Re: [zfs-discuss] Using iSCSI on ZFS with non-native FS - How to backup.

I think it should work. I have seen blog post about ZFS, iSCSI and Macs. Just google a bit. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Transaction consistency of ZFS

The "rename trick" may not work here. Even if I renamed the file successfully, the data of the file may still reside in the memory instead of flushing back to the disk. If I made any mistake here, please correct me. Thank you! I'll try to find out whether ZFS binding the same file always to the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Transaction consistency of ZFS

On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Damon Atkins wrote: If power failure happens you will lose anything in cache. So you could lose the entire file on power failure if the system is not busy (ie ZFS does delay writes, unless you do a fsync before closing the file). I would still like to see a file system opt

Re: [zfs-discuss] Transaction consistency of ZFS

If power failure happens you will lose anything in cache. So you could lose the entire file on power failure if the system is not busy (ie ZFS does delay writes, unless you do a fsync before closing the file). I would still like to see a file system option "sync on close" or even "wait for txg

Re: [zfs-discuss] Workaround for mpt timeouts in snv_127

I was under the impression that the problem affecting most of us was introduced much later than b104, sometime between ~114 and ~118. When I first started using my LSI 3081 cards, they had the IR firmware on them, and it caused me all kinds of problems. The disks showed up but I couldn't write

Re: [zfs-discuss] Workaround for mpt timeouts in snv_127

I found this thread after fighting the same problem in Nexenta which uses the OpenSolaris kernel from b104. Thankfully, I think I have (for the moment) solved my problem. Background: I have an LSI 3081e-R (1068E based) adapter which experiences the same disconnected command timeout error unde

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool import - device names not always updated?

On 4 dec 2009, at 18.47, Cindy Swearingen wrote: > Hi-- > > The problem with your test below was creating a pool by using the > components from another pool. This configuration is not supported. > > We don't have a lot of a specific information about using volumes, > other than for using as iSC

Re: [zfs-discuss] Transaction consistency of ZFS

On 5-Dec-09, at 8:32 AM, nxyyt wrote: Thank you very much for your quick response. My question is I want to figure out whether there is data loss after power outage. I have replicas on other machines so I can recovery from the data loss. But I need a way to know whether there is data lo

Re: [zfs-discuss] mpt errors on snv 127

Hi all, Unfortunately for me, there does seem to be a hardware component to my problem. Although my rsync copied almost 4TB of data with no iostat errors after going back to OpenSolaris 2009.06, I/O on one of my mpt cards did eventually hang, with 6 disk lights on and 2 off, until rebooting. T

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send | verify | receive

On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, dick hoogendijk wrote: > >> On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 09:22 -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: >> >>> You can also stream into a gzip or lzop wrapper in order to obtain the >>> benefit of incremental CRCs and some compression as

[zfs-discuss] Using iSCSI on ZFS with non-native FS - How to backup.

Hi there. I'm looking at moving my home server to ZFS and adding a second for backup purposes. In the process of researching ZFS I noticed iSCSI. I'm thinking of creating a zvol, share it with iSCSI and use it with my Mac(s). In this scenario, the fs would obviously have to be HFS+. Now, my ques

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send | verify | receive

On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, dick hoogendijk wrote: On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 09:22 -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: You can also stream into a gzip or lzop wrapper in order to obtain the benefit of incremental CRCs and some compression as well. Can you give an example command line for this option please?

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs on ssd

Colin Raven wrote: > On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 17:43, Seth Heeren > wrote: > > Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > > On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Seth Heeren wrote: > >>> > >>> in the same way, I guess, when running an OS on a SSD boot disk, > >>> should we still need the sa

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send | verify | receive

Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Sriram Narayanan wrote: > >> If feasible, you may want to generate MD5 sums on the streamed output >> and then use these for verification. > > You can also stream into a gzip or lzop wrapper in order to obtain the > benefit of incremental CRCs and some

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs on ssd

Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Seth Heeren wrote: >>> >>> in the same way, I guess, when running an OS on a SSD boot disk, >>> should we still need the same memory swapping mechanisms as we do >>> today, considering that in that case, the swap device is (nearly) as >>> fast as memory

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send | verify | receive

On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 09:22 -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > You can also stream into a gzip or lzop wrapper in order to obtain the > benefit of incremental CRCs and some compression as well. Can you give an example command line for this option please? ___

