I think the exception may be when doing a recursive snapshot - ZFS appears to
halt IO so that it can take all the snapshots at the same instant.
At least, that's what it looked like to me. I've got an Opensolaris ZFS box
providing NFS to VMWare, and I was getting SCSI timeout's within the Virtua
Seems like upgrading from b126 to b127 will have the same problem.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On Fri, Nov 13 at 15:58, Tim Cook wrote:
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Orvar Korvar <
knatte_fnatte_tja...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yes I do fine. How do you do-be-do-be-do?
I have OpenSolaris b125 and filled a zpool with data. I did scrub on it,
which took 8 hours. Some of the drives were connect
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Orvar Korvar <
knatte_fnatte_tja...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yes I do fine. How do you do-be-do-be-do?
>
> I have OpenSolaris b125 and filled a zpool with data. I did scrub on it,
> which took 8 hours. Some of the drives were connected to the mobo, some of
> the drives
Yes I do fine. How do you do-be-do-be-do?
I have OpenSolaris b125 and filled a zpool with data. I did scrub on it, which
took 8 hours. Some of the drives were connected to the mobo, some of the drives
were connected to the AOC-MV8... marvellsx88 card which is used in Thumper.
Then I connected a
Original Message
Subject: [osol-announce] IMPT: Infrastructure upgrade this weekend, 11/13-15
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:37:19 -0800
From: Derek Cicero
Reply-To: mai...@opensolaris.org
To: opensolaris-annou...@opensolaris.org
All,
Due to infrastructure upgrades in several phy
On Nov 13, 2009, at 6:43 AM, Rodrigo E. De León Plicet wrote:
While reading about NILFS here:
http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7345/1.html
I saw this:
One of the most noticeable features of NILFS is that it can
"continuously and automatically save instantaneous states of the
file system w
The Netra X1 has one ATA bus for both internal drives.
No way to get high perf out of a snail.
-- richard
On Nov 13, 2009, at 8:08 AM, Bob Friesenhahn > wrote:
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Tim Cook wrote:
If it is using parallel SCSI, perhaps there is a problem with the
SCSI bus termination or
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Tim Cook wrote:
If it is using parallel SCSI, perhaps there is a problem with the
SCSI bus termination or a bad cable?
SCSI? Try PATA ;)
Is that good? I don't recall ever selecting that option when
purchasing a computer. It seemed safer to st
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Tim Cook wrote:
If it is using parallel SCSI, perhaps there is a problem with the SCSI bus
termination or a bad cable?
SCSI? Try PATA ;)
Is that good? I don't recall ever selecting that option when
purchasing a computer. It seemed safer to stick with SCSI than to try
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Bob Friesenhahn <
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, inouk wrote:
>
>>
>> Sounds like a bus bottleneck, as if two HD's can't use the same bus for
>> data transfert. I don't know the hardware specifications of Netra X1,
>> though
>>
>
> May
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, inouk wrote:
Sounds like a bus bottleneck, as if two HD's can't use the same bus
for data transfert. I don't know the hardware specifications of
Netra X1, though
Maybe it uses Ultra-160 SCSI like my Sun Blade 2500? This does
constrain performance, but due to simultane
> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, inouk wrote:
> Your system has every little RAM (512MB). It is less
> than is
> recommended for Solaris 10 or for zfs and if it was a
> PC, it would be
> barely enough to run Windows XP. Since zfs likes to
> use RAM and
> expects and sufficient RAM will be available, it
NSA might choose in the future.
I just found this link on the Backblaze blog and I hope you will find it
as amusing as I do:
http://blog.backblaze.com/2009/11/12/nsa-might-want-some-backblaze-pods/
--
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give him a freshly-charged
Electric Eel and ch
Agreed, but still: wy zpool iostat 15MB en iostat 615KB?
Regard, Jeff
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org]
On Behalf Of Bob Friesenhahn [bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us]
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 4:05 PM
To: in
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Ross wrote:
> > Isn't dedupe in some ways the antithesis of setting
> > copies > 1? We go to a lot of trouble to create redundancy (n-way
> > mirroring, raidz-n, copies=n, etc) to make things as robust as
> > possible and then we reduce redundancy with dedupe and
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, inouk wrote:
So my question are the following:
1.- Why zpool iostat is reporting 15MB/s of data read when in reality only
615KB/s is read ?
2.- Why sched is taking so much io?
3.- What I can do to improve IO performance? It find it very unbelievable that
this is the best
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Ross wrote:
But are we reducing redundancy? I don't know the details of how
dedupe is implemented, but I'd have thought that if copies=2, you
get 2 copies of each dedupe block. So your data is just as safe
since you haven't actually changed the redundancy, it's just tha
>While reading about NILFS here:
>
>http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7345/1.html
>
>
>I saw this:
>
>*One of the most noticeable features of NILFS is that it can "continu=
>ously
>> and automatically save instantaneous states of the file system with=
>out
>> interrupting service". NILFS refers to th
While reading about NILFS here:
http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7345/1.html
I saw this:
*One of the most noticeable features of NILFS is that it can "continuously
> and automatically save instantaneous states of the file system without
> interrupting service". NILFS refers to these as checkpoint
Hi,
I have a Netra X1 server with 512MB ram and two ATA disk, model ST340016A.
Processor is a UltraSPARC-IIe 500MHz.
Version of solaris is: Solaris 10 10/09 s10s_u8wos_08a SPARC
I jumpstarted the server with ZFS as root, two disks as a mirror:
On 13.11.09 16:09, Ross wrote:
Isn't dedupe in some ways the antithesis of setting copies > 1? We go to a
lot of trouble to create redundancy (n-way mirroring, raidz-n, copies=n,
etc) to make things as robust as possible and then we reduce redundancy
with dedupe and compression
But are we redu
> It says at the end of the zfs send section of the man page "The format
> of the stream is committed. You will be able to receive your streams on
> future versions of ZFS."
>
> 'Twas not always so. It used to say "The format of the stream is
> evolving. No backwards compatibility is guaranteed. Y
> Isn't dedupe in some ways the antithesis of setting
> copies > 1? We go to a lot of trouble to create redundancy (n-way
> mirroring, raidz-n, copies=n, etc) to make things as robust as
> possible and then we reduce redundancy with dedupe and compression
But are we reducing redundancy? I don't
How do you do,
On 13 nov 2009, at 11.07, Orvar Korvar
wrote:
I have a raidz2 and did a scrub, it took 8h. Then I reconnected some
drives to other SATA ports, and now it takes 15h to scrub??
Why is that?
Could you perhaps provid some more info?
Which OSOL release? are the new disks ut
I have a raidz2 and did a scrub, it took 8h. Then I reconnected some drives to
other SATA ports, and now it takes 15h to scrub??
Why is that?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://ma
26 matches
Mail list logo
