On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 04:43:30PM -0400, James Lee wrote:
> I found an old post by Jeff Bonwick with some code that does EXACTLY
> what I was looking for [1]. I had to update the 'label_write' function
> to support the newer ZFS interfaces:
That's great!
Would someone in the community please ki
On 10/07/2011 11:02 AM, James Lee wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I had a pool made from a single LUN, which I'll call c4t0d0 for the
> purposes of this email. We replaced it with another LUN, c4t1d0, to
> grow the pool size. Now c4t1d0 is hosed and I'd like to see about
> recovering whatever data we can fr
[exposed organs below…]
On Oct 7, 2011, at 8:25 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 09:28:36PM -0700, Richard Elling wrote:
>> On Oct 4, 2011, at 4:14 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
>>
>>> I sent it twice, because something strange happened on the first send,
>>> to the ashift=12 poo
2011/10/8 James Litchfield :
> The value of zfs_arc_min specified in /etc/system must be over 64MB
> (0x400).
> Otherwise the setting is ignored. The value is in bytes not pages.
wel I've now set it to 0x800 and it stubbornly stays at 2048 MB...
--
Frank Van Damme
No part of this copyr
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011, Jim Klimov wrote:
Thus I proposed the second idea with a code-only solution
to optimize performance (force user-configured minimal
data block sizes and physical alignments) where metadata
blocks would remain 512 bytes because the pool is formally
ashift=9 - and on-disk data
2011-10-08 7:25, Daniel Carosone пишет:
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 09:28:36PM -0700, Richard Elling wrote:
On Oct 4, 2011, at 4:14 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
What is going on? Is there really that much metadata overhead? How
many metadata blocks are needed for each 8k vol block, and are they
eac
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011, Daniel Carosone wrote:
This isn't about whether the metadata compresses, this is about
whether ZFS is smart enough to use all the space in a 4k block for
metadata, rather than assuming it can fit at best 512 bytes,
regardless of ashift. By packing, I meant packing them full r
On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 08:19:20AM +0400, Jim Klimov wrote:
>
> Hello, Daniel,
>
> Apparently your data is represented by rather small files (thus
> many small data blocks)
It's a zvol, default 8k block size, so yes.
> , so proportion of metadata is relatively
> high, and your<4k blocks are now u
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 07:34:07PM -0400, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> It is also very similar to running iscsi targets on ZFS,
> while letting some other servers use iscsi to connect to the ZFS server.
The SAS, IB and FCoE targets, too..
SAS might be the most directly comparable to replace a tradi
The value of zfs_arc_min specified in /etc/system must be over 64MB
(0x400).
Otherwise the setting is ignored. The value is in bytes not pages.
Jim
---
n 10/ 6/11 05:19 AM, Frank Van Damme wrote:
Hello,
quick and stupid question: I'm breaking my head over how to tunz
zfs_arc_min on a runn
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 09:28:36PM -0700, Richard Elling wrote:
> On Oct 4, 2011, at 4:14 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
>
> > I sent it twice, because something strange happened on the first send,
> > to the ashift=12 pool. "zfs list -o space" showed figures at least
> > twice those on the source, m
Hello all,
ZFS developers have for a long time stated that ZFS is not intended,
at least not in near term, for clustered environments (that is, having
a pool safely imported by several nodes simultaneously). However,
many people on forums have wished having ZFS features in clusters.
I have some
12 matches
Mail list logo
