Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-18 Thread Daniel Rock
Richard Elling - PAE schrieb: Where most people get confused is the expectation that a hot-plug device works like a hot-swap device. Well, seems like you should also inform your documentation team about this definition: http://www.sun.com/products-n-solutions/hardware/docs/html/819-3722-15/i

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Eric Schrock
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 10:02:31PM -0400, Dale Ghent wrote: > > There's also a bug open on this matter, and has been open for a long > time. If this wasn't feasible, I imagine the bug would be closed > already with a WONTFIX. > FYI, the ARC case for integrating the nvidia ck804/mcp55 SATA HB

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Richard Elling - PAE
still more below... Frank Cusack wrote: On October 17, 2006 1:45:45 PM -0700 Richard Elling - PAE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ah, more terminology below... Daniel Rock wrote: I still haven't found the document which states that hot-plugging of disks is not supported by Solaris. The operation

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Dale Ghent
On Oct 17, 2006, at 1:59 PM, Richard Elling - PAE wrote: The realities of the hardware world strike again. Sun does use the Siig SATA chips in some products, Marvell in others, and NVidia MCPs in others. The difference is in who writes the drivers. NVidia, for example, has a history of deve

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Frank Cusack
On October 17, 2006 1:45:45 PM -0700 Richard Elling - PAE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ah, more terminology below... Daniel Rock wrote: I still haven't found the document which states that hot-plugging of disks is not supported by Solaris. The operational definition of "hot pluggable" is:

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Daniel Rock
Richard Elling - PAE schrieb: The operational definition of "hot pluggable" is: The ability to add or remove a system component while the system remains powered up, and without inducing any hardware errors. This does not imply anything about whether the component is automati

CAVEAT: Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Richard Elling - PAE
Richard Elling - PAE wrote: All SATA drives are hot-pluggable. The caveat here is that some enclosures will cause a shutdown when opened to access the drives. The drives themselves are hot-pluggable, but access may not possible without a shutdown. -- richard __

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Richard Elling - PAE
Ah, more terminology below... Daniel Rock wrote: Richard Elling - PAE schrieb: Frank Cusack wrote: I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. Sun sells a hardware product which their software does not support. The worst part is it is advertised as working.

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Frank Cusack
On October 17, 2006 12:59:26 PM -0700 Richard Elling - PAE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Frank Cusack wrote: On October 17, 2006 10:59:51 AM -0700 Richard Elling - PAE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The realities of the hardware world strike again. Sun does use the Siig SATA chips in some products, M

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Daniel Rock
Richard Elling - PAE schrieb: Frank Cusack wrote: I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. Sun sells a hardware product which their software does not support. The worst part is it is advertised as working. What is your definition of "work"? NVidia

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Richard Elling - PAE
Frank Cusack wrote: On October 17, 2006 10:59:51 AM -0700 Richard Elling - PAE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The realities of the hardware world strike again. Sun does use the Siig SATA chips in some products, Marvell in others, and NVidia MCPs in others. The difference is in who writes the drive

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Frank Cusack
On October 17, 2006 10:59:51 AM -0700 Richard Elling - PAE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dale Ghent wrote: On Oct 12, 2006, at 12:23 AM, Frank Cusack wrote: On October 11, 2006 11:14:59 PM -0400 Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Today, in 2006 - much different story. I even had Linux AND Sola

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-17 Thread Richard Elling - PAE
Dale Ghent wrote: On Oct 12, 2006, at 12:23 AM, Frank Cusack wrote: On October 11, 2006 11:14:59 PM -0400 Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Today, in 2006 - much different story. I even had Linux AND Solaris problems with my machine's MCP51 chipset when it first came out. Both forcedeth and

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-12 Thread listman
this really bothers me too.. i was an early x2100 adopter and been waiting almost a year for this.. come on sun, please release a patch to fully support your own hardware on solaris 10!! On Oct 11, 2006, at 9:23 PM, Frank Cusack wrote: On October 11, 2006 11:14:59 PM -0400 Dale Ghent <[

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-12 Thread clockwork
Yeah, I looked at the tool. Unfortunately it doesnt help at all with choosing what to buy.On 10/12/06, Dick Davies < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On 11/10/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Dick Davies wrote:>> > On 11/10/06, Peter van Gemert <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:> >> You might wa

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-12 Thread Dick Davies
On 11/10/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dick Davies wrote: > On 11/10/06, Peter van Gemert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> You might want to check the HCL at http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl to >> find out which hardware is supported by Solaris 10. > I tried that myself - th

