On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 8:21 AM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are those universal though? I was under the impression it had to be
> supported by the motherboard, or you'd fry all components involved.
There are PCI/PCI-X to PCI-e bridge chips available (as well as PCI-e
to AGP) and they're par
I don't think so, not all of them anyway. They also sell ones that have a
proprietary goldfinger, which obviously would not work.
The spec does not mention any specific restrictions, just lists the interface
types (but it is fairly breif), and you can certianly buy PCI - PCI-E generic
adapters
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If your worried about the bandwidth limitations of putting something like
> the supermicro card in a pci slot how about using an active riser card to
> convert from PCI-E to PCI-X. One of these, or something similar:
>
> http://www
If your worried about the bandwidth limitations of putting something like the
supermicro card in a pci slot how about using an active riser card to convert
from PCI-E to PCI-X. One of these, or something similar:
http://www.tyan.com/product_accessories_spec.aspx?pid=26
on sale at
http://www.am
Brandon High wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:12 PM, Joe Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> winner is going to be the newer SAS/SATA mixed HBAs from LSI based on
>> the 1068 chipset, which Sun has been supporting well in newer
>> hardware.
>>
>> http://jmlittle.blogspot.com/2008/06/recommended-d
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:12 PM, Joe Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> winner is going to be the newer SAS/SATA mixed HBAs from LSI based on
> the 1068 chipset, which Sun has been supporting well in newer
> hardware.
>
> http://jmlittle.blogspot.com/2008/06/recommended-disk-controllers-for-zfs.htm
Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> /dev/zero does not have infinite performance. Dd will perform at
> least one extra data copy in memory. Since zfs computes checksums it
> needs to inspect all of the bytes in what is written. As a result,
> zfs will easily know if the block is all
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, Jonathan Hogg wrote:
>> Are you sure gdd doesn't create a sparse file?
>
> One would presumably expect it to be instantaneous if it was creating
> a sparse file. It's not a compressed filesystem though is it? /dev/
> zero tends to be fairly compressible ;-)
/dev/zero does not
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, Tom Buskey wrote:
>
> time gdd if=/dev/zero bs=1048576 count=10240 of=/data/video/x
>
> real 0m13.503s
> user 0m0.016s
> sys 0m8.981s
These results are not quite valid.
/dev/zero only produces null bytes which allows zfs to store the data
as sparse files (i.e. write less
>
> time gdd if=/dev/zero bs=1048576 count=10240
> of=/data/video/x
>
> real 0m13.503s
> user 0m0.016s
> sys 0m8.981s
As someone pointed out, this is a compressed file system :-)
I'll have to get a copy of Bonnie++ or some such to get more accurate numbers
This message posted from openso
On 9 Jun 2008, at 14:59, Thomas Maier-Komor wrote:
>> time gdd if=/dev/zero bs=1048576 count=10240 of=/data/video/x
>>
>> real 0m13.503s
>> user 0m0.016s
>> sys 0m8.981s
>>
>>
>
> Are you sure gdd doesn't create a sparse file?
One would presumably expect it to be instantaneous if it was creating
Tom Buskey schrieb:
>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 16:23, Tom Buskey
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I have an AMD 939 MB w/ Nvidea on the motherboard
>> and 4 500GB SATA II drives in a RAIDZ.
>> ...
>>> I get 550 MB/s
>> I doubt this number a lot. That's almost 200
>> (550/N-1 = 183) MB/s per
>> dis
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Tom Buskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 16:23, Tom Buskey
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I have an AMD 939 MB w/ Nvidea on the motherboard
> > and 4 500GB SATA II drives in a RAIDZ.
> > ...
> > > I get 550 MB/s
> > I doubt this number
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 16:23, Tom Buskey
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have an AMD 939 MB w/ Nvidea on the motherboard
> and 4 500GB SATA II drives in a RAIDZ.
> ...
> > I get 550 MB/s
> I doubt this number a lot. That's almost 200
> (550/N-1 = 183) MB/s per
> disk, and drives I've seen are
Tim wrote:
>
>
>
> **pci or pci-x. Yes, you might see *SOME* loss in speed from a pci
> interface, but let's be honest, there aren't a whole lot of users on
> this list that have the infrastructure to use greater than 100MB/sec who
> are asking this sort of question. A PCI bus should have n
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Joe Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Peeyush Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrot
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 16:23, Tom Buskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have an AMD 939 MB w/ Nvidea on the motherboard and 4 500GB SATA II drives
> in a RAIDZ.
...
> I get 550 MB/s
I doubt this number a lot. That's almost 200 (550/N-1 = 183) MB/s per
disk, and drives I've seen are usually more i
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Tom Buskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >**pci or pci-x. Yes, you might see
> > *SOME* loss in speed from a pci interface, but
> > let's be honest, there aren't a whole lot of
> > users on this list that have the infrastructure to
> > use greater than 100MB/sec who
>**pci or pci-x. Yes, you might see
> *SOME* loss in speed from a pci interface, but
> let's be honest, there aren't a whole lot of
> users on this list that have the infrastructure to
> use greater than 100MB/sec who are asking this sort
> of question. A PCI bus should have no issues
> pushing t
Richard L. Hamilton smart.net> writes:
> But I suspect to some extent you get what you pay for; the throughput on the
> higher-end boards may well be a good bit higher.
Not really. Nowadays, even the cheapest controllers, processors & mobos are
EASILY capable of handling the platter-speed throug
Buy a 2-port SATA II PCI-E x1 SiI3132 controller ($20). The solaris driver is
very stable.
Or, a solution I would personally prefer, don't use a 7th disk. Partition
each of your 6 disks with a small ~7-GB slice at the beginning and the rest of
the disk for ZFS. Install the OS in one of the sma
I don't presently have any working x86 hardware, nor do I routinely work with
x86 hardware configurations.
But it's not hard to find previous discussion on the subject:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=96790
for example...
Also, remember that SAS controllers can usually also
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Joe Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Peeyush Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey guys, please excuse me in advance if I say or ask anything
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Peeyush Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hey guys, please excuse me in advance if I say or ask anything stupid :)
>>
>> Anyway, Solaris newbie here. I've built for myself a new file server
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Peeyush Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hey guys, please excuse me in advance if I say or ask anything stupid :)
>
> Anyway, Solaris newbie here. I've built for myself a new file server to
> use at home, in which I'm planning on configuring SXCE-89 & ZFS. It's
Hey guys, please excuse me in advance if I say or ask anything stupid :)
Anyway, Solaris newbie here. I've built for myself a new file server to use at
home, in which I'm planning on configuring SXCE-89 & ZFS. It's a Supermicro
C2SBX motherboard with a Core2Duo & 4GB DDR3. I have 6x750GB SATA
26 matches
Mail list logo
