Re: [zfs-discuss] Samba with ZFS ACL

Thank you very much Tim! This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

[zfs-discuss] Strange ZFS timeouts

I'm seeing some odd i/o behaviour on a Sun Fire running snv_70, connected via 4gb FC to some passthrough disks for a ZFS pool. The system is normally not heavily loaded, so I don't pay as much attention to I/O performance as I should, but recently we had several drives fail checksums (heat event)

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 15:28 -0700, Richard Elling wrote: > Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: > > # zfs set recordsize=2K tank/bench > > # randomio bigfile 10 .25 .01 2048 60 1 > > > > total | read: latency (ms) | write:latency (ms) > >iops | iops minavgmax sdev |

Re: [zfs-discuss] Please help! ZFS crash & burn in SXCE b70!

Nigel Smith wrote: > Are you sure your hardware is working without problems? > I would first check the RAM with memtest86+ > http://www.memtest.org/ Also, SunVTS should be in /usr/sunvts and includes memory and disk tests (plus others). This is the test suite we (Sun) use in manufacturing. Take c

Re: [zfs-discuss] Please help! ZFS crash & burn in SXCE b70!

Are you sure your hardware is working without problems? I would first check the RAM with memtest86+ http://www.memtest.org/ How many megabytes of RAM do you have on this PC? Can you get any other operating system, like Ubuntu to work ok on this hardware? I think it would be useful to know which c

Re: [zfs-discuss] Please help! ZFS crash & burn in SXCE b70!

> The problems I'm experiencing are as follows: > ZFS creates the storage pool just fine, sees no errors on the drives, and > seems to work great...right up until I attempt to put data on the drives. > After only a few moments of transfer, things start to go wrong. The system > doesn't power o

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: > # zfs set recordsize=2K tank/bench > # randomio bigfile 10 .25 .01 2048 60 1 > > total | read: latency (ms) | write:latency (ms) >iops | iops minavgmax sdev | iops minavgmax > sdev > +-

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 01:53:53PM -0700, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: > Roughly the same as when the RS was 128K. But, if I set the RS to 2K > before creating bigfile: > > total | read: latency (ms) | write:latency (ms) >iops | iops minavgmax sdev | iops

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 13:07 -0700, eric kustarz wrote: > On Aug 30, 2007, at 12:33 PM, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: > > > > Uh, whoops. As I freely admit this is my first encounter with > > opensolaris, I just built the software on the assumption that it would > > be 64-bit by default. But it looks li

[zfs-discuss] Please help! ZFS crash & burn in SXCE b70!

Hey folks, I've been wanting to use Solaris for a while now, for a ZFS home storage server and simply to get used to Solaris (I like to experiment). However, installing b70 has really not worked out for me at all. The hardware I'm using is pretty simple, but didn't seem to be supported under

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

On Aug 30, 2007, at 12:33 PM, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: > On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 12:07 -0700, eric kustarz wrote: >> Hey jwb, >> >> Thanks for taking up the task, its benchmarking so i've got some >> questions... >> >> What does it mean to have an external vs. internal journal for ZFS? > > This is m

[zfs-discuss] ARC vs DULO

Hi all, has an alternative to ARC been considered to improve sequential write IO in zfs? here's a reference for DULO: http://www.usenix.org/event/fast05/tech/full_papers/jiang/jiang_html/dulo-html.html#BG03 sd- ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@o

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 12:07 -0700, eric kustarz wrote: > Hey jwb, > > Thanks for taking up the task, its benchmarking so i've got some > questions... > > What does it mean to have an external vs. internal journal for ZFS? This is my first use of ZFS, so be gentle. External == ZIL on a separat

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 13:57 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 05:07:46PM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: > >> To improve metadata performance, you have many options with XFS (which > >> ones are useful depends on the type of metadata workload) - you can tr

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

On Aug 29, 2007, at 11:16 PM, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: > I have a lot of people whispering "zfs" in my virtual ear these days, > and at the same time I have an irrational attachment to xfs based > entirely on its lack of the 32000 subdirectory limit. I'm not > afraid of > ext4's newness, since

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 08:37 -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote: > On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:16:51 -0700 > "Jeffrey W. Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://tastic.brillig.org/~jwb/zfs-xfs-ext4.html > > FFSB: > Could you send the patch to fix FFSB Solaris build? I should probably > update the Sourcef

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 14:33 -0400, Jim Mauro wrote: > Your numbers are in the 50-90MB/second range, or roughly 1/2 to 1/4 > what was > measured on the other 2 file systems for the same test. Very odd. > Yeah it's pretty odd. I'd tend to blame the Areca HBA, but then I'd also point out that the H

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared

I'll take a look at this. ZFS provides outstanding sequential IO performance (both read and write). In my testing, I can essentially sustain "hardware speeds" with ZFS on sequential loads. That is, assuming 30-60MB/sec per disk sequential IO capability (depending on hitting inner or out cylinder

