Gary Mills wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 12:23:18PM -0400, Torrey McMahon wrote:
James C. McPherson wrote:
Roshan Perera wrote:
But Roshan, if your pool is not replicated from ZFS' point of view,
then all the multipathing and raid controller backup in the world will
not make a
Victor Engle wrote:
On 6/20/07, Torrey McMahon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Also, how does replication at the ZFS level use more storage - I'm
assuming raw block - then at the array level?
___
Just to add to the previous comments. In the case where you
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 12:23:18PM -0400, Torrey McMahon wrote:
> James C. McPherson wrote:
> >Roshan Perera wrote:
> >>
> >>>But Roshan, if your pool is not replicated from ZFS' point of view,
> >>>then all the multipathing and raid controller backup in the world will
> >>>not make a difference.
>
On 6/20/07, Torrey McMahon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Also, how does replication at the ZFS level use more storage - I'm
assuming raw block - then at the array level?
___
Just to add to the previous comments. In the case where you have a SAN
array pro
James C. McPherson wrote:
Roshan Perera wrote:
But Roshan, if your pool is not replicated from ZFS' point of view,
then all the multipathing and raid controller backup in the world will
not make a difference.
James, I Agree from ZFS point of view. However, from the EMC or the
customer point
Roshan Perera wrote:
But Roshan, if your pool is not replicated from ZFS' point of view,
then all the multipathing and raid controller backup in the world will
not make a difference.
James, I Agree from ZFS point of view. However, from the EMC or the
customer point of view they want to do the
Roshan Perera wrote:
Hi all,
Is there a place where I can find ZFS best practices guide to use against
DMX and a roadmap of ZFS ?
Also, the customer now looking at big ZFS installations in production.
Would you guys happen to know or where I can find details of the numbers
of current installatio
- Original Message -
From: Roshan Perera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 10:49 am
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS - SAN and Raid
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Bruce McAlister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, Richard
Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&
> But Roshan, if your pool is not replicated from ZFS'
> point of view, then all the multipathing and raid
> controller backup in the world will not make a difference.
James, I Agree from ZFS point of view. However, from the EMC or the customer
point of view they want to do the replication at t
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 11:16:39AM +1000, James C. McPherson wrote:
> Roshan Perera wrote:
> >
> >I don't think panic should be the answer in this type of scenario, as
> >there is redundant path to the LUN and Hardware Raid is in place inside
> >SAN. From what I gather there is work being carried o
Roshan Perera wrote:
Thanks for all your replies. Lot of info to take it back. In this case it
seems like emcp carried out a repair to a path to LUN Followed by a
panic.
Jun 4 16:30:12 su621dwdb emcp: [ID 801593 kern.notice] Info: Assigned
volume Symm 000290100491 vol 0ffe to
I don't think pan
oshan
- Original Message -
From: Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 6:28 pm
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS - SAN and Raid
To: Victor Engle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Bruce McAlister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, Roshan
P
Victor Engle wrote:
> The best practices guide on opensolaris does recommend replicated
> pools even if your backend storage is redundant. There are at least 2
> good reasons for that. ZFS needs a replica for the self healing
> feature to work. Also there is no fsck like tool for ZFS so it is a
We have the same problem and I have just moved back to UFS because of
this issue. According to the engineer at Sun that i spoke with, he
implied that there is an RFE out internally that is to address this problem.
The issue is this:
When configuring a zpool with 1 vdev in it and zfs times out a w
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> attached below the errors. But the question still remains is ZFS only happy
> with JBOD disks and not SAN storage with hardware raid. Thanks
ZFS works fine on our SAN here. You do get a kernel panic (Solaris-10U3)
if a LUN disappears for some reason (without ZFS-level r
> The best practices guide on opensolaris does recommend replicated
> pools even if your backend storage is redundant. There are at least 2
> good reasons for that. ZFS needs a replica for the self healing
> feature to work. Also there is no fsck like tool for ZFS so it is a
> good idea to make s
Victor Engle wrote:
Roshan,
As far as I know, there is no problem at all with using SAN storage
with ZFS and it does look like you were having an underlying problem
with either powerpath or the array.
Correct. A write failed.
The best practices guide on opensolaris does recommend replicated
Roshan,
As far as I know, there is no problem at all with using SAN storage
with ZFS and it does look like you were having an underlying problem
with either powerpath or the array.
The best practices guide on opensolaris does recommend replicated
pools even if your backend storage is redundant.
Victror,
Thanks for your comments but I believe it contradict what ZFS information given
below and now Bruce's mail.
After some digging around I found that the messages file has thrown out some
powerpath errors to one of the devices that may have caused the proble.
attached below the errors. Bu
19 matches
Mail list logo
