Is it the version of ZFS? I think it was upgraded. I noticed
something similar after upgrading ZFS on FreeBSD 7 STABLE. I was trying
to zfs send my @Tuesday, and an automatic script ran (which deletes
@Tuesday and takes a new snap) - and rather than failing as I expected,
the destroy and snaps
Hi. I am working on the ADM project within OpenSolaris. ADM is a Hierarchical
Storage manager (HSM) for ZFS. An HSM serves several purposes. One is a
virtualization of amount of disk space by copying (archiving to other media) a
files
data, then freeing that data space, when needed. Another is as
Yeah. The command line works fine. Thought it to be a bit curious that there
was an issue with the HTTP interface. It's low priority I guess because it
doesn't impact the functionality really.
Thanks for the responses.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
snv_89 is the same. The ZFS Administration console worked fine to create my
first 2 pools. I've been unable to use it since then. I have the same stack
trace errors.
Did you find a workaround for this issue?
-Rick
This message posted from opensolari
that 11.5 or so is the most you'd be able to
get on a 100Mbit link.
Of course, I've not talked network in a bit, so maybe I have my terms mixed.
I've been trying to review external references just to make sure I'm speaking
in the correct terms. Feel free to let me know i
that the high read/write speeds for FTP and
HTTP showed that the issue was with CIFS. I'm still kind of baffled as to why
CIFS was so terrible for the write speed only when, in the end, the issue was
the NIC.
Thanks to those that helped.
rick
This message posted from opensolaris.org
thumb drive to do it. It appears that the 1401 BIOS was just
released on 2008-04-24.
> Lastly, could there be a bug in the build 86
> regarding the nge driver?
So far, looks like something I did. :(
> That's all I can think of, good luck! :)
Thanks! I'll check thr
> Rick, I have the same motherboard on my backup
> machine and got 48MBytes/sec sustained on a 650GB
> transfer (but that was using iSCSI), so I suggest two
> things:
>
> 1. Make sure you are using the latest stable -- i.e.
> not beta, BIOS update. You can use a USB thumb
transfers. It's not like I did 10 tests.
Jose Borrego noted the following in the cifs discuss list:
I should put back a fix related to performance this week CR 6686647. I
don't know if it's related to what you are experiencing but the
performance boos
ts. So
these tests are all done with an 8GB file.
I would imagine that write speeds and read speeds across the network should be
much closer. At this point, I'm assuming that I'm doing something wrong here.
Anyone want to let me know what I'm missing?
rick
This message poste
We see similar problems on a SuperMicro with 5 500 GB Seagate sata drives. This
is using the AHCI driver. We do not, however, see problems with the same
hardware/drivers if we use 250GB drives.
We sometimes see bad blocks reported (are these automatically remapped somehow
so they are not used
Richard Elling wrote:
> For the time being, these SATA disks will operate in IDE compatibility mode,
> so
> don't worry about the write cache. There is some debate about whether the
> write
> cache is a win at all, but that is another rat hole. Go ahead and split off
> some
> space for boot a
I'm having a heckuva time posting to individual replies (keep getting
exceptions).
I have a 1U rackmount server with 4 bays. I don't think there's any way to
squeeze in a small IDE drive, and I don't want to reduce the swap transfer rate
if I can avoid it.
The machine has 4 500 GB SATA drives,
Ian Collins wrote:
> Bung in (add a USB one if you don't have space) a small boot drive and
> use all the others for for ZFS.
Not a bad idea; I'll have to see where I can put one.
But, I thought I read somewhere that one can't use ZFS for swap. Or maybe I
read this:
"Slices should only be used
> Hi Rick,
>
> what do you think about this configuration:
>
> Part all disks like this
> 7GiB
> 493GiB
>
> Make a RAIDz1 out of the 493GiB partitions and a
> RAID5 out of the 7GiB
> partitions. Create a swap, and the root in the RAID5,
> the dirs wit
I'm putting together a NexentaOS (b65)-based server that has 4 500 GB drives on
it. Currently it has two, set up as a ZFS mirror. I'm able to boot Nexenta from
it, and it seems to work ok. But, as I've learned, the mirror is not properly
redundant, and so I can't just have a drive fail (when I p
Hi. I've been reading the ZFS admin guide, and I don't understand the
distinction between "adding" a device and "attaching" a device to a pool?
TIA
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
htt
>From
>(http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=199903525)
---
[...]
