Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs send/recv partial filesystem?

Shannon Fiume wrote: > Hi, > > I want to send peices of a zfs filesystem to another system. Can zfs > send peices of a snapshot? Say I only want to send over /[EMAIL PROTECTED] > and > not include /app/conf data while /app/conf is still apart of the > /[EMAIL PROTECTED] snapshot? I say app/con

[zfs-discuss] solved: zfs on entire disk?

Thanks Cindy and Erik, The link to the boot page exactly answers my question. Russ Cindy Swearingen wrote: Hi Russ, If you are asking whether you can create a ZFS file system for the root file system and boot from it, it is possible on an x86 system running the Nevada release. Not possible

[zfs-discuss] zfs send/recv partial filesystem?

Hi, I want to send peices of a zfs filesystem to another system. Can zfs send peices of a snapshot? Say I only want to send over /[EMAIL PROTECTED] and not include /app/conf data while /app/conf is still apart of the /[EMAIL PROTECTED] snapshot? I say app/conf as an example, it could be webser

[zfs-discuss] zfs on entire disk?

Is it possible/recommended to create a zpool and zfs setup such that the OS itself (in root /) is in its own zpool? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Is there _any_ suitable motherboard?

On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 10:23:49AM -0700, Neal Pollack wrote: > > Server class: Chipset ESB-2 southbridge > Desktop class: Chipset ICH-8 and ICH-9 > Motherboards known as i965 chipset > and Intel P35 chipsets Are the i975 chipset boards any les

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

> This is practically the holy grail of "dynamic raid" - the ability to > dynamically use different redundancy settings on a per-directory > level, and to use a mix of different sized devices and add/remove them > at will. Well I suspect that arbitrary redundancy configuration is not something we'

Re: [zfs-discuss] Is there _any_ suitable motherboard?

Alec Muffett wrote: >> Does anyone on this list have experience with a recent board with 6 or more >> SATA ports that they know is supported? >> > > > Well so far I have only populated 5 of the ports I have available, > but my writeup with my 9-port SATS ASUS mobo is at: > > http://www.c

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

On 8/10/07, Darren Dunham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For instance, it might be nice to create a "mirror" with a 100G disk and > two 50G disks. Right now someone has to create slices on the big disk > manually and feed them to zpool. Letting ZFS handle everything itself > might be a win for some

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

On 8/10/07, Moore, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wishlist: It would be nice to put the whole redundancy definitions into > the zfs filesystem layer (rather than the pool layer): Imagine being > able to "set copies=5+2" for a filesystem... (requires a 7-VDEV pool, > and stripes via RAIDz2, othe

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

> >> > Mirror and raidz suffer from the classic blockdevice abstraction > >> > problem in that they need disks of equal size. > >> > >> Not that I'm aware of. Mirror and raid-z will simply use the smallest > >> size of your available disks. > >> > > > > Exactly. The rest is not usable. > > Well I

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Cusack > Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 7:26 AM > To: Tuomas Leikola > Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev? > > On August 10, 2007 2:20:30 PM +0300 Tuomas Leikola

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

On 8/10/07, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tuomas Leikola wrote: > We call that a "mirror" :-) > > >>> Mirror and raidz suffer from the classic blockdevice abstraction > >>> problem in that they need disks of equal size. > >> Not that I'm aware of. Mirror and raid-z will si

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

> >> >> We call that a "mirror" :-) > >> >> > >> > > >> > Mirror and raidz suffer from the classic blockdevice abstraction > >> > problem in that they need disks of equal size. > >> > >> Not that I'm aware of. Mirror and raid-z will simply use the smallest > >> size of your available disks. > >> >

Re: [zfs-discuss] Is there _any_ suitable motherboard?

>Does anyone on this list have experience with a recent board with 6 or more >SATA ports that they know is supported? Well so far I have only populated 5 of the ports I have available, but my writeup with my 9-port SATS ASUS mobo is at: http://www.crypticide.com/dropsafe/article/2091

[zfs-discuss] Is there _any_ suitable motherboard?

Hi, I am wondering what the readers of this list are using to control their ZFS & RAID-Z arrays with. A quote from an under answered comment the OpenSolaris device driver forum: *I'm having a hard time finding any decent m

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

Tuomas Leikola wrote: We call that a "mirror" :-) >>> Mirror and raidz suffer from the classic blockdevice abstraction >>> problem in that they need disks of equal size. >> Not that I'm aware of. Mirror and raid-z will simply use the smallest >> size of your available disks. >> > > Exac

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

On August 10, 2007 2:20:30 PM +0300 Tuomas Leikola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> We call that a "mirror" :-) >> >> >> > >> > Mirror and raidz suffer from the classic blockdevice abstraction >> > problem in that they need disks of equal size. >> >> Not that I'm aware of. Mirror and raid-z will

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

> >> We call that a "mirror" :-) > >> > > > > Mirror and raidz suffer from the classic blockdevice abstraction > > problem in that they need disks of equal size. > > Not that I'm aware of. Mirror and raid-z will simply use the smallest > size of your available disks. > Exactly. The rest is not us

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

On August 10, 2007 12:34:23 PM +0300 Tuomas Leikola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/9/07, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > What I'm looking for is a disk full error if ditto cannot be written >> > to different disks. This would guarantee that a mirror is written on a >> > separate

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

On 8/9/07, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What I'm looking for is a disk full error if ditto cannot be written > > to different disks. This would guarantee that a mirror is written on a > > separate disk - and the entire filesystem can be salvaged from a full > > disk failure. > > We

Re: [zfs-discuss] Force ditto block on different vdev?

On 8/9/07, Mario Goebbels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you're that bent on having maximum redundancy, I think you should > consider implementing real redundancy. I'm also biting the bullet and > going mirrors (cheaper than RAID-Z for home, less disks needed to start > with). Currently I am, and

Re: [zfs-discuss] Slow write speed to ZFS pool (via NFS)

> So that leaves us with a Samba vs NFS issue (not > related to > ZFS). We know that NFS is able to create file _at > most_ at > one file per server I/O latency. Samba appears better > and this is > what we need to investigate. It might be better in a > way > that NFS can borrow (maybe through some