Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions

> From: edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org > [mailto:edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org] On Behalf Of Eric D. Mudama > > >Unless your drive is able to queue up a request to read every single used > >part of the drive... Which is larger than the command queue for any > >reasonable drive in the world... T

Re: [zfs-discuss] Intermittent ZFS hang

There's nothing odd about the physical mounting of the hard drives. All drives are firmly attached and secured in their casings, no loose connections etc. There is some dust but not more than the hardware should be able to handle. I replaced the hard drive with another one of the same size, I fi

Re: [zfs-discuss] relationship between ARC and page cache

> Another alternative to try would be setting primarycache=metadata on the > ZFS dataset that contains the mmap files. That way you are only turning > of the ZFS ARC cache of the file content for that one dataset rather > than clamping the ARC. Yeah, you'd think that would be the right thing to d

Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions

On Tue, Dec 21 at 8:24, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: From: edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org [mailto:edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org] On Behalf Of Eric D. Mudama On Mon, Dec 20 at 19:19, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: >If there is no correlation between on-disk order of blocks for different >disks within the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Long resilver time

Dear Richard, How can I update the important ZFS fixes on NexentaStor? Now my version of NexentsStor is v3.0.4 enterprise. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/m

Re: [zfs-discuss] Long resilver time

Dear Richard, I am a Nexenta user and now I meet the same problem of the resilver spend too long time. I try to find out solution from the link on your content that "zfs set resilver_speed=10% pool_name" but the Nexenta without the property of resiler_speed. How can I slove my issue on Nexenta?

Re: [zfs-discuss] relationship between ARC and page cache

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Jeff Bacon wrote: > One thing I've been confused about for a long time is the relationship > between ZFS, the ARC, and the page cache. > > We have an application that's a quasi-database. It reads files by > mmap()ing them. (writes are done via write()). We're talki

Re: [zfs-discuss] relationship between ARC and page cache

On 21/12/2010 14:25, Phil Harman wrote: Hi Jeff, ZFS support for mmap() was something of an afterthought. The current Solaris virtual memory infrastructure didn't have the features or performance required, which is why ZFS ended up with the ARC. Yes, you've got it. When we mmap() a ZFS file, th

Re: [zfs-discuss] relationship between ARC and page cache

Hi Jeff, ZFS support for mmap() was something of an afterthought. The current Solaris virtual memory infrastructure didn't have the features or performance required, which is why ZFS ended up with the ARC. Yes, you've got it. When we mmap() a ZFS file, there are two main caches involved: the

Re: [zfs-discuss] OT: anyone aware how to obtain 1.8.0 for X2100M2?

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010, Eugen Leitl wrote: I realize this is off-topic, but Oracle has completely screwed up the support site from Sun. I figured someone here would know how to obtain Sun Fire X2100 M2 Server Software 1.8.0 Image contents: * BIOS is version 3A21 * SP is updated to versio

[zfs-discuss] relationship between ARC and page cache

One thing I've been confused about for a long time is the relationship between ZFS, the ARC, and the page cache. We have an application that's a quasi-database. It reads files by mmap()ing them. (writes are done via write()). We're talking 100TB of data in files that are 100k->50G in size (the fi

Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions

> From: Richard Elling [mailto:richard.ell...@gmail.com] > > > Now suppose you have a raidz with 3 disks (disk1, disk2, disk3, where disk3 > > is resilvering). You find some way of ordering all the used blocks of > > disk1... Which means disk1 will be able to read in optimal order and speed. >

Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions

> From: edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org > [mailto:edmud...@mail.bounceswoosh.org] On Behalf Of Eric D. Mudama > > On Mon, Dec 20 at 19:19, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: > >If there is no correlation between on-disk order of blocks for different > >disks within the same vdev, then all hope is lost; it's

Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions

Doh sorry about that, the threading got very confused on my mail reader! Bye, Deano From: Phil Harman [mailto:phil.har...@gmail.com] Sent: 21 December 2010 13:12 To: Deano Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions On 21/12/2010 13:05, Deano wrote: On

Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions

On 21/12/2010 13:05, Deano wrote: On Dec 20, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Phil Harman > wrote: > If you only have a few slow drives, you don't have performance. > Like trying to win the Indianapolis 500 with a tricycle... Actually, I didn't say that, Richard did :) Well

Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions

On Dec 20, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Phil Harman wrote: > If you only have a few slow drives, you don't have performance. > Like trying to win the Indianapolis 500 with a tricycle... Well you can put a jet engine on a tricycle and perhaps win it… Or you can change the race course to only allow a tr

Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions

On 21/12/2010 05:44, Richard Elling wrote: On Dec 20, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Phil Harman > wrote: On 20/12/2010 13:59, Richard Elling wrote: On Dec 20, 2010, at 2:42 AM, Phil Harman > wrote: Why does resilvering take so long in raidz anyway?

Re: [zfs-discuss] a single nfs file system shared out twice with different permissions

On 20/12/2010 19:26, Geoff Nordli wrote: I guess he has some application he can imprison into a specific read-only subdirectory, while some other application should be able to read/write or something like that, using the same username, on the same machine. It is the same application, but for so

Re: [zfs-discuss] A few questions

> It's worse on raidzN than on mirrors, because the > number of items which must > be read is higher in radizN, assuming you're using > larger vdev's and > therefore more items exist scattered about inside > that vdev. You therefore > have a higher number of things which must be randomly > read be

Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz recovery

Hi, I'm copying the list - assume you meant to send it there. On Sun 2010-12-19 (15:52), Miles Nordin wrote: > If 'zpool replace /dev/ad6' will not accept that the disk is a > replacement, then You can unplug the disk, erase the label in a > different machine using > > dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 and 1TB Seagate Barracuda ES.2

Richard Jacobsen unixboxen.net> writes: > > Hi all, > > I'm getting a very strange problem with a recent OpenSolaris b134 install. > > System is: > Supermicro X5DP8-G2 BIOS 1.6a > 2x Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 1.0b As Richard pointed out this is a bug in the AOC-SAT2-MV8 firmware 1.0b. It incorre