Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs rewrite?

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 10:57:19PM -0800, Frank Cusack wrote: > On January 27, 2007 12:27:17 AM -0200 Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 26-Jan-07, at 11:34 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > >>3. I created file system with huge amount of data, where most of the > >>data is read-only. I chan

[zfs-discuss] Re: high density SAS

> > How badly can you mess up a JBOD? > > Two words: vibration, cooling. Three more: power, signal quality. I've seen even individual drive cases with bad enough signal quality to cause bit errors. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-

[zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

> 1. How stable is ZFS? It's a new file system; there will be bugs. It appears to be well-tested, though. There are a few known issues; for instance, a write failure can panic the system under some circumstances. UFS has known issues too > 2. Recommended config. Above, I have a fairly

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs rewrite?

On January 27, 2007 12:27:17 AM -0200 Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 26-Jan-07, at 11:34 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: 3. I created file system with huge amount of data, where most of the data is read-only. I change my server from intel to sparc64 machine. Adaptive endianess only chan

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

> A number that I've been quoting, albeit without a good reference, comes > from Jim Gray, who has been around the data-management industry for > longer than I have (and I've been in this business since 1970); he's > currently at Microsoft. Jim says that the controller/drive subsystem > writes

[zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

Al Hopper wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Rainer Heilke wrote: > >>> So, if I was an enterprise, I'd be willing to keep >>> enough empty LUNs >>> available to facilitate at least the migration of >>> one or more filesystems >>> if not complete pools. > > reformatted ... > >> You might be, but d

[zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

Richard Elling wrote: > Rainer Heilke wrote: > >>> So, if I was an enterprise, I'd be willing to keep >>> enough empty LUNs >>> available to facilitate at least the migration of >>> one or more filesystems >>> if not complete pools. >> >> >> >> You might be, but don't be surprised when the Finan

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs rewrite?

On 26-Jan-07, at 11:34 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: Hi. What do you guys think about implementing 'zfs/zpool rewrite' command? It'll read every block older than the date when the command was executed and write it again (using standard ZFS COW mechanism, simlar to how resilvering works, bu

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs rewrite?

> What do you guys think about implementing 'zfs/zpool rewrite' command? > It'll read every block older than the date when the command was executed > and write it again (using standard ZFS COW mechanism, simlar to how > resilvering works, but the data is read from the same disk it is written to= >

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Toby Thain wrote: On 26-Jan-07, at 7:29 PM, Selim Daoud wrote: it would be good to have real data and not only guess ot anecdots this story about wrong blocks being written by RAID controllers sounds like the anti-terrorism propaganda we are leaving in: exagerate the facts to catch everyone'

[zfs-discuss] zfs rewrite?

Hi. What do you guys think about implementing 'zfs/zpool rewrite' command? It'll read every block older than the date when the command was executed and write it again (using standard ZFS COW mechanism, simlar to how resilvering works, but the data is read from the same disk it is written to). I s

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

Al Hopper wrote: On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Torrey McMahon wrote: Al Hopper wrote: Now your accounting folks are going to be asking you to justify the purchase of that hi-end SAN box and why you're not using ZFS everywhere. :) Oh - and the accounting folks love it when you tell them th

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

Richard Elling wrote: Personally, I've never been in the situation where users ask for less storage, but maybe I'm just the odd guy out? ;-) You just realized that JoeSysadmin allocated ten luns to the zpool when he realy only should have allocated one. ___

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Torrey McMahon wrote: > Al Hopper wrote: > > > > Now your accounting folks are going to be asking you to justify the > > purchase of that hi-end SAN box and why you're not using ZFS > > everywhere. :) > > > > Oh - and the accounting folks love it when you tell them there'

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Toby Thain wrote: > > > > Oh - and the accounting folks love it when you tell them there's no > > ongoing cost of ownership - because Joe Screwdriver can swap out a > > failed > > Seagate 500Gb SATA drive after he picks up a replacement from Frys > > on his > > lunch break! >

Re: [zfs-discuss] Project Proposal: Availability Suite

Jason J. W. Williams wrote: Could the replication engine eventually be integrated more tightly with ZFS? Not it in the present form. The architecture and implementation of Availability Suite is driven off block-based replication at the device level (/dev/rdsk/...), something that allows the pro