Re: [zfs-discuss] OT: QFS question WAS:Single SAN Lun presented to 4 Hosts

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 14:03 -0400, Paul Kraus wrote: > On 8/30/07, Peter L. Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > That said, is there a "HOWTO" anywhere on installing QFS on Solaris 9 > > (Sparc64) > > machines? Is that even possible? > > I don't know of a How To, but I assume the manual has

Re: [zfs-discuss] problem: file copy's aren't getting the current file

On 8/30/07, Russ Petruzzelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For instance, > On a T2000, Solaris 10u3, with zfs setup, and a zone I try to copy in a > file from my swan home directory to a directory in the zone ... > The file copied, is not the file currently in my home directory. It is an > olde

Re: [zfs-discuss] Single SAN Lun presented to 4 Hosts

Peter L. Thomas wrote: > That said, is there a "HOWTO" anywhere on installing QFS on Solaris 9 > (Sparc64) machines? Is that even possible? We've been selling SAMFS (which qfs is a part of) for ages, long before S10 ever saw the light, so I'd be *very* surprised if it wasn't documented with t

[zfs-discuss] OT: QFS question WAS:Single SAN Lun presented to 4 Hosts

On 8/30/07, Peter L. Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That said, is there a "HOWTO" anywhere on installing QFS on Solaris 9 > (Sparc64) > machines? Is that even possible? I don't know of a How To, but I assume the manual has instructions. When I took the Sun SAM-FS / QFS technical training m

Re: [zfs-discuss] Single SAN Lun presented to 4 Hosts

> No. You can neither access ZFS nor UFS in that way. > Only one host can mount the file system at the same time > (read/write or read-only doesn't matter here). [...] > If you don't want to use NFS, you can use QFS in such a configuration. > The shared writer approach of QFS allows mounting the sa

Re: [zfs-discuss] problem: file copy's aren't getting the current file

On Aug 30, 2007, at 12:35 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > NFS clients can cache. This cache can be loosely synchronized for > performance reasons. See the settings for actimeo and related > variables > in mount_nfs(1m) The NFS client will getattr/OPEN at the point where the application opens the

Re: [zfs-discuss] problem: file copy's aren't getting the current file

NFS clients can cache. This cache can be loosely synchronized for performance reasons. See the settings for actimeo and related variables in mount_nfs(1m) -- richard Russ Petruzzelli wrote: >I'm not sure if this is a zfs, zones, or solaris/nfs problem... So > I'll start on this alias... >

Re: [zfs-discuss] problem: file copy's aren't getting the current file

On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 10:18:05AM -0700, Russ Petruzzelli wrote: > I'm not sure if this is a zfs, zones, or solaris/nfs problem... So I'll > start on this alias... > > Problem: > I am seeing file copies from one machine to another grab an older file. > (Worded differently: The "cp" command is n

[zfs-discuss] problem: file copy's aren't getting the current file

I'm not sure if this is a zfs, zones, or solaris/nfs problem... So I'll start on this alias... Problem: I am seeing file copies from one machine to another grab an older file. (Worded differently: The "cp" command is not getting the most recent file.) For instance, On a T2000, Solaris 10u3, wi

Re: [zfs-discuss] [zfs-code] DMU as general purpose transaction engine?

I am not an expert but I think the correct sequence is : 1. dmu_tx_create() 2. dmu_tx_hold_() 3. dmu_tx_assign() 4. modify the objects as part of the transaction 5. dmu_tx_commit() see comments in common/fs/zfs/sys/dmu.h Thanks Bhaskar ___ zfs-d

[zfs-discuss] ZFS compared to ASM

Hello ZFS folks, with the deployment of HA-ZFS we are in the process of migrating some SVM based cluster services to ZFS. What we couldn't find is an up-to-date performance comparison between Oracle's own ASM technology compared to ZFS performance, I could only find performance figures from 2006

Re: [zfs-discuss] import zfs dataset online in a zone

works like a charm! thank you very much Darren! greetings, Stoyan This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Samba with ZFS ACL

Please read this thread on my blog . This question has been addressed in the comments. Yoshikuni.Yanagiya said the following : > Hi, > > I'm looking for Samba, which work native ZFS ACL. > With ZFS almost everything work except nat

[zfs-discuss] DMU as general purpose transaction engine?

ZFS Experts, Is it possible to use DMU as general purpose transaction engine? More specifically, in following order: 1. Create transaction: tx = dmu_tx_create(os); error = dmu_tx_assign(tx, TXG_WAIT) 2. Decide what to modify(say create new object): dmu_tx_hold_bonus(tx, DMU_NEW_OBJECT); dmu_tx_h

[zfs-discuss] Samba with ZFS ACL

Hi, I'm looking for Samba, which work native ZFS ACL. With ZFS almost everything work except native ZFS ACL. I have learned on samba mailing list, that it dosn't work while samba-3.2.0 will be released. Has anyone knows any solution to work samba-3.0.25? If any idea, please let me know. thanks