Shouldn'