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

> My only qualification to enter this discussion is that I once wrote a > floppy disk format program for minix. I recollect, however, that each > sector on the disk is accompanied by a block that contains the sector > address and a CRC. You'd have to define the layer you're talking about. I pres

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

Al Hopper wrote: Now your accounting folks are going to be asking you to justify the purchase of that hi-end SAN box and why you're not using ZFS everywhere. :) Oh - and the accounting folks love it when you tell them there's no ongoing cost of ownership - because Joe Screwdriver can swap

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

Oh - and the accounting folks love it when you tell them there's no ongoing cost of ownership - because Joe Screwdriver can swap out a failed Seagate 500Gb SATA drive after he picks up a replacement from Frys on his lunch break! Why do people think this will work? I never could figure it o

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On 26-Jan-07, at 7:29 PM, Selim Daoud wrote: it would be good to have real data and not only guess ot anecdots this story about wrong blocks being written by RAID controllers sounds like the anti-terrorism propaganda we are leaving in: exagerate the facts to catch everyone's attention .It's g

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: > > A number that I've been quoting, albeit without a good reference, comes > from Jim Gray, who has been around the data-management industry for > longer than I have (and I've been in this business since 1970); he's > currently at Micro

Re: [zfs-discuss] Project Proposal: Availability Suite

Could the replication engine eventually be integrated more tightly with ZFS? That would be slick alternative to send/recv. Best Regards, Jason On 1/26/07, Jim Dunham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Project Overview: I propose the creation of a project on opensolaris.org, to bring to the community

Re: [zfs-discuss] multihosted ZFS

You could use SAN zoning of the affected LUN's to keep multiple hosts from seeing the zpool. When failover time comes, you change the zoning to make the LUN's visible to the new host, then import. When the old host reboots, it won't find any zpool. Better safe than sorry Or change the LUN

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

To be fair, you can replace vdevs with same-sized or larger vdevs online. The issue is that you cannot replace with smaller vdevs nor can you eliminate vdevs. In other words, I can migrate data around without downtime, I just can't shrink or eliminate vdevs without send/recv. This is where the ph

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Rainer Heilke wrote: > > So, if I was an enterprise, I'd be willing to keep > > enough empty LUNs > > available to facilitate at least the migration of > > one or more filesystems > > if not complete pools. reformatted ... > You might be, but don't be surprised when th

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Correction: "ZFS has run VERY stably for us with data integrity issues at all." should read "ZFS has run VERY stably for us with NO data integrity issues at all." On 1/26/07, Jason J. W. Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Jeff, We're running a FLX210 which I believe is an Engenio 2884. I

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Hi Jeff, We're running a FLX210 which I believe is an Engenio 2884. In our case it also is attached to a T2000. ZFS has run VERY stably for us with data integrity issues at all. We did have a significant latency problem caused by ZFS flushing the write cache on the array after every write, but t

[zfs-discuss] data wanted: disk kstats

We've been talking a lot recently about failure rates and types of failures. As you may know, I do look at field data and generally don't ask the group for more data. But this time, for various reasons (I might have found a bug or deficiency) I'm soliciting for more data at large. What I'd like

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Dana H. Myers wrote: Torrey McMahon wrote: Dana H. Myers wrote: Ed Gould wrote: On Jan 26, 2007, at 12:13, Richard Elling wrote: On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: A number that I've been quoting, albeit without a good ref

Re: [zfs-discuss] bug id 6343667

On Jan 26, 2007, at 6:02 AM, Robert Milkowski wrote: Hello zfs-discuss, Is anyone working on that bug? Any progress? For bug: 6343667 scrub/resilver has to start over when a snapshot is taken I believe that is on Matt and Mark's radar, and they have made some progress. eric _

Re: [zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

On 1/26/07, Robert Thurlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Eric Enright wrote: > Samba does not currently support ZFS ACLs. Yes, but this just means you can't get/set your ACLs from a CIFS client. ACLs will be enforced just fine once set locally on the server; you may also be able to get/set them f

