Re: [zfs-discuss] Create ZFS now, add mirror later

W. Wayne Liauh wrote: >> E. Mike Durbin wrote: >> >>> Is there a way to to a create a zfs file system >>> (e.g. zpool create boot /dev/dsk/c0t0d0s1) >>> >>> Then, (after vacating the old boot disk) add >>> >> another >> >>> device and make the zpool a mirror? >>> >>> >> z

Re: [zfs-discuss] Create ZFS now, add mirror later

> E. Mike Durbin wrote: > > Is there a way to to a create a zfs file system > > (e.g. zpool create boot /dev/dsk/c0t0d0s1) > > > > Then, (after vacating the old boot disk) add > another > > device and make the zpool a mirror? > > > > zpool attach > -- richard > > (as in: zpool create boot mirr

[zfs-discuss] ZFS locking up! Bug in ZFS, device drivers or time for mobo RMA?

Greetings all. I am facing serious problems running ZFS on a storage server assembled out of commodity hardware that is supposed to be Solaris compatible. Although I am quite familiar with Linux distros and other unices, I am new to Solaris so any suggestions are highly appreciated. First I

Re: [zfs-discuss] Create ZFS now, add mirror later

E. Mike Durbin wrote: > Is there a way to to a create a zfs file system > (e.g. zpool create boot /dev/dsk/c0t0d0s1) > > Then, (after vacating the old boot disk) add another > device and make the zpool a mirror? > zpool attach -- richard > (as in: zpool create boot mirror /dev/dsk/c0t0d0s1 /d

[zfs-discuss] Create ZFS now, add mirror later

Is there a way to to a create a zfs file system (e.g. zpool create boot /dev/dsk/c0t0d0s1) Then, (after vacating the old boot disk) add another device and make the zpool a mirror? (as in: zpool create boot mirror /dev/dsk/c0t0d0s1 /dev/dsk/c1t0d0s1) Thanks! emike This message posted from op

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

http://blogs.sun.com/relling/entry/adaptec_webinar_on_disks_and -- richard Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Wed, 28 May 2008, Brandon High wrote: > >> CMU released a study comparing the MTBF enterprise class drive with >> consumer drives, and found no real differences. >> > > That should reall

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

On Wed, 28 May 2008, Brandon High wrote: > CMU released a study comparing the MTBF enterprise class drive with > consumer drives, and found no real differences. That should really not be a surprise. Chips are chips and in the economies of scale, as few chips will be be used as possible. The qu

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are BigDriveCos which sell enterprise-class SATA drives. > Since the mechanics are the same, the difference is in the electronics > and software. Vote with your pocketbook for the enterprise-class > products. CMU r

[zfs-discuss] ZFS sharing options for Windows

Hello, I am fairly new to Solaris and ZFS. I am testing both out in a sandbox at work. I am playing with virtual machines running on a windows front-end that connects to a zfs back-end for its data needs. As far as i know my two options are sharesmb and shareiscsci for data sharing. I have a cou

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 10:34 -0600, Keith Bierman wrote: > On May 28, 2008, at 10:27 AM 5/28/, Richard Elling wrote: > > > Since the mechanics are the same, the difference is in the electronics > > > In my very distant past, I did QA work for an electronic component > manufacturer. Even parts

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08

On Wed, 28 May 2008, Mertol Ozyoney wrote: > > Think that you have a 146 GB SSD and the wirte cycle is around 100k > And you can write/update data at 10 MB/sec (depends on the IO pattern could > be a lot slower or a lot higher) It will take 4 Hours or 14,400 sec's to > fully populate the drive. Mul

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08

By the way. All enterprise SSD's have internal Dram based cache. Some vendors may quote the write performance of the internal RAM device. Normally Nand drives due to read after write operations and several other reasons will not perform quite good under write based load. Mertol Ozyoney Storag

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in S10U6 vs openSolaris 05/08

I strongly agree most of the comments. I quess, I tried to keep it simple, perhaps a little bit too simple. If I am not mistaken ,most of the Nand disks will virtualize the underlying cells so even you update the same sector update will be made somewhere else. So the time to corrupt an enterpris

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs hangs after disk failure

Tim wrote: > > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Richard Elling > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > J. Les Bemont wrote: > > At home I have an old ultra-60 running attached to a scsi > shoebox with 6x18GB disks. I created the zpool as raidZ with one > hot

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

On May 28, 2008, at 10:27 AM 5/28/, Richard Elling wrote: > Since the mechanics are the same, the difference is in the electronics In my very distant past, I did QA work for an electronic component manufacturer. Even parts which were "identical" were expected to behave quite differently .

