Re: [zfs-discuss] The Dangling DBuf Strikes Back

2007-09-03 Thread Mike Gerdts
On 9/3/07, Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I saw a putback this past week from M. Maybee regarding this, but I > thought I'd post here that I saw what is apparently an incarnation of > 6569719 on a production box running s10u3 x86 w/ latest (on > sunsolve) patches. I have 3 other servers

[zfs-discuss] ZFS iSCSI Windows driver question

2007-09-03 Thread John Tracy
I'm trying to use the Microsoft iSCSI initiator against a target on a ON build 70 box. This target is a RAID Z volume with seven 750 gig drives, in an Ultra 40 M2. I can create the ZFS pool just fine and mount it, and can also create a 4 TB iSCSI target on that pool. When I try to connect to it

Re: [zfs-discuss] "inherit" vs "clone" and property values.

2007-09-03 Thread Eric Schrock
Yes, this would be useful. See: 6364688 method to preserve properties when making a clone The infrastructure is all there (zfs_clone() takes an nvlist of properties), it just hasn't been implemented yet. Note that 'volblocksize' is special because it is a create-time property and cannot be chan

[zfs-discuss] "inherit" vs "clone" and property values.

2007-09-03 Thread Darren J Moffat
I had expected that when I clone'd a snapshot properties like "compression" would be "copied" over to the clone from the parent snapshot regardless of the inheritance implied from the place in the tree. Particularly since 'zfs clone' doesn't have the ability to set options. However it seems t

[zfs-discuss] Bug 6580715, panic: freeing free segment

2007-09-03 Thread Jürgen Keil
Yesterday I tried to clone a xen dom0 zfs root filesystem and hit this panic (probably Bug ID 6580715): System is running last week's opensolaris bits (but I'm also accessing the zpool using the xen snv_66 bits). files/s11-root-xen: is an existing version 1 zfs files/[EMAIL PROTECTED]: new snap

[zfs-discuss] The Dangling DBuf Strikes Back

2007-09-03 Thread Dale Ghent
I saw a putback this past week from M. Maybee regarding this, but I thought I'd post here that I saw what is apparently an incarnation of 6569719 on a production box running s10u3 x86 w/ latest (on sunsolve) patches. I have 3 other servers configured the same way WRT work load, zfs pools