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Jan 26, 2007, at 13:53, Paul Fisher wrote: This seems to be from Jim and on point: http://www.usenix.org/event/fast05/tech/gray.pdf Yes, thanks. That's the talk I was referring to. There's a reference in it to a Microsoft tech report with measurement data. --Ed ___

RE: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Gould > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 3:38 PM > > Yes, I agree. I'm sorry I don't have the data that Jim presented at > FAST, but he did present actual data. Richard Elling (I believe it > was > Richard) has also posted som

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

Rainer Heilke wrote: So, if I was an enterprise, I'd be willing to keep enough empty LUNs available to facilitate at least the migration of one or more filesystems if not complete pools. You might be, but don't be surprised when the Financials folks laugh you out of their office. Large corpo

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Jan 26, 2007, at 13:29, Selim Daoud wrote: it would be good to have real data and not only guess ot anecdots Yes, I agree. I'm sorry I don't have the data that Jim presented at FAST, but he did present actual data. Richard Elling (I believe it was Richard) has also posted some related da

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

it would be good to have real data and not only guess ot anecdots this story about wrong blocks being written by RAID controllers sounds like the anti-terrorism propaganda we are leaving in: exagerate the facts to catch everyone's attention .It's going to take more than that to prove RAID ctrls

Re: [zfs-discuss] multihosted ZFS

On Jan 26, 2007, at 13:52, Marion Hakanson wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: . . . realize that the pool is now in use by the other host. That leads to two systems using the same zpool which is not nice. Is there any solution to this problem, or do I have to get Sun Cluster 3.2 if I want to

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Jan 26, 2007, at 13:16, Dana H. Myers wrote: I would tend to expect these spurious events to impact read and write equally; more specifically, the chance of any one read or write being mis-addressed is about the same. Since, AFAIK, there are many more reads from a disk typically than writes,

Re: [zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

Eric Enright wrote: Samba does not currently support ZFS ACLs. Yes, but this just means you can't get/set your ACLs from a CIFS client. ACLs will be enforced just fine once set locally on the server; you may also be able to get/set them from an NFS client. You may know this, but I know some a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Torrey McMahon wrote: > Dana H. Myers wrote: >> Ed Gould wrote: >> >>> On Jan 26, 2007, at 12:13, Richard Elling wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: > A number that I've been quoting, albeit without a good reference, > comes from Jim Gr

[zfs-discuss] Re: Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

> So, if I was an enterprise, I'd be willing to keep > enough empty LUNs > available to facilitate at least the migration of > one or more filesystems > if not complete pools. You might be, but don't be surprised when the Financials folks laugh you out of their office. Large corporations do not

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Jan 26, 2007, at 12:52, Dana H. Myers wrote: So this leaves me wondering how often the controller/drive subsystem reads data from the wrong sector of the drive without notice; is it symmetrical with respect to writing, and thus about once a drive/year, or are there factors which change this?

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Dana H. Myers wrote: Ed Gould wrote: On Jan 26, 2007, at 12:13, Richard Elling wrote: On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: A number that I've been quoting, albeit without a good reference, comes from Jim Gray, who has been around the data-management industry

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Ed Gould wrote: > On Jan 26, 2007, at 12:13, Richard Elling wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: >>> A number that I've been quoting, albeit without a good reference, >>> comes from Jim Gray, who has been around the data-management industry >>> for longer than I have

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Jan 26, 2007, at 12:05 PM, Ed Gould wrote: I would suggest exporting two LUNs from your central storage and let ZFS mirror them. You can get a wider range of space/ performance tradeoffs if you give ZFS a JBOD, but that doesn't sound like an option. I am doing something similar on a l

Re: [zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

On 1/26/07, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Brian H. Nelson wrote: > For several reasons we currently need to stay on UFS and can't switch to > ZFS proper. So instead we have opted to do UFS on a zvol using raid-z, Can you state what those reasons are please ? I know that isn't answe

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Jan 26, 2007, at 12:13, Richard Elling wrote: On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: A number that I've been quoting, albeit without a good reference, comes from Jim Gray, who has been around the data-management industry for longer than I have (and I've been in this busine

