2008/6/30 Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Matthew Gardiner <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I think Kyle might be onto something here. With ZFS it is so easy
>>> to create file systems, one could expect many people to d
>
> I think Kyle might be onto something here. With ZFS it is so easy
> to create file systems, one could expect many people to do so.
> In the past, it was so difficult and required planning, so people
> tended to be more careful about mount points.
>
> In this new world, we don't really have a w
>
> > Can anybody confirm that random read performance is definitely
> > better with mirrored volumes. Does ZFS use all the disks in the
> > mirror sets independently when reading data? Am I right in thinking
> > I could have around 7x better random read performance with the 15
> > mirrored drive
Hi,
why are you creating a file in the directory tank?
Matthew
2008/6/27 wan_jm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> the procedure is follows:
> 1. mkdir /tank
> 2. touch /tank/a
> 3. zpool create tank c0d0p3
> this command give the following error message:
> cannot mount '/tank': directory is not empty;
> 4
> > I've got a couple of identical old sparc boxes
> running nv90 - one
> > on ufs, the other zfs. Everything else is the same.
> (SunBlade
> > 150 with 1G of RAM, if you want specifics.)
> >
> > The zfs root box is significantly slower all
> around. Not only is
> > initial I/O slower, but it seems
Hi,
I've got an external hard disk and I've done the stuff with zpool - so
its all working.
The problem I have, however, is whether it is possible to actually set
it up so that zfs devices mount just like cd's and drives formatted as
fat.
___
zfs-discus