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send | verify | receive

On Dec 4, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: Depending of your version of OS, I think the following post from Richard Elling will be of great interest to you: - http://richardelling.blogspot.com/2009/10/check-integrity-of-zfs-send-streams . html Thanks! :-) No, wait! Accordi

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs on ssd

On Dec 5, 2009, at 8:09 AM, Andrew Gabriel wrote: Bob Friesenhahn wrote: The interesting thing for the future will be non-volatile main memory, with the primary concern being how to firewall damage due to a bug. You would be able to turn your computer off and back on and be working again a

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs on ssd

Bob Friesenhahn wrote: The interesting thing for the future will be non-volatile main memory, with the primary concern being how to firewall damage due to a bug. You would be able to turn your computer off and back on and be working again almost instantaneously. Some of us are old enough (just)

Re: [zfs-discuss] Transaction consistency of ZFS

On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Seth Heeren wrote: Yes. It is my understanding that (at least recent versions) will detect incomplete transactions and simply rollback to the last consistent uberblock in case of trouble. I'm not completely up to speed with regard to the ODF, Uberblocks and the ZIL; In my re

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs on ssd

On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Seth Heeren wrote: in the same way, I guess, when running an OS on a SSD boot disk, should we still need the same memory swapping mechanisms as we do today, considering that in that case, the swap device is (nearly) as fast as memory itself. Is it? I think that when you look

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs on ssd

On 12/05/09 01:36, anu...@kqinfotech.com wrote: Hi, What you say is probably right with respect to L2ARC, but logging (ZIL or database log) is required for consistency purpose. No, the ZIL is not required for consistency. The pool is fully consistent without the ZIL. See http://blogs.sun.

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send | verify | receive

On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Sriram Narayanan wrote: If feasible, you may want to generate MD5 sums on the streamed output and then use these for verification. You can also stream into a gzip or lzop wrapper in order to obtain the benefit of incremental CRCs and some compression as well. As long as

[zfs-discuss] How can we help fix MPT driver post build 129

How can we help with what is outlined below. I can reproduce these at will, so if anyone at Sun would like an environment to test this situation let me know. What is the best info to grab for you folks to help here? Thanks - nola This is in regard to these threads: http://www.opensolaris.or

Re: [zfs-discuss] Transaction consistency of ZFS

Thank you very much for your quick response. My question is I want to figure out whether there is data loss after power outage. I have replicas on other machines so I can recovery from the data loss. But I need a way to know whether there is data loss without comparing the different data repli

Re: [zfs-discuss] Transaction consistency of ZFS

Yes. It is my understanding that (at least recent versions) will detect incomplete transactions and simply rollback to the last consistent uberblock in case of trouble. I'm not completely up to speed with regard to the ODF, Uberblocks and the ZIL; In my recollection the "inspection / selection" of

[zfs-discuss] Transaction consistency of ZFS

Hi, everybody, I'm a newbie to ZFS. I have a special question against the COW transaction of ZFS. Does ZFS keeps the sequential consistency when it meets power outage or server crash? Assume following scenario: My application has only a single thread and it appends the data to the file contin

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs on ssd

Selim Daoud wrote: > I was wondering if there were work done in the area of zfs > configuration running out of 100% SSD disks. > > L2ARC and ZIL have been designed as a way to improve long seek > times/latencies of rotational disks. > now if we use only SSD (F5100 or F20) as back end drives for zfs

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send | verify | receive

Well what does _that_ verify? It will verify that no bits provably broke during transport. It will still leave the chance of getting an incompatible stream, an incomplete stream (kill the dump), or plain corrupted data. Of course, the chance of the latter should be extremely small in server-grade

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs on ssd

Hi, What you say is probably right with respect to L2ARC, but logging (ZIL or database log) is required for consistency purpose. Anurag. Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone from !DEA -Original Message- From: Selim Daoud Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 08:59:52 To: ZFS Discussions Subject: [zfs-

[zfs-discuss] zfs on ssd

I was wondering if there were work done in the area of zfs configuration running out of 100% SSD disks. L2ARC and ZIL have been designed as a way to improve long seek times/latencies of rotational disks. now if we use only SSD (F5100 or F20) as back end drives for zfs, we should not need those add