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/26/2007 01:43:35 PM: > On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: > > On Jan 26, 2007, at 9:42, Gary Mills wrote: > > >How does this work in an environment with storage that's centrally- > > >managed and shared between many servers? > > > > It wil

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Gary Mills wrote: On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: On Jan 26, 2007, at 9:42, Gary Mills wrote: How does this work in an environment with storage that's centrally- managed and shared between many servers? It will work, but if the storage system corrupts th

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Gary Mills wrote: On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: On Jan 26, 2007, at 9:42, Gary Mills wrote: How does this work in an environment with storage that's centrally- managed and shared between many servers? It will work, but if the storage system corrupts the data, ZFS wil

RE: [zfs-discuss] A little different look at filesystems ... Justlooking for ideas

I know that there was some initial work with NFSv4 and caching at the NFS level. With AFS support dwindling, some AFS proponents are saying that NFSv4 is the replacement. File caching with NFSv4 may be another way to do it. Gary A. Ross Network Operations Architect Ford Motor Company [EMAIL PRO

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:05:17AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: > On Jan 26, 2007, at 9:42, Gary Mills wrote: > >How does this work in an environment with storage that's centrally- > >managed and shared between many servers? > > It will work, but if the storage system corrupts the data, ZFS will be > u

Re: [zfs-discuss] A little different look at filesystems ... Just looking for ideas

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 11:11:13AM -0800, Ed Gould wrote: > > Disconnected operation is a hard problem. One of the better research > efforts in that area was CODA, at CMU. CODA was, as I recall, and > extension to AFS, but it's probably reasonable to take some of those > ideas and marry them

Re: [zfs-discuss] multihosted ZFS

On Jan 26, 2007, at 10:52, Marion Hakanson wrote: Perhaps I'm stating the obvious, but here goes: You could use SAN zoning of the affected LUN's to keep multiple hosts from seeing the zpool. When failover time comes, you change the zoning to make the LUN's visible to the new host, then import.

Re: [zfs-discuss] A little different look at filesystems ... Just looking for ideas

On Jan 26, 2007, at 10:57, Ross, Gary (G.A.) wrote: ... What if something like the old CacheFS was revived, using ZFS as the base file system instead of UFS? ... Could this be a good thing, or am I way off base??? Disconnected operation is a hard problem. One of the better research efforts

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Jan 26, 2007, at 9:42, Gary Mills wrote: How does this work in an environment with storage that's centrally- managed and shared between many servers? I'm putting together a new IMAP server that will eventually use 3TB of space from our Netapp via an iSCSI SAN. The Netapp provides all of the

Re: [zfs-discuss] multihosted ZFS

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > . . . > realize that the pool is now in use by the other host. That leads to two > systems using the same zpool which is not nice. > > Is there any solution to this problem, or do I have to get Sun Cluster 3.2 if > I want to serve same zpools from many hosts? We may try S

[zfs-discuss] A little different look at filesystems ... Just looking for ideas

Here's something I've been noodling around for a while. I'd like to run this by some of you in this forum and see what you think. If I'm off topic, I apologize. ZFS gives large companies the ability to have huge amounts of data available to the desktop user. Moving the user data from a locally ins

Re: [zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/26/2007 12:20:17 PM: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > *snip* > IMO, the quota-per-file-system approach seems inconvenient when you get > past a handful of file systems. Unless I'm really missing something, it > just seems like a nightmare to have to deal with such a

Re: [zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *snip* IMO, the quota-per-file-system approach seems inconvenient when you get past a handful of file systems. Unless I'm really missing something, it just seems like a nightmare to have to deal with such a ridiculous number of file systems. Why? What additiona

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Gary Mills wrote: > no way to get the Netapp to behave like a JBOD. Are you saying that > this configuration isn't going to work? It'll work, but it may not be optimal. -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 9

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 09:33:40AM -0800, Akhilesh Mritunjai wrote: > ZFS Rule #0: You gotta have redundancy > ZFS Rule #1: Redundancy shall be managed by zfs, and zfs alone. > > Whatever you have, junk it. Let ZFS manage mirroring and redundancy. ZFS > doesn't forgive even single bit errors! Ho

