> NOTHING anton listed takes the place of ZFS
That's not surprising, since I didn't list any file systems.
Here's a few file systems, and some of their distinguishing features. None of
them do exactly what ZFS does. ZFS doesn't do what they do, either.
QFS: Very, very fast. Supports segregat
Allowing a filesystem to be rolled back without unmounting it sounds unwise,
given the potentially confusing effect on any application with a file currently
open there.
And if a user can't roll back their home directory filesystem, is that so bad?
Presumably they can still access snapshot vers
> > You have me at a disadvantage here, because I'm
> not
> > even a Unix (let alone Solaris and Linux)
> aficionado.
> > But don't Linux snapshots in conjunction with
> rsync
> > (leaving aside other possibilities that I've never
> > heard of) provide rather similar capabilities
> (e.g.,
> > incre
Hello,
I have been trying to chase down some ZFS performance issues, and I was hoping
someone with more ZFS experience might be able to comment.
When running a "zfs list" command, it often takes several minutes to complete.
I see similar behavior when running most other ZFS commands, such as "
> There are a category of errors that are
> not caused by firmware, or any type of software. The
> hardware just doesn't write or read the correct bit value this time
> around. With out a checksum there's no way for the firmware to know, and
> next time it very well may write or read the correct b
Please see below for an example.
-Wade
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/07/2007 03:07:29 PM:
> >
> > I keep getting ETOOMUCHTROLL errors thrown while
> > reading this list, is
> > there a list admin that can clean up the mess? I
> > would hope that repeated
> > personal attacks could be consider
> You have me at a disadvantage here, because I'm not
> even a Unix (let alone Solaris and Linux) aficionado.
> But don't Linux snapshots in conjunction with rsync
> (leaving aside other possibilities that I've never
> heard of) provide rather similar capabilities (e.g.,
> incremental backup or re-
>
> I keep getting ETOOMUCHTROLL errors thrown while
> reading this list, is
> there a list admin that can clean up the mess? I
> would hope that repeated
> personal attacks could be considered grounds for
> removal/blocking.
Actually, most of your more unpleasant associates here seem to suffe
--On 07 December 2007 11:18 -0600 Jason Morton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am using ZFS on FreeBSD 7.0_beta3. This is the first time i have used
> ZFS and I have run into something that I am not sure if this is normal,
> but am very concerned about.
>
> SYSTEM INFO:
> hp 320s (storage array)
Once again, profuse apologies for having taken so long (well over 24 hours by
now - though I'm not sure it actually appeared in the forum until a few hours
after its timestamp) to respond to this.
> can you guess? wrote:
> >
> > Primarily its checksumming features, since other
> open source solu
> NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
> fatty DEGRADED 0 0 3.71K
> raidz2DEGRADED 0 0 3.71K
> da0 ONLINE 0 0 0
> da1 ONLINE 0 0 0
> da2 ONLINE 0 0 0
> da3
Thanks Darren.
I found another link that goes into the 2003 implementation:
http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/archive/tags/Single+Instance+Store+_2800_SIS_2900_/default.aspx
It looks pretty nice, although I am not sure about the userland dedup
service design -- I would like to see it implemented
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Darren,
>
> Do you happen to have any links for this? I have not seen anything
> about NTFS and CAS/dedupe besides some of the third party apps/services
> that just use NTFS as their backing store.
Single Instance Storage is what Microsoft uses to refer to this:
Hello Marcin,
Saturday, December 1, 2007, 9:57:11 AM, you wrote:
MW> i did some test lately with zfs, env is:
MW> 2 node veritas cluster 5.0 on solaris 8/07 with recommended
MW> patches, 2 machines v440 & v480, shared storage through switch on 6120
array.
MW> 2 luns from array, on every zfs pool
Darren,
Do you happen to have any links for this? I have not seen anything
about NTFS and CAS/dedupe besides some of the third party apps/services
that just use NTFS as their backing store.
