Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool fragmentation issues? (dovecot) [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

0n Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 08:43:06PM -0800, Michael Keller wrote: >> The best Mail Box to use under Dovecot for ZFS is >> MailDir, each email is store as a individual file. > >Can not agree on that. dbox is about 10x faster - at least if you have > 1 messages in one mailbo

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool fragmentation issues? (dovecot)

> The best Mail Box to use under Dovecot for ZFS is > MailDir, each email is store as a individual file. Can not agree on that. dbox is about 10x faster - at least if you have > 1 messages in one mailbox folder. Thats not because of ZFS but dovecot just handles dbox files (one for each messa

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS ARC Cache and Solaris u8

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Mr. T Doodle wrote: Has the ARC cache in Solaris 10 u8 been improved? Have been reading some mixed messages. Also should this parameter be tuned? It is true that there does not seem to be a kernel patch out for the bug I reported, but the ARC cache in Solaris 10 U8 seems

[zfs-discuss] ZFS ARC Cache and Solaris u8

Has the ARC cache in Solaris 10 u8 been improved? Have been reading some mixed messages. Also should this parameter be tuned? Thanks ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

> Personally I'd say it's a must. Most DC's I operate in wouldn't tolerate > having a card separately wired from the chassis power. May I ask the list, if this is a hard requirement for anyone else? Please email me directly "cgeorge at ddrdrive dot com". Thank you, Christopher George Founder/

Re: [zfs-discuss] opensolaris-vmware

On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:33 AM, Gregory Durham wrote: > I have been recommended by several other users on this mailing list to use > inside the vm snapshots, vmware snapshots, and then use zfs snapshots. I > believe I understand the difference between filesystem snapshots vs block > level snapsh

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

> I see nothing in the design that precludes a customer from using a > Li-Ion battery, if they so desire. Perhaps the collective has forgotten > that DC power is one of the simplest and most widespread interfaces > around? :-) Richard, Very good point! We have already had a request for the DC ja

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs fast mirror resync?

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 06:11:10PM -0500, Miles Nordin wrote: > zpool offline / zpool online of a mirror component will indeed > fast-resync, and I do it all the time. zpool detach / attach will > not. Yes, but the offline device is still part of the pool. What are you doing with the device when

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZIL to disk

On Jan 14, 2010, at 4:02 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > That is a simple performance model for small, random reads. The ZIL > is a write-only workload, so the model will not apply. BTW, it is a Good Thing (tm) the small, random read model does not apply to the ZIL. -- richard

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZIL to disk

On Jan 14, 2010, at 3:59 PM, Ray Van Dolson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 03:55:20PM -0800, Ray Van Dolson wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 03:41:17PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote: Consider a pool of 3x 2TB SATA disks in RAIZ1, you would roughly have 80 IOPS. Any info about the relat

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZIL to disk

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 03:55:20PM -0800, Ray Van Dolson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 03:41:17PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote: > > > Consider a pool of 3x 2TB SATA disks in RAIZ1, you would roughly > > > have 80 IOPS. Any info about the relation between ZIL <> pool > > > performance? Or will th

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZIL to disk

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 03:41:17PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote: > > Consider a pool of 3x 2TB SATA disks in RAIZ1, you would roughly > > have 80 IOPS. Any info about the relation between ZIL <> pool > > performance? Or will the ZIL simply fill up and performance drops > > to pool speed? > > The Z

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZIL to disk

On Jan 14, 2010, at 10:58 AM, Jeffry Molanus wrote: > Hi all, > > Are there any recommendations regarding min IOPS the backing storage pool > needs to have when flushing the SSD ZIL to the pool? Pedantically, as many as you can afford :-) The DDRdrive folks sell IOPS at 200 IOPS/$. Sometimes

Re: [zfs-discuss] Invalid zpool argument in Solaris 10 (10/09)

OK. Now I see the problem. ldi_get_size() uses a few DDI properties that are exported by the driver. Specifically it looks for "NBlocks", "nblocks", "Size", and "size". CMLB version 1, which is implemented in OpenSolaris, handles creating and returning these DDI properties. Solaris 10, however,

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

> "dd" == David Dyer-Bennet writes: dd> I'm pretty sure the insides of my camera batteries and such dd> are "standard parts" at that level; but it doesn't do me any dd> good. I don't know how to find the sources for those parts, dd> be sure I'm right, and fake up replacements