Re: [zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

Brian H. Nelson wrote: > IMO, the quota-per-file-system approach seems inconvenient when you get > past a handful of file systems. Unless I'm really missing something, it > just seems like a nightmare to have to deal with such a ridiculous > number of file systems. Seconded -- is there any chance

Re: [zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

>The other reason is that the machine has been around for years, already >using UFS and quotas extensively. Over winter break we had time to >upgrade to Solaris 10 and migrate the volume from svm to zvol, but not >much more.There are a few thousand users on the machine. The thought of >transit

[zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Oh yep, I know that "churning" feeling in stomach that there's got to be a GOTCHA somewhere... it can't be *that* simple! This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/ma

[zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

ZFS Rule #0: You gotta have redundancy ZFS Rule #1: Redundancy shall be managed by zfs, and zfs alone. Whatever you have, junk it. Let ZFS manage mirroring and redundancy. ZFS doesn't forgive even single bit errors! This message posted from opensolaris.org ___

Re: [zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

Darren J Moffat wrote: Brian H. Nelson wrote: For several reasons we currently need to stay on UFS and can't switch to ZFS proper. So instead we have opted to do UFS on a zvol using raid-z, Can you state what those reasons are please ? I know that isn't answering the question you are asking

Re: [zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

Brian H. Nelson wrote: For several reasons we currently need to stay on UFS and can't switch to ZFS proper. So instead we have opted to do UFS on a zvol using raid-z, Can you state what those reasons are please ? I know that isn't answering the question you are asking but it is worth making

[zfs-discuss] UFS on zvol: volblocksize and maxcontig

Hi all! First off, if this has been discussed, please point me in that direction. I have searched high and low and really can't find much info on the subject. We have a large-ish (200gb) UFS file system on a Sun Enterprise 250 that is being shared with samba (lots of files, mostly random IO)

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: multihosted ZFS

> > On Jan 26, 2007, at 7:17, Peter Eriksson wrote: > >> If you _boot_ the original machine then it should see that the pool > >> now is "owned" by > >> the other host and ignore it (you'd have to do a "zpool import -f" > >> again I think). Not tested though so don't take my word for it... > > > >

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/26/2007 03:00:13 AM: > Hi, > > I do agree that zpool remove is a _very_ desirable feature, not doubt about > that. > > Here are a couple of thoughts and workarounds, in random order, that might > give us some more perspective: > > - My home machine has 4 disks a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: multihosted ZFS

Ed Gould wrote: > On Jan 26, 2007, at 7:17, Peter Eriksson wrote: >> If you _boot_ the original machine then it should see that the pool >> now is "owned" by >> the other host and ignore it (you'd have to do a "zpool import -f" >> again I think). Not tested though so don't take my word for it... >

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

> - We need to avoid customers thinking "Veritas can shrink, ZFS can't". That > is wrong. ZFS _filesystems_ grow and shrink all the time, it's just the > pools below them that can just grow. And Veritas does not even have pools. I'm sure that this issue is different for different environments,

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: multihosted ZFS

Peter Eriksson wrote: > If you _boot_ the original machine then it should see that the pool now is > "owned" by > the other host and ignore it (you'd have to do a "zpool import -f" again I > think). Not tested though so don't take my word for it... > > However if you simply type "go" and let it

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 08:06:46AM -0800, Anantha N. Srirama wrote: > > b. Your server will hang when one of the underlying disks disappear. In our > case we had a T2000 running 11/06 and had a mirrored zpool against two > internal drives. When we pulled one of the drives abruptly the server s

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: multihosted ZFS

On Jan 26, 2007, at 7:17, Peter Eriksson wrote: If you _boot_ the original machine then it should see that the pool now is "owned" by the other host and ignore it (you'd have to do a "zpool import -f" again I think). Not tested though so don't take my word for it... Conceptually, that's about

[zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS or UFS - what to do?

