Re: [zfs-discuss] Forensics related ZFS questions

>1. Does variable FSB block sizing extend to files larger than record size, >concerning the last FSB allocated? > >In other words, for files larger than 128KB, that utilize more than one >full recordsize FSB, will the LAST FSB allocated be `right-sized' to fit >the remaining da

[zfs-discuss] Forensics related ZFS questions

1. Does variable FSB block sizing extend to files larger than record size, concerning the last FSB allocated? In other words, for files larger than 128KB, that utilize more than one full recordsize FSB, will the LAST FSB allocated be 'right-sized' to fit the remaining data, or will ZFS allocate a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Freezing OpenSolaris with ZFS

On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Blake wrote: > > > > On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Markus Denhoff > wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > we set up an OpenSolaris/ZFS based storage server with two zpools: rpool > is > > a mirror for the operating system. tank is a raidz for data storage. > > > > The

Re: [zfs-discuss] Freezing OpenSolaris with ZFS

This sounds quite like the problems I've been having with a spotty sata controller and/or motherboard. See my thread from last week about copying large amounts of data that forced a reboot. Lots of good info from engineers and users in that thread. On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Markus Denho

Re: [zfs-discuss] ACL interpretation

Mark Shellenbaum wrote: David Dyer-Bennet wrote: On page 202 of the December 2008 Solaris ZFS Administration Guide, it says the ACLs are processed in order. Then it says that an explicit allow ends processing (or at least it says that a later deny can't override an earlier allow). But that's

Re: [zfs-discuss] ACL interpretation

David Dyer-Bennet wrote: On page 202 of the December 2008 Solaris ZFS Administration Guide, it says the ACLs are processed in order. Then it says that an explicit allow ends processing (or at least it says that a later deny can't override an earlier allow). But that's all it says; it doesn't re

Re: [zfs-discuss] CLI grinds to a halt during backups

Here is the info required. PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/NLWP 6179 nobody312M 225M sleep 510 12:42:09 0.8% BackupPC_dump/1 7783 root 3812K 2984K cpu7500 0:00:03 0.4% prstat/1 7803 root 2948K 1736K sleep 540 0:00:00 0.0%

Re: [zfs-discuss] After createing zpool of combined 750gb only 229 shows

Tomas Ögren writes: > I seem to recall that ZFS should complain and point out that they are > of (major) different size.. But apparently not.. Thanks for the tips. It actually did complain about size difference at one point. I used the -f option. But later destroyed the zpool I'd created that

Re: [zfs-discuss] After createing zpool of combined 750gb only 229 shows

On 15 March, 2009 - Harry Putnam sent me these 1,7K bytes: > > Summary: > I'm doing something wrong here but not sure what. Put a 250gb and > 500gb disk into zpool but only 229gb is available > > I have a 250 gb disk and a 500gb disk installed and configured as > raidz1. both have efi labels wh

[zfs-discuss] Freezing OpenSolaris with ZFS

Hi there, we set up an OpenSolaris/ZFS based storage server with two zpools: rpool is a mirror for the operating system. tank is a raidz for data storage. The system is used to store large video files and has attached 12x1GB SATA-drives (2 mirrored for the system). Everytime large files a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can VirtualBox run a 64 bit guests on 32 bit host

On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 01:20:54AM -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: > So cutting to the chase here... would you happen to have a > recommendation from your own experience, or something you've heard > will work and that can stand more ram... my current setup tops out at > 3gb. The link to the HCL that wa

[zfs-discuss] After createing zpool of combined 750gb only 229 shows

Summary: I'm doing something wrong here but not sure what. Put a 250gb and 500gb disk into zpool but only 229gb is available I have a 250 gb disk and a 500gb disk installed and configured as raidz1. both have efi labels when viewed with format/fdisk. fdisk c3d1: Total disk size is 30401

[zfs-discuss] ACL interpretation

On page 202 of the December 2008 Solaris ZFS Administration Guide, it says the ACLs are processed in order. Then it says that an explicit allow ends processing (or at least it says that a later deny can't override an earlier allow). But that's all it says; it doesn't really describe the interpret

Re: [zfs-discuss] What to do with a disk partition

Blake writes: > I think you will be helped by looking at this document: > > > > It addresses many of your questions. > > I think the easiest way to back up your OS might be to