Thanks for the info, it looks like this is exactly what I need. However, I'm
curious as to why the guys at Sun that are working on this aren't building the
ZFS GUI Administration into the existing, web-based ZFS Administration tool? It
seems that they're developing a GUI for the GNOME desktop. A
Indeed -
If it was 100Mb/s ethernet, 1TB would take near enough 24 hours just to
push that much data...
Would be great to see some details of the setup and where the bottleneck
was. I'd be surprised if ZFS has anything to do with the transfer rate...
But an interesting read anyways. :)
Nathan
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 11:38:03PM -0400, Jignesh K. Shah wrote:
> Can zfs send utilize multiple-streams of data transmission (or some sort
> of multipleness)?
>
> Interesting read for background
> http://people.planetpostgresql.org/xzilla/index.php?/archives/338-guid.html
>
> Note: zfs send tak
Can zfs send utilize multiple-streams of data transmission (or some sort
of multipleness)?
Interesting read for background
http://people.planetpostgresql.org/xzilla/index.php?/archives/338-guid.html
Note: zfs send takes 3 days for 1TB to another system
Regards,
Jignesh
___
Sharon Daraby wrote:
>Hi,
>
>1. Does the ZFS boot's limitation still single disk or mirrored config,
>and SMI label only ?
>
>
yes
>2. There is plan to enable ZFS boot from RaidZ / RaidZ2 ?
>
yes, but it won't be in the first release.
lori
>
>Thanks in advance
>Sharon,
>___
On Apr 9, 2008, at 6:54 PM, Wee Yeh Tan wrote:
> I'm just thinking out loud. What would be the advantage of having
> periodic snapshot taken within ZFS vs invoking it from an external
> facility?
I suspect that the people requesting this really want a unified
management tool (GUI and possibly
I'm just thinking out loud. What would be the advantage of having
periodic snapshot taken within ZFS vs invoking it from an external
facility?
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 1:21 AM, sean walmsley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I haven't used it myself, but the following blog describes an automatic
> sna
Hi,
1. Does the ZFS boot's limitation still single disk or mirrored config,
and SMI label only ?
2. There is plan to enable ZFS boot from RaidZ / RaidZ2 ?
Thanks in advance
Sharon,
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.o
Haudy,
Thanks for reporting this bug and helping to improve ZFS.
I'm not sure either how you could have added a note to an
existing report. Anyway I've gone ahead and done that for you
in the "Related Bugs" field. Though opensolaris doesn't reflect it yet
Neil.
Haudy Kazemi wrote:
> I have repo
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just get my laptop within WiFi range and mount :-). I don't see any
> benefit to a wire which is slower than Ethernet, when an Ethernet
> port is readily available on almost all modern laptops.
I think what Bob mean
Just to report back to the list... Sorry for the lengthy post
So I've tested the iSCSI based zfs mirror on Sol 10u4, and it does more
or less work as expected. If I unplug one side of the mirror - unplug
or power down one of the iSCSI targets - I/O to the zpool stops for a
while, perhaps a
Paul B. Henson wrote:
> One of my colleagues was testing our ZFS prototype (S10U4), and was
> wondering what was the limit for ACE's on a ZFS ACL.
>
> Empirically, he determined that he could not add more than 1024 ACE's
> either locally or via NFSv4 from a Solaris client (from a Linux NFSv4
> cli
One of my colleagues was testing our ZFS prototype (S10U4), and was
wondering what was the limit for ACE's on a ZFS ACL.
Empirically, he determined that he could not add more than 1024 ACE's
either locally or via NFSv4 from a Solaris client (from a Linux NFSv4
client, it failed adding the 209th A
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Richard Elling wrote:
> I just get my laptop within WiFi range and mount :-). I don't see any
> benefit to a wire which is slower than Ethernet, when an Ethernet
> port is readily available on almost all modern laptops.
Under Windows or Mac, is this as convenient as pugging i
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Ross wrote:
>
>> Well the first problem is that USB cables are directional, and you
>> don't have the port you need on any standard motherboard. That
>>
>
> Thanks for that info. I did not know that.
>
>
>> Adding iSCSI support to ZFS is re
I haven't used it myself, but the following blog describes an automatic
snapshot facility:
http://blogs.sun.com/timf/entry/zfs_automatic_snapshots_0_10
I agree that it would be nice to have this type of functionality built into the
base product, however.
This message posted from opensolaris
On Apr 9, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Ross wrote:
>>
>> Well the first problem is that USB cables are directional, and you
>> don't have the port you need on any standard motherboard. That
>
> Thanks for that info. I did not know that.
>
>> Adding iSCSI suppor
I have reported this bug here:
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6685676
I think this bug may be related, but I do not see where to add a note to
an existing bug report:
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6633592
(both bugs refer to ZFS-8000-2Q however my report shows a
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Ross wrote:
>
> Well the first problem is that USB cables are directional, and you
> don't have the port you need on any standard motherboard. That
Thanks for that info. I did not know that.
> Adding iSCSI support to ZFS is relatively easy since Solaris already
> supported
Ross wrote:
> I'm not sure how this is a ZFS function? You're talking about using ZFS to
> create a USB drive? So you'd want a small box running ZFS with a USB
> interface that you can just plug into other computers to access the storage?
>
> Well the first problem is that USB cables are direc
I'm not sure how this is a ZFS function? You're talking about using ZFS to
create a USB drive? So you'd want a small box running ZFS with a USB interface
that you can just plug into other computers to access the storage?
Well the first problem is that USB cables are directional, and you don't
21 matches
Mail list logo
