On 03/18/10 11:09 AM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On 03/17/10 14:03, Ian Collins wrote:
I ran a scrub on a Solaris 10 update 8 system yesterday and it is 100%
done, but not complete:
scrub: scrub in progress for 23h57m, 100.00% done, 0h0m to go
If blocks that have already been visited are freed a
OK I have a very large zfs snapshot I want to destroy. When I do this, the
system nearly freezes during the zfs destroy. This is a Sun Fire X4600 with
128GB of memory. Now this may be more of a function of the IO device, but let's
say I don't care that this zfs destroy finishes quickly. I actual
I vote for zfs needing a backup and restore command against a snapshot.
backup command should output on stderr at least
Full_Filename SizeBytes Modification_Date_1970secSigned
so backup software can build indexes and stdout contains the data.
The advantage of zfs providing the command is that as
On 3/17/2010 21:07, Ian Collins wrote:
I have a couple of x4540s which use ZFS send/receive to replicate each
other hourly. Ech box has about 4TB of data, with maybe 10G of
changes per hour. I have run the replication every 15 minutes, but
hourly is good enough for us.
What software ver
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 08:43:13PM -0500, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> My own stuff is intended to be backed up by a short-cut combination --
> zfs send/receive to an external drive, which I then rotate off-site (I
> have three of a suitable size). However, the only way that actually
> works s
On 03/18/10 01:03 PM, Matt wrote:
Shipping the iSCSI and SAS questions...
Later on, I would like to add a second lower spec box to continuously (or
near-continously) mirror the data (using a gig crossover cable, maybe). I have
seen lots of ways of mirroring data to other boxes which has left
On 3/17/2010 17:53, Ian Collins wrote:
On 03/18/10 03:53 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
Also, snapshots. For my purposes, I find snapshots at some level a very
important part of the backup process. My old scheme was to rsync from
primary ZFS pool to backup ZFS pool, and snapshot both pools (wit
In the end, it was the drive. I replaced the drive and all the errors went
away. Another testimony to ZFS - all my data was intact after the resilvering
process, even with some other errors in the pool. ZFS resilvered the entire
new disk and fixed the other errors. You have to love ZFS.
--
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On 03/17/10 14:03, Ian Collins wrote:
>
>> I ran a scrub on a Solaris 10 update 8 system yesterday and it is 100%
>> done, but not complete:
>>
>> scrub: scrub in progress for 23h57m, 100.00% done, 0h0m to go
>>
>
> Don't panic. If "zpo
Dear list,
I am in the process of speccing an OpenSolaris box for iSCSI Storage of
XenServer domUs. I'm trying to get the best performance from a combination of
decent SATA II disks and some SSDs and I would really appreciate some feedback
on my plans. I don't have much idea what the workload
Ian,
When you say you spool to tape for off-site archival, what software do you
use?
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 18:53, Ian Collins wrote:
>
> I have been using a two stage backup process with my main client,
> send/receive to a backup pool and spool to tape for off site archival.
>
> I use a pa
On 03/18/10 03:53 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
Anybody using the in-kernel CIFS is also concerned with the ACLs, and I
think that's the big issue.
Especially in a paranoid organisation with 100s of ACEs!
Also, snapshots. For my purposes, I find snapshots at some level a very
important pa
On 03/18/10 11:09 AM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On 03/17/10 14:03, Ian Collins wrote:
I ran a scrub on a Solaris 10 update 8 system yesterday and it is 100%
done, but not complete:
scrub: scrub in progress for 23h57m, 100.00% done, 0h0m to go
Don't panic. If "zpool iostat" still shows active
For those following along, this is the e-mail I meant to send to the list
but
instead sent directly to Tonmaus. My mistake, and I apologize for having to
re-send.
=== Start ===
My understanding, limited though it may be, is that a scrub touches ALL data
that
has been written, including the pari
Ugh! I meant that to go to the list, so I'll probably re-send it for the
benefit
of everyone involved in the discussion. There were parts of that that I
wanted
others to read.
