The adage that I adhere to with ZFS features is "just because you can doesn't
mean you should!". I would suspect that with that many filesystems the normal
zfs-tools would also take an inordinate length of time to complete their
operations - scale according to size.
Generally snapshots are quic
I'd back that. X25E's are great but also look at the STECH ZeusIOPS as well
as the new Intel's.
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843
Windows - Linux - Solaris - ZFS - XenServer - FreeBSD - C/C++ - PHP/Perl -
LAMP - Nexenta - Development - Consulting &am
Could you not also pin process' to cores, preventing switching should help
too? I've done this for performance reasons before on a 24 core Linux box
Sent from my HTC Desire
On 16 Feb 2011 05:12, "Richard Elling" wrote:
> On Feb 15, 2011, at 7:46 PM, ian W wrote:
>
>> Thanks..
>>
>> given this box
You should also check out VA Technologies (
http://www.va-technologies.com/servicesStorage.php) in the UK which supply a
range of JBOD's. I've used this is very large deployments with no JBOD
related failures to-date. Interestingly the laso list co-raid boxes.
---
W. A. Khushil Dep
n an argument but it's always interesting to
find out why someone went for certain solutions over others.
My 2p. YMMV.
*goes off to collect cheque from Nexenta* ;-)
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843
Windows - Linux - Solaris - ZFS - Nexenta - Development - Cons
o know a whole lot of *nix land.
My 2p. YMMV.
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843
Windows - Linux - Solaris - ZFS - Nexenta - Development - Consulting &
Contracting
http://www.khushil.com/ - http://www.facebook.com/GlobalOverlord
On 6 January 2011 00:14, Edwa
We do have a major commercial interest - Nexenta. It's been quiet but I do
look forward to seeing something come out of that stable this year? :-)
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843
Visit my blog at http://www.khushil.com/
On 5 January 2011 14:34, Edwar
Do you have SSD in? Which ones and any errors on those?
On 26 Dec 2010 13:35, "Jackson Wang" wrote:
> Dear Richard,
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> Actually there is NO any other disk/controlller fault in this system. An
> engineer of NexentaStor, Andrew, just add a line in /kernel/drv/sd.conf of
> "
"Friends don't let friends disable the ZIL" - right Richard? :-)
On 24 Dec 2010 20:34, "Richard Elling" wrote:
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
We've always bought 2.5" and adapters for the super-micro cradles - works
well, no issues to report here.
Normally Intel's or Samsung though we also use STECH.
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843
Visit my blog at http://www.khushil.com/
On 22 Dece
Check the dmesg and system logs for any output concerning those devices
re-seat one then the other just in case too.
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843
Visit my blog at http://www.khushil.com/
On 20 December 2010 13:10, Paul Piscuc wrote:
> Hi, this is curr
I'm not sure that leaving the ZIL enabled whilst replacing the log devices
is a good idea?
Also - I had no idea Elvis was coming back tomorrow! Sweet. ;-)
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843
Visit my blog at http://www.khushil.com/
On 19 November 2010 14:57,
so I'm not going to be able to due much
more tonight (I'm working remotely).
I do notice that when the ARC size reaches capacity, that's when things slow
down. Also, it never appears to drop after I kill the IO. If I stop all IO,
arcstat shows all numbers but the arcsz drop. Should arc
Points to check are iostat,fsstat, zilstat, mpstat, prstat. Check for sw
interrupt sharing, disable ohci.
On 16 Nov 2010 00:27, "Khushil Dep" wrote:
> That controls zfs breathing, I'm on a phone writing this so u hope you
won't
> mind me pointing you to
>
listwa
t have mentioned values lower than 12288 ms.
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Khushil Dep wrote:
>
> Set your txg_synct...
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Set your txg_synctime_ms to 0x3000 and retest please?
On 15 Nov 2010 23:23, "Louis" wrote:
> Hey all1
>
> Recently I've decided to implement OpenSolaris as a target for BackupExec.
>
> The server I've converted into a "Storage Appliance" is an IBM x3650 M2 w/
~4TB of on board storage via ~10 loca
Now I feel stupid lol. Thanks for the clarification!
On 13 Nov 2010 22:30, "Erik Trimble" wrote:
> On 11/13/2010 1:56 PM, Khushil Dep wrote:
>>
>> Wait I thought the x4/x7 was the thumper series?
>>
>
> Nope. Thumper is specifically the codename for
Ok so what range was the thumper?