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > On Jan 14, 2010, at 11:02 AM, Christopher George wrote: > > >> That's kind of an overstatement. NVRAM backed by on-board LI-Ion > >> batteries has been used in storage industry for years; > > > > Respectfully, I stand by my three points of L

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

Very interesting product indeed! Given the volume one of these cards take up inside the server though, I couldn't help but think that 4GB is a bit on the low side. Alex. On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Christopher George wrote: > The DDRdrive X1 OpenSolaris device driver is now complete, > p

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

On Jan 14, 2010, at 11:02 AM, Christopher George wrote: >> That's kind of an overstatement. NVRAM backed by on-board LI-Ion >> batteries has been used in storage industry for years; > > Respectfully, I stand by my three points of Li-Ion batteries as they relate > to enterprise class NVRAM: igniti

Re: [zfs-discuss] 4 Internal Disk Configuration

On Jan 14, 2010, at 10:44 AM, "Mr. T Doodle" wrote: Hello, I have played with ZFS but not deployed any production systems using ZFS and would like some opinions I have a T-series box with 4 internal drives and would like to deploy ZFS with availability and performance in mind ;

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs fast mirror resync?

> "fc" == Frank Cusack writes: fc> That's my experience. I wish zfs had that feature. Pretty fc> sure (IIRC) SVM has it with offline/online. zpool offline / zpool online of a mirror component will indeed fast-resync, and I do it all the time. zpool detach / attach will not. no ne

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

> Why not enlighten EMC/NTAP on this then? On the basic chemistry and possible failure characteristics of Li-Ion batteries? I will agree, if I had system level control as in either example, one could definitely help mitigate said risks compared to selling a card based product where I have very li

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

On Thu, January 14, 2010 14:34, Miles Nordin wrote: >> "cg" == Christopher George writes: > cg> inflexible proprietary nature of Li-Ion > > You can get complete systems with charging microcontroller and battery > without any undue encumbrances I can detect on sparkfun.com. What's > ``pr

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs fast mirror resync?

On January 14, 2010 8:58:51 PM + A Darren Dunham wrote: I was under the impression that the ZFS fast replay only held for mirrors where one part is "missing" and not where you actually administratively detach it or where the mirror is used on another host (a la 'zpool split'). That's my ex

Re: [zfs-discuss] 2-way Mirror With Spare

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:31:25AM -0800, Richard Elling wrote: > On Jan 14, 2010, at 11:09 AM, Mr. T Doodle wrote: > > > I am considering RAIDZ or a 2-way mirror with a spare. > > > > I have 6 disks and would like the best possible performance and > > reliability and not really concerned with di

Re: [zfs-discuss] Invalid zpool argument in Solaris 10 (10/09) - Email found in subject

Hello Mark I created s0 as you suggested: partition> print Current partition table (unnamed): Total disk cylinders available: 54823 + 2 (reserved cylinders) Part TagFlag Cylinders SizeBlocks 0usrwm 3 - 54822 419.94GB(54820/0/0) 88068

Re: [zfs-discuss] Invalid zpool argument in Solaris 10 (10/09)

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Josh Morris wrote: Hello List, I am porting a block device driver(for a PCIe NAND flash disk driver) from OpenSolaris to Solaris 10. On Solaris 10 (10/09) I'm having an issues creating a zpool with the disk. Apparently I have an 'invalid argument' somewhere: % pfexec z

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs fast mirror resync?

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 04:38:42PM +0200, Cyril Plisko wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Max Levine wrote: > > Veritas has this feature called fast mirror resync where they have ?a > > DRL on each side of the mirror and, detaching/re-attaching a mirror > > causes only the changed bits to b

[zfs-discuss] Invalid zpool argument in Solaris 10 (10/09)

Hello List, I am porting a block device driver(for a PCIe NAND flash disk driver) from OpenSolaris to Solaris 10. On Solaris 10 (10/09) I'm having an issues creating a zpool with the disk. Apparently I have an 'invalid argument' somewhere: % pfexec zpool create mypool c4d0p0 cannot create 'm

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Christopher George wrote: >> That's kind of an overstatement. NVRAM backed by on-board LI-Ion >> batteries has been used in storage industry for years; > > Respectfully, I stand by my three points of Li-Ion batteries as they relate > to enterprise class NVRAM: ign

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

> "cg" == Christopher George writes: cg> I agree, it would be very informative if RAID HBA vendors cg> would publish failure statistics of their Li-Ion based BBU cg> products. If they haven't, then on what are you basing your decision *not* to use one? Just the random thought th

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZIL to disk

> > There are different kinds of "IOPS". The expensive ones are random > IOPS whereas sequential IOPS are much more efficient. The intention > of the SSD-based ZIL is to defer the physical write so that would-be > random IOPS can be converted to sequential scheduled IOPS like a > normal write.