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

Bill McGonigle wrote: > On May 28, 2008, at 05:11, James Andrewartha wrote: > > >> From what I can tell, all the vendors are only making SAS >> controllers for >> PCIe with more than 4 ports. Since SAS supports SATA, I guess they >> don't see >> much point in doing SATA-only controllers. >>

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs hangs after disk failure

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > J. Les Bemont wrote: > > At home I have an old ultra-60 running attached to a scsi shoebox with > 6x18GB disks. I created the zpool as raidZ with one hot spare. Recently, > one of the non hot spare disks failed and now

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs hangs after disk failure

J. Les Bemont wrote: > At home I have an old ultra-60 running attached to a scsi shoebox with 6x18GB > disks. I created the zpool as raidZ with one hot spare. Recently, one of > the non hot spare disks failed and now zpool commands hang. Also, I/O to the > pool just hangs for periods of time.

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

On May 28, 2008, at 05:11, James Andrewartha wrote: > From what I can tell, all the vendors are only making SAS > controllers for > PCIe with more than 4 ports. Since SAS supports SATA, I guess they > don't see > much point in doing SATA-only controllers. > > For example, the LSI SAS3081E-R i

[zfs-discuss] [blog post] Trying to corrupt data in a ZFS mirror

Hi guys, I wrote my first post about ZFS ( http://silveiraneto.net/2008/05/28/trying-to-corrupt-data-in-a-zfs-mirror/) showing how to create a pool with a mirror and so trying to corrupt the data. I used the Self Healing with ZFSas base. I al

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Problems under vmware

Hello, I'm having the same exact situation on one VM, and not on another VM on the same infrastructure. The only difference is that on the failing VM I initially created the pool with a name and then changed the mountpoint to another name. Did you found a solution to the issue? Should I consider

[zfs-discuss] zfs hangs after disk failure

At home I have an old ultra-60 running attached to a scsi shoebox with 6x18GB disks. I created the zpool as raidZ with one hot spare. Recently, one of the non hot spare disks failed and now zpool commands hang. Also, I/O to the pool just hangs for periods of time. I'm using release 0807 with

Re: [zfs-discuss] Disabling ZFS ACL

Did you try mounting with nfs version 3? mount -o vers=3 On May 28, 2008, at 10:38 AM, kevin kramer wrote: > that is my thread and I'm still having issues even after applying > that patch. It just came up again this week. > > [locahost] uname -a > Linux dv-121-25.centtech.com 2.6.18-53.1.14.el

Re: [zfs-discuss] Disabling ZFS ACL

kevin kramer wrote: > that is my thread and I'm still having issues even after applying that patch. > It just came up again this week. > > [locahost] uname -a > Linux dv-121-25.centtech.com 2.6.18-53.1.14.el5 #1 SMP Wed Mar 5 11:37:38 EST > 2008 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > [localhost] cat /

Re: [zfs-discuss] Disabling ZFS ACL

that is my thread and I'm still having issues even after applying that patch. It just came up again this week. [locahost] uname -a Linux dv-121-25.centtech.com 2.6.18-53.1.14.el5 #1 SMP Wed Mar 5 11:37:38 EST 2008 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux [localhost] cat /etc/issue CentOS release 5 (Final)

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

Erik Trimble wrote: > On a related note - does anyone know of a good Solaris-supported 4+ port > SATA card for PCI-Express? Preferably 1x or 4x slots... From what I can tell, all the vendors are only making SAS controllers for PCIe with more than 4 ports. Since SAS supports SATA, I guess they