I got the motherboard wrong. It is a P45 Neo3-FR. The onboard ethernet is
flaky, but "supported", and the USB attached drives work fine w/ 2TB drives,
but not the motherboard attached SATA ports...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-di
this is a 64 bit system, and I already used 2 of these drives in a raidz1 pool
and they worked great, except I needed to use the SATA controller card and not
the motherboard SATA. Any ideas?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss m
I had a perfectly working 7 drive raidz pool using some on board STATA
connectors and some on PCI SATA controller cards. My pool was using 500GB
drives. I had the stupid idea to replace my 500GB drives with 2TB ( Mitsubishi
) drives. This process resulted in me loosing much of my data ( see my o
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark J Musante [mailto:mark.musa...@oracle.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 5:03 AM
> To: Seth Keith
> Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs replace problems please please help
>
> On Tue, 10 Au
this is for newbies like myself: I used using 'zdb -l' wrong, just using the
drive name from 'zpool status' or format which is like c6d1, didn't work. I
needed to add s0 to the end:
zdb -l /dev/dsk/c6d1s0
gives me a good looking label ( I think ). The pool_guid values are the same
for all
First off double thanks for replying to my post. I tried to your advice but
something is way wrong. I have all 2TB drives disconnected, and the 7 500GB
drives connected. All 7 show up in bios and in format. Here all the drives are
the original 7 500Mb drives:
# format
Searching for disk
first off I don't have the exact failure messages here, and I did not take good
notes of the failures, so I will do the best I can. Please try and give me
advice anyway.
I have a 7 drive raidz1 pool with 500G drives, and I wanted to replace them
all with 2TB drives. Immediately I ran into trou
R.G. Keen wrote:
> I didn't see "remove a simple device" anywhere in there.
>
> Is it:
> too hard to even contemplate doing,
> or
> too silly a thing to do to even consider letting that happen
> or
> too stupid a question to even consider
> or
> too easy and straightforward to do the procedure I
ort | uniq -c
This will do all your hearts desires at once :) Note how the >(subshell)
notation allows you to do most anything your shell supports, including
using aliases, functions, redirection exactly like you would in
$(subshell) [1].
Well I'll stop here, because I'm sure 'ma
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Dec 2009, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>>
>> I also have a "threadzip" script, because gzip is invariably the
>> bottleneck
>> in the data stream. Utilize those extra cores!!! ;-)
>
> Gzip can be a bit slow. Luckily there is 'lzop' which is quite a lot
> more CPU e
Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>> If feasible, you may want to generate MD5 sums on the streamed output
>> and then use these for verification.
>>
>
> That's actually not a bad idea. It should be kinda obvious, but I hadn't
> thought of it because it's sort-of duplicating existing functionality.
>
Colin Raven wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 17:43, Seth Heeren <mailto:s...@zfs-fuse.net>> wrote:
>
> Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Seth Heeren wrote:
> >>>
> >>> in the same way, I guess, when running an OS on a S
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Sriram Narayanan wrote:
>
>> If feasible, you may want to generate MD5 sums on the streamed output
>> and then use these for verification.
>
> You can also stream into a gzip or lzop wrapper in order to obtain the
> benefit of incremental CRCs and some
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Seth Heeren wrote:
>>>
>>> in the same way, I guess, when running an OS on a SSD boot disk,
>>> should we still need the same memory swapping mechanisms as we do
>>> today, considering that in that case, the swap d
dy pointers where to
look for more solid info...
Seth
nxyyt wrote:
> Hi, everybody,
>
> I'm a newbie to ZFS. I have a special question against the COW transaction of
> ZFS.
> Does ZFS keeps the sequential consistency when it meets power outage or
> server crash?
>
> Ass
Selim Daoud wrote:
> I was wondering if there were work done in the area of zfs
> configuration running out of 100% SSD disks.
>
> L2ARC and ZIL have been designed as a way to improve long seek
> times/latencies of rotational disks.
> now if we use only SSD (F5100 or F20) as back end drives for zfs
Well what does _that_ verify?
It will verify that no bits provably broke during transport.
It will still leave the chance of getting an incompatible stream, an
incomplete stream (kill the dump), or plain corrupted data. Of course,
the chance of the latter should be extremely small in server-grade
michael schuster wrote:
Roland Rambau wrote:
gang,
actually a simpler version of that idea would be a "zcp":
if I just cp a file, I know that all blocks of the new file
will be duplicates; so the cp could take full advantage for
the dedup without a need to check/read/write anz actual data
I
Andre Boegelsack wrote:
> Hi to all,
>
> I have a short question regarding which filesystem I should use in Dom0/DomU.
> I've built my Dom0 on basis of ZFS.
>
> For my first DomU I've created a ZFS pool and installed the DomU (with OSOL
> inside). During the installation process you are being ask
19 matches
Mail list logo
