>To put it slightly differently, if I used ZoL in production, would I be
likely to experience performance or stability problems?
I saw one team revert from ZoL (CentOS 6) back to ext on some backup
servers for an application project, the killer was
stat times (find running slow etc.), perhaps mor
>> Maybe it would be faster to just offline this one disk, use dd(1) to
>> copy entire disk content, disconnect old disk on online the new one.
>> Not sure how well this will work on Solaris as the new disk serial
>> number won't match the one in metadata, but it will surely work on
>> FreeBSD.
>
>
Matt,
> If the filesystem is old (created on pool version < 15), then the first time
> you do "zfs userspace " or "zfs groupspace ", it will take some time
> to do an initial gather of the accounting information.
This is good to know since we do have some upgraded filesystems / pools, thanks!
I
lated experinces to share?
Thanks,
Jordan
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Jordan Schwartz wrote:
> ZFSfolk,
>
> Pardon the slightly offtopic post, but I figured this would be a good
> forum to get some feedback.
>
> I am looking at implementing zfs group quotas on some X4540s and
terabytes of data in relatively small files, will there be
any performance impacts as the quotas are created?
Also for the pre-populated filesystems will "zfs get groupsp...@$gid
$zpool/$fs" return the total usage for the group?
Thanks for any feedback,
Jorda
>Preface: yes, shrink will be cool. But we've been running highly
available,
>mission critical datacenters for more than 50 years without shrink being
>widely available.
Agreed, and shrink IS cool, I used it to migrate VxVM volumes from direct
attached storage to slightly smaller SAN LUNS on a s
We ran into something similar with controllers changing after a x4500 to
x4540 upgrade.
In our case the the spares were in a separate data pool so the recovery
procedure we developed was relatively easy to implement as long as downtime
could be scheduled.
You may be able to tweak the procedure to