>From a re-read of Richard's e-mail, maybe he meant that the number of I/Os
queued to a device can be tuned lower and no
On 03/17/10 14:03, Ian Collins wrote:
I ran a scrub on a Solaris 10 update 8 system yesterday and it is 100%
done, but not complete:
scrub: scrub in progress for 23h57m, 100.00% done, 0h0m to go
Don't panic. If "zpool iostat" still shows active reads from all disks
in the pool, just step
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
> I ran a scrub on a Solaris 10 update 8 system yesterday and it is 100%
> done, but not complete:
>
> scrub: scrub in progress for 23h57m, 100.00% done, 0h0m to go
>
> Any ideas?
I've had that happen on FreeBSD 7-STABLE (post 7.2 release) us
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:15:53AM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> Clearly there are many more reads per second occuring on the zfs
> filesystem than the ufs filesystem.
yes
> Assuming that the application-level requests are really the same
From the OP, the workload is a "find /".
So, ZFS mak
I ran a scrub on a Solaris 10 update 8 system yesterday and it is 100%
done, but not complete:
scrub: scrub in progress for 23h57m, 100.00% done, 0h0m to go
Any ideas?
--
Ian.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.ope
Hi,
One of my colleagues was confused by the output of 'zpool status' on a pool
where a hot spare is being resilvered in after a drive failure:
$ zpool status data
pool: data
state: DEGRADED
status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The pool will
continue to function,
Hi,
I got a message from you off-list that doesn't show up in the thread even after
hours. As you mentioned the aspect here as well I'd like to respond to, I'll do
it from here:
> Third, as for ZFS scrub prioritization, Richard
> answered your question about that. He said it is
> low priority
> Hi Dave,
>
> I'm unclear about the autoreplace behavior with one
> spare that is
> connected to two pools. I don't see how it could work
> if the autoreplace
> property is enabled on both pools, which formats and
> replaces a spare
Because I already partitioned the disk into slices. Then
I ind
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17.03.2010 18:18, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>
> On Wed, March 17, 2010 10:19, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>
>> However, removable disks are not very
>> reliable compared to tapes, and the disks are higher cost per GB, and
>> require more volume in the
Hi Dave,
I'm unclear about the autoreplace behavior with one spare that is
connected to two pools. I don't see how it could work if the autoreplace
property is enabled on both pools, which formats and replaces a spare
disk that might be in-use in another pool (?) Maybe I misunderstand.
1. I th
On Wed, March 17, 2010 10:19, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> However, removable disks are not very
> reliable compared to tapes, and the disks are higher cost per GB, and
> require more volume in the safe deposit box, so the external disk usage is
> limited... Only going back for 2-4 weeks of archiv
> "la" == Lori Alt writes:
la> This is no longer the case. The send stream format is now
la> versioned in such a way that future versions of Solaris will
la> be able to read send streams generated by earlier versions of
la> Solaris.
Your memory of the thread is selective. T
> "k" == Khyron writes:
k> Star is probably perfect once it gets ZFS (e.g. NFS v4) ACL
nope, because snapshots are lost and clones are expanded wrt their
parents, and the original tree of snapshots/clones can never be
restored.
we are repeating, though. This is all in the archives.
>From pages 29,83,86,90 and 284 of the 10/09 Solaris ZFS Administration
guide, it sounds like a disk designated as a hot spare will:
1. Automatically take the place of a bad drive when needed
2. The spare will automatically be detached back to the spare
pool when a new device is inserted and bro
I think what you're saying is: Why bother trying to backup with "zfs
send"
when the recommended practice, fully supportable, is to use other tools
for
backup, such as tar, star, Amanda, bacula, etc. Right?
The answer to this is very simple.
#1 ...
#2 ...
Oh, one more thing. "zfs se
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17.03.2010 16:19, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
*snip
> Still ... If you're in situation (b) then you want as many options available
> to you as possible. I've helped many people and/or companies before, who
> ... Had backup media, but didn't have the
> Why do we want to adapt "zfs send" to do something it was never
> intended
> to do, and probably won't be adapted to do (well, if at all) anytime
> soon instead of
> optimizing existing technologies for this use case?