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-12 Thread Paul Chambers
On 10/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So are there any pci-e SATA cards that are supported ? I was hoping to go with a sempron64. Using old-pci seems like a waste. I recently built a am2 sempron64 based zfs box. motherboard: ASUS M2NPV-MX cpu: amd am2 sempron64 2800+ The

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-12 Thread Ceri Davies
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 06:36:28PM -0500, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: > On 10/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> The more I learn about Solaris hardware support, the more I see it as > >> a minefield. > > > > > >I've found this to be true for almost all open source platforms w

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-12 Thread Zhiqi Ni - Sun China ERI (Beijing)
om/bigadmin/hcl/hcts/index.html and have a try.     Best regards, Ni, Zhiqi Original Message Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:24:50 -0700 F

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread Dale Ghent
On Oct 12, 2006, at 12:23 AM, Frank Cusack wrote: On October 11, 2006 11:14:59 PM -0400 Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Today, in 2006 - much different story. I even had Linux AND Solaris problems with my machine's MCP51 chipset when it first came out. Both forcedeth and nge croaked on i

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread Frank Cusack
On October 11, 2006 11:14:59 PM -0400 Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Today, in 2006 - much different story. I even had Linux AND Solaris problems with my machine's MCP51 chipset when it first came out. Both forcedeth and nge croaked on it. Welcome to the bleeding edge. You're unfortunately

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread David Dyer-Bennet
On 10/11/06, Dale Ghent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Oct 11, 2006, at 7:36 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: > I've been running Linux since kernel 0.99pl13, I think it was, and > have had amazingly little trouble. Whereas I'm now sitting on $2k of > hardware that won't do what I wanted it to do un

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread Dale Ghent
On Oct 11, 2006, at 7:36 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: I've been running Linux since kernel 0.99pl13, I think it was, and have had amazingly little trouble. Whereas I'm now sitting on $2k of hardware that won't do what I wanted it to do under Solaris, so it's a bit of a hot-button issue for me r

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread clockwork
Well thats probably because both windows and Linux were designed with the intel/x86/cheap crap market in mind. A more valid comparison would be OSX, since it is also designed to run on a somewhat specific set of hardware. Solaris will get there, but the open aspect of solaris on intel is still fair

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread David Dyer-Bennet
On 10/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The more I learn about Solaris hardware support, the more I see it as > a minefield. I've found this to be true for almost all open source platforms where you're trying to use something that hasn't been explicitly used and tested by t

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread Darren . Reed
David Dyer-Bennet wrote: On 10/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There are tools around that can tell you if hardware is supported by Solaris. One such tool can be found at: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/hcts/install_check.html Beware of this tool. It reports "Y" for bo

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread David Dyer-Bennet
On 10/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There are tools around that can tell you if hardware is supported by Solaris. One such tool can be found at: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/hcts/install_check.html Beware of this tool. It reports "Y" for both 32-bit and 64-bit on the

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread Darren . Reed
Dick Davies wrote: On 11/10/06, Peter van Gemert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi There, You might want to check the HCL at http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl to find out which hardware is supported by Solaris 10. Greetings, Peter I tried that myself - there really isn't very much on there. I

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread Dale Ghent
On Oct 11, 2006, at 10:10 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So are there any pci-e SATA cards that are supported ? I was hoping to go with a sempron64. Using old-pci seems like a waste. Yes. I wrote up a little review of the SIIG SC-SAE412-S1 card which is a two port PCIe card based on the Sili

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread Al Hopper
Followup - if you also want to also use the machine as a workstation: Graphics card (PCI Express): Pick a Nvidia based board to take advantage fo the excellent Solaris native driver[0]. The 7600GS has a great price/performance ratio. This ref [1] also mentions the 7600GT - altough I'm (almost)

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread clockwork
So are there any pci-e SATA cards that are supported ? I was hoping to go with a sempron64. Using old-pci seems like a waste.Regards.On 10/11/06, Dick Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On 11/10/06, Peter van Gemert < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Hi There,>> You might want to check the HCL at http://w

Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread Dick Davies
On 11/10/06, Peter van Gemert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi There, You might want to check the HCL at http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl to find out which hardware is supported by Solaris 10. Greetings, Peter I tried that myself - there really isn't very much on there. I can't believe Solaris r

[zfs-discuss] Re: ZFS Inexpensive SATA Whitebox

2006-10-11 Thread Peter van Gemert
Hi There, You might want to check the HCL at http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl to find out which hardware is supported by Solaris 10. Greetings, Peter This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org h