On 13 Nov 2010 22:00, "Tim Cook" wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Erik Trimble wrote:
>
>> On 11/13/2010 1:06 PM, Khushil Dep wrote:
>>
>> Think those might have been the thumper screen shots? Take a look at
>> ne
Wait I thought the x4/x7 was the thumper series?
On 13 Nov 2010 21:54, "Erik Trimble" wrote:
> On 11/13/2010 1:06 PM, Khushil Dep wrote:
>>
>> Think those might have been the thumper screen shots? Take a look at
>> nexentastor
>>
>> On 13 N
Think those might have been the thumper screen shots? Take a look at
nexentastor
On 13 Nov 2010 20:12, "Brad Henderson" wrote:
> I am new to OpenSolaris and I have been reading about and seeing
screenshots of the ZFS Administration Console. I have been looking at the
dates on it and every pos
Hi,
# savecore -vf vmdump.0
This should produce two files: unix.0 and vmcore.0
Now we use mdb on these as follows:
# mdb unix.0 vmcore.0
Now when presented with the '>' prompt, type "::status" and send us all the
output please?
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@g
I would also add that you should try the NexentaStor Enterprise demo - fully
functional for 45 days. If you find a partner they will most likely be able
to provide you a managed trial. I'd be interested to hear what parts of the
GUI didn't work for you.
---
W. A. Khushil Dep
I think you maybe wanting the same kind of thing that NexentaStor does when
it upgrade - takes snapshot and marks it a checkpoint in case the upgrade
fails - right? I think you may have to snap then clone from that and use
beadm thought it's something you should play with...
---
W. A. Khushi
The fmdump will let you get the serial of one disk and id the controller its
on so you can swap it out and check.
On 6 Nov 2010 19:45, "Dave Pooser" wrote:
On 11/6/10 Nov 6, 2:35 PM, "Khushil Dep" wrote:
> Similar to what I've seen...
It's been up for a
hba it was connected to is on the
blink.
Restore from backup might be inevitable unless your snapping and auto
syncing to another system?
On 6 Nov 2010 19:25, "Dave Pooser" wrote:
On 11/6/10 Nov 6, 2:21 PM, "Khushil Dep" wrote:
> Sorry I meant iostat -En ...
# iostat -E
Sorry u meant iostat -En I'm looking for errors
On 6 Nov 2010 18:56, "Dave Pooser" wrote:
On 11/6/10 Nov 6, 1:35 PM, "Khushil Dep" wrote:
> Is this an E2 chassis? Are you using interposers?
No, it¹s an SC846A chassis. There are no interposers or expanders; si
Can you send output of iostat -xCzn as well as fmadm faulty please? Is. This
an E2 chassis? Are you using interposers?
On 6 Nov 2010 18:28, "Dave Pooser" wrote:
My setup: A SuperMicro 24-drive chassis with Intel dual-processor
motherboard, three LSI SAS3081E controllers, and 24 SATA 2TB hard dri
How is your current system setup as like Chris? What's the config of the new
system? sperate disk array and head nodes or all in one boxes?
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843
Visit my blog at http://www.khushil.com/
On 5 November 2010 13:15, Sriram Nara
Check your TXG settings, it could be a timing issue, nagles issue, also TCP
buffer issue. Check setup system properties.
On 1 Nov 2010 19:36, "SR" wrote:
What if you connect locally via NFS or iscsi?
SR
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
If you do a dd to the storage from the heads do you still get the same
issues?
On 31 Oct 2010 12:40, "Ian D" wrote:
I get that multi-cores doesn't necessarily better performances, but I doubt
that both the latest AMD CPUs (the Magny-Cours) and the latest Intel CPUs
(the Beckton) suffer from incr
If you take a look at http://www.brendangregg.com/cachekit.html you will see
some DTrace yummyness which should let you tell...
---
W. A. Khushil Dep - khushil@gmail.com - 07905374843
Visit my blog at http://www.khushil.com/
On 30 October 2010 15:49, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Sat,
We had the same issue with a 24 core box a while ago. Check your l2 cache
hits and misses. Sometimes more cores does not mean more performance dtrace
is your friend!
On 30 Oct 2010 14:12, "zfs user" wrote:
Here is a total guess - but what if it has to do with zfs processing running
on one CPU ha
Could you show us 'iostat -En' please?
On 21 Oct 2010 13:31, "Harry Putnam" wrote:
Ian Collins writes:
> On 10/21/10 03:47 PM, Harry Putnam wrote:
>> build 133
>> zpool version 22
>>
>> I'm getting:
>>
>> zpool status:
>> NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM
>> z3
33 matches
Mail list logo
