Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS QoS and priorities

On 12/ 2/12 05:19 AM, Richard Elling wrote: On Dec 1, 2012, at 6:54 PM, "Nikola M." wrote: On 12/ 2/12 03:24 AM, Nikola M. wrote: It is using Solaris Zones and throttling their disk usage on that level, so you separate workload processes on separate zones. Or even put KVM machines

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS QoS and priorities

On 12/ 2/12 03:24 AM, Nikola M. wrote: It is using Solaris Zones and throttling their disk usage on that level, so you separate workload processes on separate zones. Or even put KVM machines under the zones (Joyent and OI support Joyent-written KVM/Intel implementation in Illumos) for the same

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS QoS and priorities

On 11/29/12 10:56 AM, Jim Klimov wrote: For example, I might want to have corporate webshop-related databases and appservers to be the fastest storage citizens, then some corporate CRM and email, then various lower priority zones and VMs, and at the bottom of the list - backups. AFAIK, now such

Re: [zfs-discuss] S11 vs illumos zfs compatiblity

On 12/27/11 09:20 PM, Frank Cusack wrote: > > > If I "upgrade" ZFS to use the new features in Solaris 11 I will be > unable to import my pool using the free ZFS implementation that is > available in illumos based d

[zfs-discuss] aclmode -> no zfs in heterogeneous networks anymore?

I am forwarding this to openindiana-disc...@openindiana.org list, with hope of wider audience regarding question. Original Message Message-ID: <4db68e08.9040...@googlemail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:19:04 +0200 From: achim...@googlemail.com List-Id: Hi! W

Re: [zfs-discuss] Spare drives sitting idle in raidz2 with failed drive

On 04/26/11 01:56 AM, Lamp Zy wrote: > Hi, > > One of my drives failed in Raidz2 with two hot spares: What are zpool/zfs versions? (zpool upgrade Ctrl+c, zfs upgrade Cttr+c). Latest zpool/zfs versions available by numerical designation in all OpenSolaris based distributions, are zpool 28 and zfs v.

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS send/receive to Solaris/FBSD/OpenIndiana/Nexenta VM guest?

On 04/ 6/11 07:14 PM, Brandon High wrote: > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Joe Auty > wrote: > > How about getting a little more crazy... What if this entire > server temporarily hosting this data was a VM guest running ZFS? I > don't foresee this being a

Re: [zfs-discuss] best migration path from Solaris 10

On 03/23/11 09:07 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 01:54:54PM +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote: On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 06:22:01PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote: Newer versions of FreeBSD have newer ZFS code. Yes,

Re: [zfs-discuss] best migration path from Solaris 10

On 03/19/11 12:17 AM, Toby Thain wrote: > On 18/03/11 5:56 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote: >> We've been running Solaris 10 for the past couple of years, primarily to >> leverage zfs to provide storage for about 40,000 faculty, staff, and >> students ... and at this point want to start reevaluating our b

Re: [zfs-discuss] Newbie ZFS Question: RAM for Dedup

Orvar Korvar wrote: > Sometimes you read about people having low performance deduping: it is > because they have too little RAM. > I mostly heard they have low performance when they start deleting deduplicated data, not before that. So do you think that with 2.2GB of RAM per 1 TB of storage, w

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to migrate to 4KB sector drives?

Orvar Korvar wrote: > ZFS does not handle 4K sector drives well, you need to create a new zpool > with "4K" property (ashift) set. > http://www.solarismen.de/archives/5-Solaris-and-the-new-4K-Sector-Disks-e.g.-WDxxEARS-Part-2.html > > Are there plans to allow resilver to handle 4K sector drives?

Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption?

Freddie Cash wrote: > You definitely want to do the ZFS bits from within FreeBSD. Why not using ZFS in OpenSolaris? At least it has most stable/tested implementation and also the newest one if needed? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.