On Oct 18, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Sander Smeenk wrote:
Quoting Chris Kirby (chris.ki...@sun.com):
If you have a snapshot named "p...@snap", this:
# rmdir /pool/.zfs/snapshot/snap
is equivalent to this:
# zfs destroy p...@snap
Similarly, this:
# mkdir /pool/.zfs/snapshot/snap
is equivalent to this
Frank
I've been looking into:-
http://www.nexenta.com/corp/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection&id=4&Itemid=128
Only played with a VM so far on my laptop, but it does seem to be an
alternative to the Sun product if you don't want to buy a S7000.
IMHO: Sun are missing a great opport
On 10/13/09 18:35, Albert Chin wrote:
Maybe this will help:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/storage-discuss/2009-September/007118.html
Well, it does seem to explain the scrub problem. I think it might
also explain the slow boot and startup problem - the VM only has
564M available, an
hi,
After a shutdown my zpool wont go online again, zpool status showed that only
one of five hard drives is online. I tried to export the pool and get it back
in hope of a fix but with no change.
I have replaced the sata cables and even replaced the motherboard but it's
always showes the same
hi,
After a shutdown my zpool wont go online again, zpool status showed that only
one of five hard drives is online. I tried to export the pool and get it back
in hope of a fix but with no change.
I have replaced the sata cables and even replaced the motherboard but it's
always showes the same
Quoting Chris Kirby (chris.ki...@sun.com):
> If you have a snapshot named "p...@snap", this:
> # rmdir /pool/.zfs/snapshot/snap
> is equivalent to this:
> # zfs destroy p...@snap
>
> Similarly, this:
> # mkdir /pool/.zfs/snapshot/snap
> is equivalent to this:
> # zfs snapshot p...@snap
>
> This ca
On Oct 18, 2009, at 11:37 AM, Sander Smeenk wrote:
I tried to indicate that it's strange that rmdir works on the snapshot
directory while files inside snapshots are immutable.
This, to me, is a bug.
If you have a snapshot named "p...@snap", this:
# rmdir /pool/.zfs/snapshot/snap
is equivale
Quoting dick hoogendijk (d...@nagual.nl):
> > Well, thats what i would expect too. It seems strange that you can't
> > edit or remove singular files from snapshots [...]
> That would make the snapshot not a snapshot anymore. There would be
> differences..
I'm well aware of that. You're replying t
On Sun, 2009-10-18 at 18:12 +0200, Sander Smeenk wrote:
> Well, thats what i would expect too. It seems strange that you can't
> edit or remove singular files from snapshots [...]
That would make the snapshot not a snapshot anymore. There would be
differences..
__
All:
Given that the latest S10 update includes user quotas, the FAQ here
[1] may need an update
-- Sriram
[1] http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/faq/#zfsquotas
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/ma
Quoting A Darren Dunham (ddun...@taos.com):
> > i noticed rsync -removes- snapshots even though i am not able to do
> > so myself, even as root, with plain /bin/rm.
> I never liked this interface. I want snapshots to be immutable to
> operations within the filesystem itself.
Well, thats what i w
On 18-Oct-09, at 6:41 AM, Adam Mellor wrote:
I Too have seen this problem.
I had done a zfs send from my main pool "terra" (6 disk raidz on
seagate 1TB drives) to a mirror pair of WD Green 1TB drives.
ZFS send was successful, however i noticed the pool was degraded
after a while (~1 week)
I Too have seen this problem.
I had done a zfs send from my main pool "terra" (6 disk raidz on seagate 1TB
drives) to a mirror pair of WD Green 1TB drives.
ZFS send was successful, however i noticed the pool was degraded after a while
(~1 week) with one of the mirror disks constantly re-silverin
13 matches
Mail list logo