The only time I see or hear of anyone using "zfs send" in a way it wasn't
inte
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Kashif Mumtaz wrote:
but on UFS file system averge busy is 50% ,
any idea why ZFS makes disk more busy ?
Clearly there are many more reads per second occuring on the zfs
filesystem than the ufs filesystem. Assuming that the
application-level requests are really the sam
On Wed, March 17, 2010 06:28, Khyron wrote:
> The Best Practices Guide is also very clear about send and receive
> NOT being designed explicitly for backup purposes. I find it odd
> that so many people seem to want to force this point. ZFS appears
> to have been designed to allow the use of wel
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:23 AM, wrote:
>
>
> >IMHO, what matters is that pretty much everything from the disk controller
> >to the CPU and network interface is advertised in power-of-2 terms and
> disks
> >sit alone using power-of-10. And students are taught that computers work
> >with bits and
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 6:43 AM, wensheng liu wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> How to reserve a space on a zfs filesystem? For mkfiel or dd will write
> data to the
> block, it is time consuming. whiel "mkfile -n" will not really hold the
> space.
> And zfs's set reservation only work on filesytem, not on fil
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010, Tonmaus wrote:
None of them is active on that pool or in any existing file system.
Maybe the issue is particular to RAIDZ2, which is comparably recent.
On that occasion: does anybody know if ZFS reads all parities during
a scrub? Wouldn't it be sufficient for stale corrup
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Giovanni Tirloni wrote:
> IMHO, what matters is that pretty much everything from the disk controller
> to the CPU and network interface is advertised in power-of-2 terms and disks
> sit alone using power-of-10. And students are taught that computers work
> with bit
Hi all,
Great news - by attaching an identical size RDM to the server and then grabbing
the first 128K using the command you specified Ross
dd if=/dev/rdsk/c8t4d0p0 of=~/disk.out bs=512 count=256
we then proceeded to inject this into the faulted RDM and lo and behold the
volume recovered!
dd
hi ,
I'm using sun T1000 machines one machine is installed Solaris 10 with UFS and
other system with ZFS file system , ZFS machine is performing slow . Running
following commands on both systems shows Disk get busy immediatly to 100%
ZFS MACHINE
find / > /d
>IMHO, what matters is that pretty much everything from the disk controller
>to the CPU and network interface is advertised in power-of-2 terms and disks
>sit alone using power-of-10. And students are taught that computers work
>with bits and so everything is a power of 2.
That is simply not tru
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17.03.2010 15:15, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>> I think what you're saying is: Why bother trying to backup with "zfs
>> send"
>> when the recommended practice, fully supportable, is to use other tools
>> for
>> backup, such as tar, star, Amanda, bacu
> I think what you're saying is: Why bother trying to backup with "zfs
> send"
> when the recommended practice, fully supportable, is to use other tools
> for
> backup, such as tar, star, Amanda, bacula, etc. Right?
>
> The answer to this is very simple.
> #1 ...
> #2 ...
Oh, one more thing.
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:34 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> On 3/16/2010 23:21, Erik Trimble wrote:
>
>> On 3/16/2010 8:29 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/16/2010 17:45, Erik Trimble wrote:
>>>
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> On Tue, March 16, 2010 14:59, Erik Trimble wrote:
>>>
To be sure, Ed, I'm not asking:
Why bother trying to backup with "zfs send" when there are fully supportable
and
working options available right NOW?
Rather, I am asking:
Why do we want to adapt "zfs send" to do something it was never intended
to do, and probably won't be adapted to do (well, if
> The one thing that I keep thinking, and which I have yet to see
> discredited, is that
> ZFS file systems use POSIX semantics. So, unless you are using
> specific features
> (notably ACLs, as Paul Henson is), you should be able to backup those
> file systems
> using well known tools.
This is
Exactly!
This is what I meant, at least when it comes to backing up ZFS datasets.
