Hi Philip,
I'm not an expert, so I'm afraid I don't know what to tell you. I'd
call Apple Support and see what they say. As horrid as they are at
Enterprise support they may be the best ones to clarify if
multipathing is available without Xsan.
Best Regards,
Jason
On 1/16/07, Philip Mötteli <[
This command is often used to identify the physical disk linked to the LUN
(iLu) to allow the San team to deallocate/identify the right
physical disk(s) etc...
vsmd8008:/root #/opt/DynamicLinkManager/bin/dlnkmgr view -drv
PathID HDevName Device LDEV
00 c4t50060E8004572420d71 ssd
[u]Bathing ape hoody Bathing ape bape hoodie lil wayne BBC
[/u]
[nobr]Bathing ape hoody Bape hoody bathing ape hoody clothing clothes
http://wholesale-distributors-dropship-suppliers-sources.com";>http://wholesale-distributors-dropship-suppliers-sources.com/01hoodie.jpg";
border="0" height="101"
Hello Matthew,
Thursday, January 4, 2007, 12:11:26 AM, you wrote:
MA> There's also a number of areas where performance could be improved, which
MA> hopefully I'll be able to get to soon.
Any update? I would be definitely interested in speeding up zfs
send/recv process.
MA> When doing remote r
Hello Rainer,
Tuesday, January 16, 2007, 5:02:01 PM, you wrote:
RH> scenario. Due to the number of files, UFS was not an option. Since
RH> the environment is going to RAC in six months, upgrading Veritas
RH> did not seem like a justifiable option, with the (mistaken?)
RH> belief ZFS performance
Anantha N. Srirama wrote:
I'm observing the following behavior in our environment (Sol10U2, E2900, 24x96,
2x2Gbps, ...)
In general, i would recommend upgrading to s10u3 (if you can).
- I've a compressed ZFS filesystem where I'm creating a large tar file. I
notice that the tar process is ru
Hello Albert,
Tuesday, January 16, 2007, 11:26:04 PM, you wrote:
AC> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 01:28:04PM -0800, Eric Kustarz wrote:
>> Albert Chin wrote:
>> >On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 10:55:23AM -0600, Albert Chin wrote:
>> >
>> >>I have no hands-on experience with ZFS but have a question. If the
>>
What does that view show?
Gael wrote:
All,
And on that one big mea culpa, the wanboot.conf install file used the
solaris 9 miniroot to load that solaris 10 U3 machine...
explaining why the MD21 lines appeared on that machine ... (last time
I do play lazy admin and don't refresh the whole wan
The DBA team isn't wanting to do another test. They have "made up their minds".
We have a meeting with them tomorrow, though, and will try to convince them of
one more test so that we can try the mdb and fsstat tools. (The admin doing the
tests was using iostat, not fsstat.) I, at least, am inte
All,
And on that one big mea culpa, the wanboot.conf install file used the
solaris 9 miniroot to load that solaris 10 U3 machine...
explaining why the MD21 lines appeared on that machine ... (last time I do
play lazy admin and don't refresh the whole wanboot config files before
loading Solaris 10
> Rainer Heilke,
>
> You have 1/4 of the amount of memory that the 2900
> 0 system is capable of (192GBs : I think).
Yep. The server does not hold the application (three-tier architecture) so this
is the standard build we bought. The memory has not indicated any problems. All
errors point to wr
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 01:28:04PM -0800, Eric Kustarz wrote:
> Albert Chin wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 10:55:23AM -0600, Albert Chin wrote:
> >
> >>I have no hands-on experience with ZFS but have a question. If the
> >>file server running ZFS exports the ZFS file system via NFS to
> >>client
Albert Chin wrote:
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 10:55:23AM -0600, Albert Chin wrote:
I have no hands-on experience with ZFS but have a question. If the
file server running ZFS exports the ZFS file system via NFS to
clients, based on previous messages on this list, it is not possible
for an NFS clien
Rainer Heilke,
You have 1/4 of the amount of memory that the 2900 system
is capable of (192GBs : I think).
Secondly, output from fsstat(1M) could be helpful.
Run this command over time and check to see if the
values change over time..
Mitchell Erb
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 10:55:23AM -0600, Albert Chin wrote:
> I have no hands-on experience with ZFS but have a question. If the
> file server running ZFS exports the ZFS file system via NFS to
> clients, based on previous messages on this list, it is not possible
> for an NFS client to mount this
Hi Torrey,
The MD21 entries were removed from the /etc/format.dat file in the
Solaris 10 release although the controller itself was EOL'd long
before this release.
However, the entries are not removed upon upgrade from a previous
release, which is this bug:
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bu
> What hardware is used? Sparc? x86 32-bit? x86
> 64-bit?
> How much RAM is installed?
> Which version of the OS?
Sorry, this is happening on two systems (test and production). They're both
Solaris 10, Update 2. Test is a V880 with 8 CPU's and 32GB, production is an
E2900 with 12 dual-core CPU
> We are having issues with some Oracle databases on
> ZFS. We would appreciate any useful feedback you can
> provide.
> [...]
> The issue seems to be
> serious write contention/performance. Some read
> issues also exhibit themselves, but they seem to be
> secondary to the write issues.
What hardw
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Rainer Heilke wrote:
> Greetings, everyone.
>
> We are having issues with some Oracle databases on ZFS. We would appreciate
> any useful feedback you can provide.
You did'nt give any details of the system (configuration) on which the DB
runs... Not even SPARC or x86/AMD64...
Greetings, everyone.
We are having issues with some Oracle databases on ZFS. We would appreciate any
useful feedback you can provide.
We are using Oracle Financials, with all databases, control files, and logs on
one big 2TB ZFS pool that is on a Hitachi SAN. (This is what the DBA group
wanted
20 matches
Mail list logo