Thanks!
Wade Stuart
Fallon Worldwide
P: 612.758.2660
C: 612.877.0385
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12
Hello Jorgen,
Honestly - I don't think zfs is a good solution to your problem.
What you could try to do however when it comes to x4500 is:
1. Use SVM+UFS+user quotas
2. Use zfs and create several (like up-to 20? so each stays below 1TB)
ufs file systems on zvols and then apply user quotas on
I keep getting ETOOMUCHTROLL errors thrown while reading this list, is
there a list admin that can clean up the mess? I would hope that repeated
personal attacks could be considered grounds for removal/blocking.
Wade Stuart
Fallon Worldwide
P: 612.758.2660
C: 612.877.0385
I believe the data "dedup" is also a feature of NTFS.
--
Darren J Moffat
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Hello zfs-discuss,
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6421210
1. App opens and creates an empty file /pool/fs1/file1
2. zfs snapshot pool/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
3. App writes something to file and still keeps it open
4. zfs rollback pool/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now what happens to fd App is u
Hello Matt,
Monday, December 3, 2007, 8:36:28 PM, you wrote:
MB> Hi,
MB> We have a number of 4200's setup using a combination of an SVM 4
MB> way mirror and a ZFS raidz stripe.
MB> Each disk (of 4) is divided up like this
MB> / 6GB UFS s0
MB> Swap 8GB s1
MB> /var 6GB UFS s3
MB> Metadb 50MB UF
> If you ever progress beyond counting on your fingers
> you might (with a lot of coaching from someone who
> actually cares about your intellectual development)
> be able to follow Anton's recent explanation of this
> (given that the higher-level overviews which I've
> provided apparently flew com
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2007, Brian Hechinger wrote:
> [1] Finally, someone built a flash SSD that rocks
> (and they know how
> fast it is judging by the pricetag):
> http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/21/mtron_ssd_32_gb
> /
> http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3167
Great now if only Sun w
I am using ZFS on FreeBSD 7.0_beta3. This is the first time i have
used ZFS and I have run into something that I am not sure if this is
normal, but am very concerned about.
SYSTEM INFO:
hp 320s (storage array)
12 disks (750GB each)
2GB RAM
1GB flash drive (running the OS)
When I take a disk
> So name these mystery alternatives that come anywhere
> close to the protection,
If you ever progress beyond counting on your fingers you might (with a lot of
coaching from someone who actually cares about your intellectual development)
be able to follow Anton's recent explanation of this (giv
Hello Paul,
Wednesday, December 5, 2007, 10:34:47 PM, you wrote:
PG> Constantin Gonzalez wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> yes, ZFS is platform agnostic and I know it works in SANs.
>>
>> For the USB stick case, you may have run into labeling issues. Maybe
>> Solaris SPARC did not recognize the x64 type l
...
> ZFS snapshots and clones save a lot of space, but the
> 'content-hash == address' trick means you could
> potentially save
> much more.
Several startups have emerged over the past few years based on this idea of
'data deduplication', and some have been swallowed up by bigger fish that
cle
mis _HOLD_ # cat /etc/release
Solaris 10 6/06 s10s_u2wos_09a SPARC
Copyright 2006 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Use is subject to license terms.
Assembled 09 June 2006
mis _HOLD_ #
This message
Hello Walter,
Thursday, December 6, 2007, 7:05:54 PM, you wrote:
>
Hi All,
We are currently a hardware issue with our zfs file server hence the file system is unusable.
We are planning to move it to a different system.
The setup on the file server when it was running was
bash-3.00# zpo
On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 08:24 -0800, jonathan soons wrote:
> SunOS 5.10 Last change: 25 Apr 2006
>
> Yes, I see that my other server is more up to date.
>
> SunOS 5.10 Last change: 13 Feb 2007
> This one was recently installed.
