On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Dave Pooser wrote:
> On 10/19/11 9:14 AM, "Albert Shih" wrote:
>
>>When we buy a MD1200 we need a RAID PERC H800 card on the server
>
> No, you need a card that includes 2 external x4 SFF8088 SAS connectors.
> I'd recommend an LSI SAS 9200-8e HBA flashed with the
I also recommend LSI 9200-8E or new 9205-8E with the IT firmware based on
past experience
Also LSI Original HBA normally released FW earlier than OEM.
Plus, most of users in community use LSI HBA.
Rocky
-Original Message-
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org
[mailto:zfs-discuss-b
On 10/19/11 9:14 AM, "Albert Shih" wrote:
>When we buy a MD1200 we need a RAID PERC H800 card on the server
No, you need a card that includes 2 external x4 SFF8088 SAS connectors.
I'd recommend an LSI SAS 9200-8e HBA flashed with the IT firmware-- then
it presents the individual disks and ZFS ca
2011-10-19 17:54, Fajar A. Nugraha пишет:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
Well, just for the sake of completeness: most of our systems are
using zfs-auto-snap service, including Solaris 10 systems datiing
from Sol10u6. Installation of relevant packages from SXCE (ranging
sn
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:13:56AM -0400, David Magda wrote:
> On Wed, October 19, 2011 08:15, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>
> > Fsck can only fix known file system inconsistencies in file system
> > structures. Because there is no atomicity of operations in UFS and other
> > file systems it is pos
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Garrett D'Amore
wrote:
> I'd argue that from a *developer* point of view, an fsck tool for ZFS might
> well be useful. Isn't that what zdb is for? :-)
>
> But ordinary administrative users should never need something like this,
> unless they have encountered a b
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Albert Shih wrote:
> When we buy a MD1200 we need a RAID PERC H800 card on the server so we have
> two options :
>
> 1/ create a LV on the PERC H800 so the server see one volume and put
> the zpool on this unique volume and let the hardware manage th
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Albert Shih wrote:
> Hi
>
> Sorry to cross-posting. I don't knwon which mailing-list I should post this
> message.
>
> I'll would like to use FreeBSD with ZFS on some Dell server with some
> MD1200 (classique DAS).
>
> When we buy a MD1200 we need a RAID PERC H800
On Oct 19, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Richard Elling wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>
>>> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
>>> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Tim Cook
>>>
>>> I had and have redundant storage, it has *NEVER* automatical
I'd argue that from a *developer* point of view, an fsck tool for ZFS might
well be useful. Isn't that what zdb is for? :-)
But ordinary administrative users should never need something like this, unless
they have encountered a bug in ZFS itself. (And bugs are as likely to exist in
the checke
On 10/19/11 15:30, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Albert Shih wrote:
Hi
Sorry to cross-posting. I don't knwon which mailing-list I should post this
message.
I'll would like to use FreeBSD with ZFS on some Dell server with some
MD1200 (classique DAS).
When we buy a M
On 10/18/11 03:31 PM, Tim Cook wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Peter Tribble
mailto:peter.trib...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Tim Cook mailto:t...@cook.ms>> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Peter Tribble
mailto:peter.trib...@gm
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Albert Shih wrote:
> Hi
>
> Sorry to cross-posting. I don't knwon which mailing-list I should post this
> message.
>
> I'll would like to use FreeBSD with ZFS on some Dell server with some
> MD1200 (classique DAS).
>
> When we buy a MD1200 we need a RAID PERC H800
Hi
Sorry to cross-posting. I don't knwon which mailing-list I should post this
message.
I'll would like to use FreeBSD with ZFS on some Dell server with some
MD1200 (classique DAS).
When we buy a MD1200 we need a RAID PERC H800 card on the server so we have
two options :
1/ create a
On Wed, October 19, 2011 08:15, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> Fsck can only fix known file system inconsistencies in file system
> structures. Because there is no atomicity of operations in UFS and other
> file systems it is possible that when you remove a file, your system can
> crash between remo
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
> 2011-10-13 13:27, Darren J Moffat пишет:
>>
>> On 10/13/11 09:27, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Darren J Moffat
>>> wrote:
Have you looked at the time-slider functionality that is already in
Sol
2011-10-12 11:56, Frank Van Damme пишет:
The root of the problem seems to be that that process never completes.
9 /lib/svc/bin/svc.startd
332 /sbin/sh /lib/svc/method/boot-archive-update
347 /sbin/bootadm update-archive
Can't kill it and run from the cmdline either, it simply ignores
SIGKILL.
Thank you. The following is the best "layman's" explanation as to
_why_ ZFS does not have an fsck equivalent (or even needs one). On the
other hand, there are situations where you really do need to force ZFS
to do something that may not be a"good idea", but is the best of a bad
set of choices. Henc
2011-10-13 13:27, Darren J Moffat пишет:
On 10/13/11 09:27, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Darren J Moffat
wrote:
Have you looked at the time-slider functionality that is already in
Solaris
?
Hi Darren. Is it available for Solaris 10? I just installed Solaris 10
u1
2011-10-19 16:01, Richard Elling пишет:
On Oct 18, 2011, at 6:35 PM, David Magda wrote:
If we've found one bad disk, what are our options?
Live with it or replace it :-)
-- richard
Similar question: a HDD went awry last week in an snv_117 box
(the controller no longer sees the drive - so I
2011-10-19 15:52, Richard Elling пишет:
In the archives, you can find reports of recoverable and unrecoverable errors
attributed to:
...
Ah, yes, and
11. Faulty disk cabling (i.e. plastic connectors that soften with heat
and fall of) - that has happened to cause strange behavior as well ;)
Even
2011-10-19 15:52, Richard Elling wrote:
In the archives, you can find reports of recoverable and unrecoverable errors
attributed to:
1. ZFS software (rare, but a bug a few years ago mishandled a raidz
case)
2. SAN switch firmware
3. "Hardware" RAID array firmware
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 08:40:59AM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> fsck verifies the logical consistency of a filesystem. For UFS, this
> includes: used data blocks are allocated to exactly one file,
> directory entries point to valid inodes, allocated inodes have at
> least one link, the number of l
On Oct 18, 2011, at 6:35 PM, David Magda wrote:
> If we've found one bad disk, what are our options?
Live with it or replace it :-)
-- richard
--
ZFS and performance consulting
http://www.RichardElling.com
VMworld Copenhagen, October 17-20
OpenStorage Summit, San Jose, CA, October 24-27
LISA
On Oct 18, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
>> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Tim Cook
>>
>> I had and have redundant storage, it has *NEVER* automatically fixed
>> it. You're the first person I've heard that has
I just tried sending from a oi151a system to a Solaris 10 backup
server and the server barfed with
zfs_receive: stream is unsupported version 17
I can't find any documentation linking stream version to release, so
does anyone know the Update 10 stream version?
--
Ian.
_
26 matches
Mail list logo