Seeking to clarify a statement made on Monday by Brian Croll, senior director
of Mac OS X Product Marketing, to two InformationWeek reporters that Apple's
new "Leopard" operating system would not inclu
>On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Rick Mann wrote:
>> ZFS Readonly implemntation is loaded!
>Is that a copy-n-paste error, or is that typo in the actual output?
It's a typo in the actual output.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zf
Since the copy I have I did not get through normal channels, I don't have WWDC
access to the dev site, so I don't know if it's there or not. However, my
friend looked, and couldn't find it, either.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-di
I just installed the Leopard beta that was distributed at WWDC. Sadly, the
installer provided no ZFS option (the only options were HFS Extended Journaled
and a case-sensitive version of the same).
However, typing this in the terminal:
$ sudo zpool status
Returned this:
ZFS Readonly implemntat
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 08:38:10PM -0300, Toby Thain wrote:
> When should we expect Solaris kernel under OS X? 10.6? 10.7? :-)
I'm hoping for L4, myself.
http://ertos.nicta.com.au/software/darbat/
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-dis
>From Macintouch (http://macintouch.com/#other.2007.06.07):
---
On stage Wednesday in Washington D.C., Sun Microsystems Inc. CEO Jonathan
Schwartz revealed that his company's open-source ZFS file system will replace
Apple's long-used HFS+ in Mac OS X 10.5, a.k.a. "Leopard," when the new
operati
scuss list more frequently than this one.
Ced.
--
Cedric BRINER
Geneva - Switzerland
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Rick McNeal
"If ignorance is blis
On Jan 18, 2007, at 6:17 AM, Dick Davies wrote:
On 15/01/07, Rick McNeal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 15, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Dick Davies wrote:
> Hi, are there currently any plans to make an iSCSI target
created by
> setting shareiscsi=on on a zvol
> bindable to a s
ns
http://number9.hellooperator.net/
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Rick McNeal
"If ignorance is bliss, this lesson would appear to be a deliberate
attempt on your part to deprive me of
gAopNBoLJwYgoLI3m50FNhHY6mVQGVR+8DpmjY1abKZv
myMUsWSUkkPdryhG3XGg+OxnTOfZJF4d0hDYK4ObAw4rUfFYEiqneHHTLGMFajwG
ddfh2uUtQZI=
=QYuq
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Cyril Plisko wrote:
On 11/2/06, Rick McNeal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> That's how the shareiscsi property works today.
>
> So, why manipulating LUN is impossible via zfs ???
>
A ZVOL is a single LU, so there's nothing to manipulate. Could you give
Cyril Plisko wrote:
On 11/2/06, Rick McNeal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
The administration of FC devices for the target mode needs some serious
thinking so that we don't end up with a real nightmare on our hands.
As you point out the FC world doesn't separate the po
nge the accepted value to be
"disk". "direct" is a term that comes from the T10 world. Other values
are sequential for tapes, printer, scanner, etc..
Adam
--
Rick McNeal
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail...but, a true
friend will be sitting ne
Dick Davies wrote:
On 01/11/06, Rick McNeal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I too must be missing something. I can't imagine why it would take 5
minutes to online a target. A ZVOL should automatically be brought
online since now initialization is required.
s/now/no/ ?
Correct.
ut why
would
you want/need to change the LUN?
Well, with iSCSI specifically it is of less importance, since one can
easily
created multiple units identified by other means, than LUN.
I, however, trying to look forward for FC SCSI target functionality
mirroring
that of the iSCSI (AFAIK it is on
Or did I miss something ?
I too must be missing something. I can't imagine why it would take 5
minutes to online a target. A ZVOL should automatically be brought
online since now initialization is required.
--
Rick McNeal
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail...bu
e to create logical units that
are hole-y files, but doing so requires a special XML tag to be added.
I've been thinking about adding this as an option to the CLI if enough
folks would find it useful.
Hope this helps.
If it's a non-issue th
ee it.
BTW where is the iscsitadm(1M) man page it doesn't seem to be in snv_50.
Rick probably has an answer.
The man page is scheduled to go into build 52. It's been available for
some time, but because of vacation schedules and documentation gate
schedules the man page
able simplified authentication administration.
-- richard
___
storage-discuss mailing list
storage-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
--
Rick McNeal
A good friend will come and bail you out of jai
lation type, plus a few other
miscellaneous bits of information. The zfs command goes through some
effort to determine the longest property name and value. It then
displays that information in uniform column widths. The iscsi property
value blows that out of the water.
--
Rick McNeal
A goo
37 matches
Mail list logo
