On January 19, 2007 6:47:30 PM -0800 Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Not to be picky, but the X2100 and X2200 series are NOT
designed/targeted for disk serving (they don't even have redundant power
supplies). They're compute-boxes. The X4100/X4200 are what you are
looking for to get a f
On January 19, 2007 5:59:13 PM -0800 "David J. Orman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
card that supports SAS would be *ideal*,
Except that SAS support on Solaris is not very good.
One major problem is they treat it like scsi when instead they should
treat it like FC (or native SATA).
So, anybody
David J. Orman wrote:
Hi,
I'm looking at Sun's 1U x64 server line, and at most they support two drives.
This is fine for the root OS install, but obviously not sufficient for many
users.
Specifically, I am looking at the: http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x2200/
X2200M2.
It only has "Riser car
On Fri, 2007-01-19 at 17:59 -0800, David J. Orman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking at Sun's 1U x64 server line, and at most they support two drives.
> This is fine for the root OS install, but obviously not sufficient for many
> users.
>
> Specifically, I am looking at the: http://www.sun.com/serve
Hi David,
I don't know if your company qualifies as a startup under Sun's regs
but you can get an X4500/Thumper for $24,000 under this program:
http://www.sun.com/emrkt/startupessentials/
Best Regards,
Jason
On 1/19/07, David J. Orman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I'm looking at Sun's 1U x64
Hi,
I'm looking at Sun's 1U x64 server line, and at most they support two drives.
This is fine for the root OS install, but obviously not sufficient for many
users.
Specifically, I am looking at the: http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x2200/
X2200M2.
It only has "Riser card assembly with two inte
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 16:26:15 -0800
From: eric kustarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] periodic disk i/o upon pool upgrade
[description of my configuration and problem elided]
Version 2 of ZFS (
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/version/2/ ) added di
Glenn Skinner wrote:
About a month ago, I upgraded my workstation to Nevada build 49. When
I ran "zpool status" on my existing zfs pool (a couple mirrored
partitions, one from each of the system's two disks), I discovered that
the existing on-disk format was at version 1 and that I could upgrade
If you are referring to shrinking a pool/file system, where I work this is
considered very high on the list. It isn't a truly dynamic file system if we
can't shrink it.
As a practical example, you have a test server with several projects being
worked on. When a project finishes 9for whatever re
> These two items (removing a vdev and restriping an array) are probably
> closely related. At the core of either operation likely will center
> around some metaslab_evacuate() routine which empties a metaslab and
> puts the data onto another metaslab.
> Evacuating a vdev could be no more than ev
About a month ago, I upgraded my workstation to Nevada build 49. When
I ran "zpool status" on my existing zfs pool (a couple mirrored
partitions, one from each of the system's two disks), I discovered that
the existing on-disk format was at version 1 and that I could upgrade
to version 3. I chose
Hello,
I hope this is the right place to ask.
I just built a new i386 server to toy with zfsroot, followed Tabriz's
instructions as far as I can tell to the letter to build a zfs root system, and
it hangs at boot time if I try and boot the ZFS solaris from the grub selection
screen. I did this
> On 15/01/07, Rick McNeal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 15, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Dick Davies wrote:
> For the record, the reason I asked was we have an iscsi target host
> with
> 2 NICs and for some reason clients were attempting to connect to
> the targets
> on the private interface i
James Dickens wrote:
On 1/13/07, roland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
thanks for your infos!
> > can zfs protect my data from such single-bit-errors with a single
drive ?
> >
>nope.. but it can tell you that it has occurred.
can it also tell (or can i use a tool to determine), which data/file
2007/1/19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> "ACHI SATA ... probably look at Intel boards instead."
Whats ACHI ? I didnt see anything useful on google or wikipedia ... is it a
chipset ? The issue I take with intel is there chips are either grossly
power hungry/hot (anything pre-pentium M
Hello Nico,
Friday, January 19, 2007, 7:53:06 PM, you wrote:
NVdM> Hi,
NVdM> Looking if someone already found a solution, or workaround, to change the
GUID of a zfs pool.
NVdM> Explain me some more in depth, by use of tools like ShadowImage
NVdM> on storage Arrays like the Sun Storagetek 99xx
>However, I don't think OpenSolaris/Solaris support these unless the
>Addonics eSATA PCI-X adapter supports them. I have not figured that
>one out yet. All I know is I want ZFS.