Re: [zfs-discuss] 2-way Mirror With Spare

On Jan 14, 2010, at 11:09 AM, Mr. T Doodle wrote: > I am considering RAIDZ or a 2-way mirror with a spare. > > I have 6 disks and would like the best possible performance and reliability > and not really concerned with disk space. > > My thought was a 2 disk 2-way mirror with a spare. > > Woul

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZIL to disk

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Jeffry Molanus wrote: Are there any recommendations regarding min IOPS the backing storage pool needs to have when flushing the SSD ZIL to the pool? Consider a pool of 3x 2TB SATA disks in RAIZ1, you would roughly have 80 IOPS. Any info about the relation between ZIL <> po

[zfs-discuss] 2-way Mirror With Spare

I am considering RAIDZ or a 2-way mirror with a spare. I have 6 disks and would like the best possible performance and reliability and not really concerned with disk space. My thought was a 2 disk 2-way mirror with a spare. Would this be the best in terms of performance? Thanks

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

> That's kind of an overstatement. NVRAM backed by on-board LI-Ion > batteries has been used in storage industry for years; Respectfully, I stand by my three points of Li-Ion batteries as they relate to enterprise class NVRAM: ignition risk, thermal wear-out, and proprietary design. As a prior po

[zfs-discuss] ZIL to disk

Hi all, Are there any recommendations regarding min IOPS the backing storage pool needs to have when flushing the SSD ZIL to the pool? Consider a pool of 3x 2TB SATA disks in RAIZ1, you would roughly have 80 IOPS. Any info about the relation between ZIL <> pool performance? Or will the ZIL sim

Re: [zfs-discuss] SMC for ZFS administration in OpenSolaris 2009.06?

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:11 PM, ted jordan wrote: > For Sun's sake they cannot go browser only. > > Department of Defense does not allow users to install browsers. > > Ted Jordan - Funuation > -- > > I don't follow. Why would adding a web based management utility force it to be web-only? The

Re: [zfs-discuss] SMC for ZFS administration in OpenSolaris 2009.06?

ted jordan wrote: For Sun's sake they cannot go browser only. Department of Defense does not allow users to install browsers. They may not allow the end user to install a browser but there are lots of deployments of Solaris systems in the US DoD where the operating system provided browser

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do separate ZFS filesystems affect performance?

additional clarification ... On Jan 14, 2010, at 8:49 AM, Richard Elling wrote: > On Jan 14, 2010, at 6:41 AM, Gary Mills wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 01:47:46AM -0800, Roch wrote: >>> >>> Gary Mills writes: Yes, I understand that, but do filesystems have separate queues of an

Re: [zfs-discuss] SMC for ZFS administration in OpenSolaris 2009.06?

For Sun's sake they cannot go browser only. Department of Defense does not allow users to install browsers. Ted Jordan - Funuation -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.openso

[zfs-discuss] PCI-E CF adapter?

I know this is slightly OT but folks discuss zfs compatible hardware here all the time. :) Has anyone used something like this combination? It'd be nice to have externally acc

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

> Is there any data out there that have tracked these sort of ignition > incidents? I have to admit I'd never heard of this. We have quite a > few BBU backed RAID controllers in our servers and I've never had > anything remotely like this occur. I know anecdotal evidence is > meaningless, but this

Re: [zfs-discuss] 4 Internal Disk Configuration

> By partitioning the first two drives, you can arrange to have a small > zfs-boot mirrored pool on the first two drives, and then create a second > pool as two mirror pairs, or four drives in a raidz to support your data. agreed.. 2 % zpool iostat -v capacity operations

Re: [zfs-discuss] opensolaris-vmware

I have been recommended by several other users on this mailing list to use inside the vm snapshots, vmware snapshots, and then use zfs snapshots. I believe I understand the difference between filesystem snapshots vs block level snapshots, however since I cannot use vmware snapshots (all LUNs on the

Re: [zfs-discuss] 4 Internal Disk Configuration

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Mr. T Doodle wrote: I have a T-series box with 4 internal drives and would like to deploy ZFS with availability and performance in mind ;) What would some recommended configurations be? Example: use internal RAID controller to mirror boot drives, and ZFS the other 2?