I've used ZFS since July/August 2006 when Sol 10 Update 2 came out (first release to integrate ZFS.) I've used it on three servers (E25K domain, and 2 E2900s) extensivesely; two them are production. I've over 3TB of storage from an EMC SAN under ZFS management for no less than 6 months. Like you

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 06:16 -0800, Jeffery Malloch wrote: > 2. Recommended config. 1) Since this is a system that many users will depend on, use zfs-managed redundancy, either mirroring or raid-z, between the LUNs exported by the storage system. You may think your storage system is perfect, bu

[zfs-discuss] Project Proposal: Availability Suite

Project Overview: I propose the creation of a project on opensolaris.org, to bring to the community two Solaris host-based data services; namely volume snapshot and volume replication. These two data services exist today as the Sun StorageTek Availability Suite, a Solaris 8, 9 & 10, unbundled p

[zfs-discuss] Re: multihosted ZFS

If you _boot_ the original machine then it should see that the pool now is "owned" by the other host and ignore it (you'd have to do a "zpool import -f" again I think). Not tested though so don't take my word for it... However if you simply type "go" and let it continue from where it was then t

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS or UFS - what to do?

On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 06:16 -0800, Jeffery Malloch wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I am currently in the midst of setting up a completely new file server using > a pretty well loaded Sun T2000 (8x1GHz, 16GB RAM) connected to an Engenio > 6994 product (I work for LSI Logic so Engenio is a no brainer). I

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Hello Jeffery, Friday, January 26, 2007, 3:16:44 PM, you wrote: JM> Hi Folks, JM> I am currently in the midst of setting up a completely new file JM> server using a pretty well loaded Sun T2000 (8x1GHz, 16GB RAM) JM> connected to an Engenio 6994 product (I work for LSI Logic so JM> Engenio is a

[zfs-discuss] ZFS or UFS - what to do?

Hi Folks, I am currently in the midst of setting up a completely new file server using a pretty well loaded Sun T2000 (8x1GHz, 16GB RAM) connected to an Engenio 6994 product (I work for LSI Logic so Engenio is a no brainer). I have configured a couple of zpools from Volume groups on the Engeni

[zfs-discuss] bug id 6343667

Hello zfs-discuss, Is anyone working on that bug? Any progress? It's really PITA on x4500 when one wants/needs snapshots regularry and resilvering of bad disks can take many days... -- Best regards, Robert mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [zfs-discuss] multihosted ZFS

James C. McPherson wrote: > You can't do it *safely* without the protection of a high- > availability framework such as SunCluster. Thanks for the fast reply. :) We'll have look into the Cluster solution. -- Ari-Pekka Oksavuori ___ zfs-discuss maili

Re: [zfs-discuss] multihosted ZFS

Ari-Pekka Oksavuori wrote: Hi! I've been testing ZFS, and would like to use it on SAN attached disks in our production environment, where multiple machines can see the same zpools. I'm having some concerns about importing/exporting pools on possible failure situations. If box that was using some

[zfs-discuss] multihosted ZFS

Hi! I've been testing ZFS, and would like to use it on SAN attached disks in our production environment, where multiple machines can see the same zpools. I'm having some concerns about importing/exporting pools on possible failure situations. If box that was using some zpool crashes (for example

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

On 25/01/07, Brian Hechinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The other point is, how many other volume management systems allow you to remove disks? I bet if the answer is not zero, it's not large. ;) Even Linux LVM can do this (with pvmove) - slow, but you can do it online. -- Rasputin :: Jack

Re: [zfs-discuss] high density SAS

>Well Solaris SAS isn't there yet but anyway just found some interesting >high density SAS/SATA enclosures. > > > >The XJ 2000 is like the x4500 in that it holds 48 drives, however with >the XJ 2000 2 drives are on each carrier and you can get to them fr

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: can I use zfs on just a partition?

Hi, > When you do the initial install, how do you do the slicing? > > Just create like: > / 10G > swap 2G > /altroot 10G > /zfs restofdisk yes. > Or do you just create the first three slices and leave the rest of the > disk untouched? I understand the concept at this point, just trying to > ex

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: How much do we really want zpool remove?

Hi, I do agree that zpool remove is a _very_ desirable feature, not doubt about that. Here are a couple of thoughts and workarounds, in random order, that might give us some more perspective: - My home machine has 4 disks and a big zpool across them. Fine. But what if a controller fails or wor