On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Nicolas Williams
wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 05:19:26PM -0600, Mike Gerdts wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Nicolas Williams
>> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:44:59PM +0100, Thomas Wagner wrote:
>> >> > >> pool-shrinking (and an option to sh
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 05:19:26PM -0600, Mike Gerdts wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Nicolas Williams
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:44:59PM +0100, Thomas Wagner wrote:
> >> > >> pool-shrinking (and an option to shrink disk A when i want disk B to
> >> > >> become a mirror, but
> Multiple pools on one server only makes sense if you are going to have
> different RAS for each pool for business reasons. It's a lot easier to
> have a single pool though. I recommend it.
A couple of other things to consider to go with that recommendation.
- never build a pool larger than y
Absolutely agree. I'l love to be able to free up some LUNs that I
don't need in the pool any more.
Also, concatenation of devices in a zpool would be great for devices
that have LUN limits. It also seems like it may be an easy thing to
implement.
-Aaron
On 2/28/09, Thomas Wagner wrote:
>> >> p
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Nicolas Williams
wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:44:59PM +0100, Thomas Wagner wrote:
>> > >> pool-shrinking (and an option to shrink disk A when i want disk B to
>> > >> become a mirror, but A is a few blocks bigger)
>> > This may be interesting... I'm not sur
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:44:59PM +0100, Thomas Wagner wrote:
> > >> pool-shrinking (and an option to shrink disk A when i want disk B to
> > >> become a mirror, but A is a few blocks bigger)
> > This may be interesting... I'm not sure how often you need to shrink a
> > pool
> > though? Could
I would really add : make insane zfs destroy <-r|> poolname as harmless as
zpool destroy poolname (recoverable)
zfs destroy <-r|> poolname<|/filesystem>
this should behave like that:
o snapshot the filesystem to be deleted (each, name it
@deletedby_operatorname_date)
o hide the snaps
> >> pool-shrinking (and an option to shrink disk A when i want disk B to
> >> become a mirror, but A is a few blocks bigger)
> This may be interesting... I'm not sure how often you need to shrink a pool
> though? Could this be classified more as a Home or SME level feature?
Enterprise level e
On Sat, 28 Feb 2009, Tim wrote:
That's not entirely true. Maybe it will put it to shame at streaming
sequential I/O. The 10k drives will still wipe the floor with any modern
7200rpm drive for random IO and seek times.
Or perhaps streaming sequential I/O will have similar performance,
with m
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Joe Esposito wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:31 AM, wrote:
>
>>
>> >I'm using opensolaris and zfs at my house for my photography storage
>> >as well as for an offsite backup location for my employer and several
>> >side web projects.
>> >
>> >I have an 80g
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:31 AM, wrote:
>
> >I'm using opensolaris and zfs at my house for my photography storage
> >as well as for an offsite backup location for my employer and several
> >side web projects.
> >
> >I have an 80g drive as my root drive. I recently took posesion of 2
> >74g 10k d
Hi Steven,
I don't have access to my usual resources to test the ACL syntax but
I think the root cause is that you don't have execute permission
on the "Not Started" directory.
Try the chmod syntax again but this time include execute:allow for
admin on "Not Sorted" or add it like this:
# chmod
"C. Bergström" wrote:
> > See http://opensolaris.org/os/about/faq/licensing_faq/#patents.
> >
> Sun has contributed zfs code to their grub fork, but it's not under the
> CDDL. So this doesn't apply.
Under GPLv2 you may only cntribute code where your patents apply if you grant
royal free usa
All;
I do apologize for making this query in this list. But I am at my wits end.
I have a directory like so
$ ls -l
total 47
drwxr-xr-x 19 adminadmin 23 Feb 27 17:52 Named
drw-r- 74 adminadmin556 Feb 25 03:46 Not Sorted <---
Directory in Question
$ ls -dv "Not S
Mike Gerdts wrote:
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 4:53 AM, "C. Bergström"
wrote:
The other question that I am less worried about is would this violate any
patents.. I mean.. Sun added the initial zfs support to grub and this is
essentially extending that, but I'm not aware of any patent provisions
>I'm using opensolaris and zfs at my house for my photography storage
>as well as for an offsite backup location for my employer and several
>side web projects.
>
>I have an 80g drive as my root drive. I recently took posesion of 2
>74g 10k drives which I'd love to add as a mirror to replace the
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Richard Elling
wrote:
> David Magda wrote:
>> On Feb 27, 2009, at 20:02, Richard Elling wrote:
>>> At the risk of repeating the Best Practices Guide (again):
>>> The zfs send and receive commands do not provide an enterprise-level
>>> backup solution.
>>
>> Yes, in
Shrinking pools would also solve the right-sizing dilemma.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 28, 2009, at 3:37 AM, Joe Esposito wrote:
I'm using opensolaris and zfs at my house for my photography storage
as well as for an offsite backup location for my employer and several
side web projects.
I have
Check out http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/data/os
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 28, 2009, at 2:20 AM, Harry Putnam wrote:
Brian Hechinger writes:
[...]
I think it would be better to answer this question that it would to
attempt to answer the VirtualBox question (I run it on a 64-bit OS,
so
I'm using opensolaris and zfs at my house for my photography storage
as well as for an offsite backup location for my employer and several
side web projects.
I have an 80g drive as my root drive. I recently took posesion of 2
74g 10k drives which I'd love to add as a mirror to replace the 80 g
dr
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 4:53 AM, "C. Bergström"
wrote:
> The other question that I am less worried about is would this violate any
> patents.. I mean.. Sun added the initial zfs support to grub and this is
> essentially extending that, but I'm not aware of any patent provisions on
> that code or s
I'm trying to help collect information about implementing raidz boot
support. At the same time there is also the possibility that the work
would overlap and take advantage of other grub 2 features allowing
booting from drives larger than 1T.
So if any zfs developers are kind enough to give
On 28 February, 2009 - Bryan Allen sent me these 1,0K bytes:
> I for one would like an "interactive" attribute for zpools and
> filesystems, specifically for destroy.
>
> The existing behavior (no prompt) could be the default, but all
> filesystems would inherit from the zpool's attrib. so I'd on
I for one would like an "interactive" attribute for zpools and
filesystems, specifically for destroy.
The existing behavior (no prompt) could be the default, but all
filesystems would inherit from the zpool's attrib. so I'd only
need to set interactive=on for the pool itself, not for each
filesyst
On 28 Feb 2009, at 07:26, C. Bergström wrote:
Blake wrote:
Gnome GUI for desktop ZFS administration
With the libzfs java bindings I am plotting a web based interface..
I'm not sure if that would meet this gnome requirement though..
Knowing specifically what you'd want to do in that inter
25 matches
Mail list logo
