again i say (eventually) some "zfs sendndmp" type of mechanism seems the right
way to go here *shrug*
-=dave
> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 05:54:15 -0800> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] HAMMER> > Peter
>
Peter Tribble wrote:
> I'm not worried about the compression effect. Where I see problems is
> backing up million/tens of millions of files in a single
> dataset. Backing up
> each file is essentially a random read (and this isn't helped by raidz
> which gives you a single disks worth of random
On 10/16/07, Dave Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> does anyone actually *use* compression ? i'd like to see a poll on how many
> people are using (or would use) compression on production systems that are
> larger than your little department catch-all dumping ground server.
We don't use comp
On 10/18/07, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Which marketing documentation (not person) says that ?
It was a person giving a technology brief in the past 6 weeks or so.
It kinda went like "so long as they link against the bundled openssl
and not a private copy of openssl they will aut
Mike Gerdts wrote:
> On 10/18/07, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Unfortunately it doesn't yet because ssh can't yet use the N2 crypto -
>> because it uses OpenSSL's libcrypto without using the ENGINE API.
>
> Marketing needs to get in line with the technology. The word I
> received
On 10/18/07, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unfortunately it doesn't yet because ssh can't yet use the N2 crypto -
> because it uses OpenSSL's libcrypto without using the ENGINE API.
Marketing needs to get in line with the technology. The word I
received was that any application tha
Mike Gerdts wrote:
> On 10/18/07, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> zfs send | ssh -C | zfs recv
>
> I was going to suggest this, but I think (I could be wrong...) that
> ssh would then use zlib for compression and that ssh is still a
> single-threaded process. This has two effects:
>
On 10/18/07, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> zfs send | ssh -C | zfs recv
I was going to suggest this, but I think (I could be wrong...) that
ssh would then use zlib for compression and that ssh is still a
single-threaded process. This has two effects:
1) gzip compression instead of
Richard Elling wrote:
> Do not assume that a compressed file system will send compressed. IIRC, it
> does not.
>
> But since UNIX is a land of pipe dreams, you can always compress anyway :-)
> zfs send ... | compress | ssh ... | uncompress | zfs receive ...
zfs send | ssh -C | zfs recv
--
Jonathan Loran wrote:
> Richard Elling wrote:
>
>> Jonathan Loran wrote:
>>
> ...
>
>
>> Do not assume that a compressed file system will send compressed.
>> IIRC, it
>> does not.
>>
> Let's say, if it were possible to detect the remote compression support,
> couldn't we send it
Richard Elling wrote:
> Jonathan Loran wrote:
...
> Do not assume that a compressed file system will send compressed.
> IIRC, it
> does not.
Let's say, if it were possible to detect the remote compression support,
couldn't we send it compressed? With higher compression rates, wouldn't
that
Jonathan Loran wrote:
>
> We are using zfs compression across 5 zpools, about 45TB of data on
> iSCSI storage. I/O is very fast, with small fractional CPU usage (seat
> of the pants metrics here, sorry). We have one other large 10TB volume
> for nearline Networker backups, and that one isn't
d state. I'd imagine this fitting into the 'zfs send' codebase
somewhere.
thoughts (on either c9n and/or 'zfs send ndmp') ?
-=dave
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Milkowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Dave Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTEC
Dave Johnson wrote:
> From: "Robert Milkowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> LDAP servers with several dozen millions accounts?
>> Why? First you get about 2:1 compression ratio with lzjb, and you also
>> get better performance.
>>
>
> a busy ldap server certainly seems a good fit for compressio
; codebase
somewhere.
thoughts (on either c9n and/or 'zfs send ndmp') ?
-=dave
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Milkowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Dave Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "roland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent:
Hello Dave,
Tuesday, October 16, 2007, 9:17:30 PM, you wrote:
DJ> you mean c9n ? ;)
DJ> does anyone actually *use* compression ? i'd like to see a poll on how many
DJ> people are using (or would use) compression on production systems that are
DJ> larger than your little department catch-all dum
On Oct 16, 2007, at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Loran wrote:
>
> We use compression on almost all of our zpools. We see very little
> if any I/O slowdown because of this, and you get free disk space.
> In fact, I believe read I/O gets a boost from this, since
> decompression is cheap compared to nor
just plain get pounded?
-=dave
- Original Message -
From: "roland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] HAMMER
and what about compression?
:D
This message posted from opensolaris.org
uldn't the system just plain get pounded?
-=dave
- Original Message -
From: "roland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] HAMMER
> and what about compression?
>
> :D
>
&
and what about compression?
:D
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Hello zfs-discuss,
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/kernel/2007-10/msg6.html
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/kernel/2007-10/msg8.html
--
Best regards,
Robert Milkowskimailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://milek.b
21 matches
Mail list logo