What OS rev? (more /etc/release)
I don't ha
SunOS 5.10 Last change: 25 Apr 2006
Yes, I see that my other server is more up to date.
SunOS 5.10 Last change: 13 Feb 2007
This one was recently installed.
Is there a patch that was not included with 10_Recommended?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Jonathan,
I think I remember seeing this error in an older Solaris release. The
current zpool.1m man page doesn't have this error unless I'm missing it:
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2240/zpool-1m
In a current Solaris release, this command fails as expected:
# zpool create mirror c0t2d0
On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 08:02 -0800, jonathan soons wrote:
> The man page gives this form:
> zpool create [-fn] [-R root] [-m mountpoint] pool vdev ...
> however, lower down, there is this command:
> # zpool create mirror c0t0d0 c0t1d0 mirror c1t0d0 c1t1d0
> Isn't the "pool" element missing in the
The man page gives this form:
zpool create [-fn] [-R root] [-m mountpoint] pool vdev ...
however, lower down, there is this command:
# zpool create mirror c0t0d0 c0t1d0 mirror c1t0d0 c1t1d0
Isn't the "pool" element missing in the command?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
> 10K RPM SCSI disks will get (best case) 350 to 400 IOPS. Remember,
> the main issue with legacy SCSI is that (SCSI) commands are sent
> 8-bits wide at 5Mbits/Sec - for backwards compatibility.
This is true for really old SCSI configurations, but if you're buying a modern
disk and controller
There won't be a performance hit beyond that of RAIDZ2 vs. RAIDZ.
But you'll wind up with a pool with fundamentally single-disk-failure
tolerance, so I'm not sure it's worth it (at least until there's a mechanism
for replacing the remaining raidz1 vdevs with raidz2).
This message posted from
> I was under the impression that real-time processes essentially trump all
> others, and I'm surprised by this behaviour; I had a dozen or so RT-processes
> sat waiting for disc for about 20s.
Process priorities on Solaris affect CPU scheduling, but not (currently) I/O
scheduling nor memory usag
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 12:58:17 +, Darren J Moffat wrote:
: Dickon Hood wrote:
: >On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 12:38:11 +, Darren J Moffat wrote:
: >: Dickon Hood wrote:
: >: >We've got an interesting application which involves recieving lots of
: >: >multicast groups, and writing the data to d
Hi,
I'm new to the list and fairly new to ZFS so hopefully this isn't a dumb
question, but...
I just inadvertantly added s0 of a disk to a zpool, and then added the
entire device:
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
zfs-bo O
Dickon Hood wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 12:38:11 +, Darren J Moffat wrote:
> : Dickon Hood wrote:
> : >We've got an interesting application which involves recieving lots of
> : >multicast groups, and writing the data to disc as a cache. We're
> : >currently using ZFS for this cache, as we
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 12:38:11 +, Darren J Moffat wrote:
: Dickon Hood wrote:
: >We've got an interesting application which involves recieving lots of
: >multicast groups, and writing the data to disc as a cache. We're
: >currently using ZFS for this cache, as we're potentially dealing with
Dickon Hood wrote:
> We've got an interesting application which involves recieving lots of
> multicast groups, and writing the data to disc as a cache. We're
> currently using ZFS for this cache, as we're potentially dealing with a
> couple of TB at a time.
>
> The threads writing to the filesyst
We've got an interesting application which involves recieving lots of
multicast groups, and writing the data to disc as a cache. We're
currently using ZFS for this cache, as we're potentially dealing with a
couple of TB at a time.
The threads writing to the filesystem have real-time SCHED_FIFO pr
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 11:40:13AM -0800, eric kustarz wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> przemol, did you set the recordsize to 8KB?
Yes. It is mentioned in the legend on the right side of the chart.
> What are the server's specs? (memory, CPU)
Memory: 24GB
CPU:8 x UltraSPARC-III+ 900 MHz
> Which vers
43 matches
Mail list logo