I'm not using the multiplier, but I am using the 4 port Addonics eSATA PCI-X
card in a PCI slot,
btw - eSATA == SATA w
-30 will not be released as a standalone patch due to issues with patchrm
and some libraries... A patch is coming soon (got told end of the month).
Keep watching :)
Regards
Gael
On 1/18/07, Mike Gerdts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/18/07, Christophe Dupré <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> . . .
> We don't want to buy an Legato solution This will be overkill and is too
> expensive. Scripting with tar and other archievers is not the best solution
> for doing a backup.
Gerrit,
It seems you/they must already be scripting with ufsdump now. It's no
more diffi
Hello Gerrit,
Friday, January 19, 2007, 5:24:47 PM, you wrote:
GS> Hi,
GS> With the Flemish government we have more then 100 sites. Most of
GS> the time the backup is done on a DLT7000 or LTO tape device. A few
GS> sites are bigger and have a Legato backup solution.
GS> With UFS, the restore is
David,
That would be nice, and reasonably cheap. I hope it works. The only
issue I have with it is the lack of 3.5 spots, only having 3 such slots
really limits the ability to grow the space over time.
"You must have just missed the "What SATA controllers are people using
for ZFS?" thread.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/19/2007 10:24:47 AM:
> Hi,
>
> With the Flemish government we have more then 100 sites. Most of the
> time the backup is done on a DLT7000 or LTO tape device. A few sites
> are bigger and have a Legato backup solution.
>
> With UFS, the restore is easy on those s
Hi,
With the Flemish government we have more then 100 sites. Most of the time the
backup is done on a DLT7000 or LTO tape device. A few sites are bigger and have
a Legato backup solution.
With UFS, the restore is easy on those small sites.
ufsrestore -ivf /dev/rmt/0n
Looking at the manual and
On Jan 18, 2007, at 6:17 AM, Dick Davies wrote:
On 15/01/07, Rick McNeal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 15, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Dick Davies wrote:
> Hi, are there currently any plans to make an iSCSI target
created by
> setting shareiscsi=on on a zvol
> bindable to a single interface (s
I've been using the syba 4port card on linux and it works well. I bricked
another one trying to downgrade the bios so it was just disks, no RAID. Ah,
$20 gone.
So I got an Addonics eSata card. Sata 3.0. PCI *or* PCI-X. Works right off
the bat w/ 10u3. No firmware update needed. It was $1
After bfuing from b37 to current zpool can't start with error:
wis-2 ~ # zpool status -x
pool: zstore
state: FAULTED
status: One or more devices could not be opened. There are insufficient
replicas for the pool to continue functioning.
action: Attach the missing device and online it usi
On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 06:55:39PM +0800, Jeremy Teo wrote:
> On the issue of the ability to remove a device from a zpool, how
> useful/pressing is this feature? Or is this more along the line of
> "nice to have"?
We definitely need it. As a usage case, on occasion we have had to move
SAN sites,
On an up to date Solaris 10 11/06 with Sun Cluster 3.2 and iSCSI backed
did devices, zpool dumps core on creation if I try to use a did device.
Using the underlying device works, and this might not be supported
(though I don't know), but I thought you would probably prefer to see
the error than no
Hello Karen,
Thursday, January 18, 2007, 6:43:24 PM, you wrote:
>
How do you reconfigure ZFS on the server after an OS upgrade? I have a ZFS pool on a 6130 storge array.
After upgrade the data on the storage array is still intact, but ZFS configuration is gone due to new OS.
Do I use
Hello Matthew,
Thursday, January 18, 2007, 7:51:18 PM, you wrote:
MA> Jeremy Teo wrote:
>> On the issue of the ability to remove a device from a zpool, how
>> useful/pressing is this feature? Or is this more along the line of
>> "nice to have"?
MA> This is a pretty high priority. We are working
Hello mike,
Friday, January 19, 2007, 4:07:31 AM, you wrote:
m> I get that part. I think I asked that question before (although not as
m> direct) - basically you're talking about the ability to shrink volumes
m> and/or disable/change the mirroring/redundancy options if there is
m> space available
31 matches
Mail list logo