There
are tools available NOW, such as Star, which will backup ZFS datasets due to
the
POSIX nature of those datasets. As well, Amanda, Bacula, NetBackup,
Networker
and probably some others I missed. Re-inventing t
On Mar 17, 2010, at 2:30 AM, Erik Ableson wrote:
On 17 mars 2010, at 00:25, Svein Skogen wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 16.03.2010 22:31, erik.ableson wrote:
On 16 mars 2010, at 21:00, Marc Nicholas wrote:
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Svein Skogen mailto
Stephen Bunn wrote:
> between our machine's pools and our backup server pool. It would be
> nice, however, if some sort of enterprise level backup solution in the
> style of ufsdump was introduced to ZFS.
Star can do the same as ufsdump does but independent of OS and filesystem.
Star is curr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17.03.2010 13:31, Svein Skogen wrote:
> On 17.03.2010 12:28, Khyron wrote:
>> Note to readers: There are multiple topics discussed herein. Please
>> identify which
*SNIP*
>
> How does backing up the NFSv4 acls help you backup up a zvol (shared f
On 3/16/2010 23:21, Erik Trimble wrote:
On 3/16/2010 8:29 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
On 3/16/2010 17:45, Erik Trimble wrote:
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
On Tue, March 16, 2010 14:59, Erik Trimble wrote:
Has there been a consideration by anyone to do a class-action lawsuit
for false advertisin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17.03.2010 12:28, Khyron wrote:
> Note to readers: There are multiple topics discussed herein. Please
> identify which
> idea(s) you are responding to, should you respond. Also make sure to
> take in all of
> this before responding. Something you
On 03/17/2010 08:28 PM, Khyron wrote:
The Best Practices Guide is also very clear about send and receive NOT
being
designed explicitly for backup purposes. I find it odd that so many
people seem to
want to force this point. ZFS appears to have been designed to allow
the use of
well known tools
Hi all,
How to reserve a space on a zfs filesystem? For mkfiel or dd will write
data to the
block, it is time consuming. whiel "mkfile -n" will not really hold the
space.
And zfs's set reservation only work on filesytem, not on file?
Could anyone provide a solution for this?
Thanks very much
Vin
Note to readers: There are multiple topics discussed herein. Please
identify which
idea(s) you are responding to, should you respond. Also make sure to take
in all of
this before responding. Something you want to discuss may already be
covered at
a later point in this e-mail, including NDMP and
On 17 mrt 2010, at 10:56, zfs ml wrote:
> On 3/17/10 1:21 AM, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
>>
>> On 16 mrt 2010, at 19:48, valrh...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it could just be a coincidence. That
>>> is, perhaps the data that you copied happens to lead to a dedup
On 3/17/10 1:21 AM, Paul van der Zwan wrote:
On 16 mrt 2010, at 19:48, valrh...@gmail.com wrote:
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it could just be a coincidence. That is,
perhaps the data that you copied happens to lead to a dedup ratio relative to
the data that's already on there. You c
>Carson Gaspar wrote:
>>> Not quite.
>>> 11 x 10^12 =~ 10.004 x (1024^4).
>>>
>>> So, the 'zpool list' is right on, at "10T" available.
>>
>> Duh, I was doing GiB math (y = x * 10^9 / 2^20), not TiB math (y = x *
>> 10^12 / 2^40).
>>
>> Thanks for the correction.
>>
>You're welcome. :-)
>
>
>On
Eric,
in my understanding ( which I learned from more qualified people
but I may be mistaken anyway ), whenever we discuss a transfer rate
like x Mb/s, y GB/s or z PB/d, the M, G, T or P refers to the
frequency and not to the data.
1 MB/s means "transfer bytes at 1 MHz", NOT "transfer megabyte
On 16 mrt 2010, at 19:48, valrh...@gmail.com wrote:
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it could just be a coincidence. That is,
> perhaps the data that you copied happens to lead to a dedup ratio relative to
> the data that's already on there. You could test this out by copying a few
> gig
On 16 mrt 2010, at 19:48, valrh...@gmail.com wrote:
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it could just be a coincidence. That is,
> perhaps the data that you copied happens to lead to a dedup ratio relative to
> the data that's already on there. You could test this out by copying a few
> gig
60 matches
Mail list logo