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Ray Van Dolson wrote: My gut tells me the risk of this is pretty low and most are going to prefer the convenience of an onboard BBU to installing UPS'es in all their racks (as good a practice as that may be). Other than the spontaneous combustion issue (which was heavily co

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do separate ZFS filesystems affect performance?

On Jan 14, 2010, at 6:41 AM, Gary Mills wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 01:47:46AM -0800, Roch wrote: >> >> Gary Mills writes: >>> >>> Yes, I understand that, but do filesystems have separate queues of any >>> sort within the ZIL? If not, would it help to put the database >>> filesystems into

Re: [zfs-discuss] adpu320 scsi timeouts only with ZFS

I was frustrated with this problem for months. I've tried different disks, cables, even disk cabinets. The driver hasn't been updated in a long time. When the timeouts occurred, they would freeze for about a minute or two (showing the 100% busy). I even had the problem with less than 8 L

Re: [zfs-discuss] adpu320 scsi timeouts only with ZFS

> Any news regarding this issue? I'm having the same > problems. Me too. My v40z with U320 drives in the internal bay will lock up partway through a scrub. I backed the whole SCSI chain down to U160, but it seems a shame that U320 speeds can't be used. -- This message posted from opensolaris.

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Christopher George wrote: >> I'm not sure about others on the list, but I have a dislike of AC power >> bricks in my racks. > > I definitely empathize with your position concerning AC power bricks, but > until the perfect battery is created, and we are far from it

Re: [zfs-discuss] 4 Internal Disk Configuration

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Mr. T Doodle wrote: > Hello, > > I have played with ZFS but not deployed any production systems using ZFS and > would like some opinions > I have a T-series box with 4 internal drives and would like to deploy ZFS > with availability and performance in mind

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:35:32AM -0800, Christopher George wrote: > > I'm not sure about others on the list, but I have a dislike of AC power > > bricks in my racks. > > I definitely empathize with your position concerning AC power bricks, but > until the perfect battery is created, and we are f

[zfs-discuss] Lycom has lots of hardware that looks interesting, is it supported

I've been building a few 6disk boxes for VirtualBox servers, and I am also surveying how I will add more disks as these boxes need it. Looking around on the HCL, I see the Lycom PE-103 is supported. That's just 2 more disks, I'm typically going to want to add a raid-z w/spare to my zpools, so

Re: [zfs-discuss] 4 Internal Disk Configuration

On Thu, January 14, 2010 09:44, Mr. T Doodle wrote: > I have played with ZFS but not deployed any production systems using ZFS > and > would like some opinions Opinions I've got :-). Nor am I at all unusual in that regard, on this list :-) :-). > I have a T-series box with 4 internal drive

[zfs-discuss] 4 Internal Disk Configuration

Hello, I have played with ZFS but not deployed any production systems using ZFS and would like some opinions I have a T-series box with 4 internal drives and would like to deploy ZFS with availability and performance in mind ;) What would some recommended configurations be? Example: use

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do separate ZFS filesystems affect performance?

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 01:47:46AM -0800, Roch wrote: > > Gary Mills writes: > > > > Yes, I understand that, but do filesystems have separate queues of any > > sort within the ZIL? If not, would it help to put the database > > filesystems into a separate zpool? > > > > The slog device is

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do separate ZFS filesystems affect performance?

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:58:48AM +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 08:21:13AM -0600, Gary Mills wrote: > > Yes, I understand that, but do filesystems have separate queues of any > > sort within the ZIL? > > I'm not sure. If you can experiment and measure a benefit, > unders

Re: [zfs-discuss] adpu320 scsi timeouts only with ZFS

Any news regarding this issue? I'm having the same problems. I'm using an external Axus SCSI enclosure (Yotta with 16 drives) and it timed out on scanning LUNs (16 of them b/c Yotta is configured as JBOD). I've performed firmware upgrade to the Yotta system and now the scanning works, the pool

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do separate ZFS filesystems affect performance?

Gary Mills writes: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 01:56:57PM -0800, Richard Elling wrote: > > On Jan 12, 2010, at 12:37 PM, Gary Mills wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:11:36AM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > > >> On Tue, 12 Jan 2010, Gary Mills wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Is moving the

Re: [zfs-discuss] New ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) device available - Beta program now open!

> I'm not sure about others on the list, but I have a dislike of AC power > bricks in my racks. I definitely empathize with your position concerning AC power bricks, but until the perfect battery is created, and we are far from it, it comes down to tradeoffs. I personally believe the ignition ris