hard Yao)
2. Re: [zfs] Re: Petabyte pool? (Trey Palmer)
--
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 08:23:07 -0400
From: Richard Yao
To: z...@lists.illumos.org
Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] [zfs] Re:
I know it's heresy these days, but given the I/O throughput you're looking for
and the amount you're going to spend on disks, a T5-2 could make sense when
they're released (I think) later this month.
Crucial sells RAM they guarantee for use in SPARC T-series, and since you're at
an edu the acad
On 03/16/2013 12:57 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
> On Mar 15, 2013, at 6:09 PM, Marion Hakanson wrote:
>> So, has anyone done this? Or come close to it? Thoughts, even if you
>> haven't done it yourself?
>
> Don't forget about backups :-)
> -- richard
Transferring 1 PB over a 10 gigabit link wil
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
> On 2013-03-16 15:20, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 16 Mar 2013, Kristoffer Sheather @ CloudCentral wrote:
>>
>> Well, off the top of my head:
>>>
>>> 2 x Storage Heads, 4 x 10G, 256G RAM, 2 x Intel E5 CPU's
>>> 8 x 60-Bay JBOD's with 60
On 2013-03-16 15:20, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Sat, 16 Mar 2013, Kristoffer Sheather @ CloudCentral wrote:
Well, off the top of my head:
2 x Storage Heads, 4 x 10G, 256G RAM, 2 x Intel E5 CPU's
8 x 60-Bay JBOD's with 60 x 4TB SAS drives
RAIDZ2 stripe over the 8 x JBOD's
That should fit within
On 2013-03-16 15:20, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Sat, 16 Mar 2013, Kristoffer Sheather @ CloudCentral wrote:
Well, off the top of my head:
2 x Storage Heads, 4 x 10G, 256G RAM, 2 x Intel E5 CPU's
8 x 60-Bay JBOD's with 60 x 4TB SAS drives
RAIDZ2 stripe over the 8 x JBOD's
That should fit within
On Sat, 16 Mar 2013, Kristoffer Sheather @ CloudCentral wrote:
Well, off the top of my head:
2 x Storage Heads, 4 x 10G, 256G RAM, 2 x Intel E5 CPU's
8 x 60-Bay JBOD's with 60 x 4TB SAS drives
RAIDZ2 stripe over the 8 x JBOD's
That should fit within 1 rack comfortably and provide 1 PB storage.
Actually, you could use 3TB drives and with a 6/8 RAIDZ2 stripe achieve
1080 TB usable.
You'll also need 8-16 x SAS ports available on each storage head to provide
redundant multi-pathed SAS connectivity to the JBOD's, recommend LSI
9207-8E's for those and Intel X520-DA2's for the 10G NIC's.
-
Well, off the top of my head:
2 x Storage Heads, 4 x 10G, 256G RAM, 2 x Intel E5 CPU's
8 x 60-Bay JBOD's with 60 x 4TB SAS drives
RAIDZ2 stripe over the 8 x JBOD's
That should fit within 1 rack comfortably and provide 1 PB storage..
Regards,
Kristoffer Sheather
Cloud Central
Scale Your Data Cen
On Tue, March 5, 2013 11:17, Russ Poyner wrote:
> Your idea to use zfs diff to limit the need to stat the entire
> filesystem tree intrigues me. My current rsync backups are normally
> limited by this very factor. It takes longer to walk the filesystem tree
> than it does to transfer the new data.
On 3/5/2013 10:27 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, David Magda wrote:
It's also possible to reduce the amount that rsync has to walk the
entire
file tree.
Most folks simply do a "rsync --options /my/source/ /the/dest/", but if
you use "zfs diff", and parse/feed the output of that
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, David Magda wrote:
It's also possible to reduce the amount that rsync has to walk the entire
file tree.
Most folks simply do a "rsync --options /my/source/ /the/dest/", but if
you use "zfs diff", and parse/feed the output of that to rsync, then the
amount of thrashing can pro
On 3/5/2013 9:40 AM, David Magda wrote:
On Tue, March 5, 2013 10:02, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
Rsync does need to read files on the destination filesystem to see if
they have changed. If the system has sufficient RAM (and/or L2ARC)
then files may still be cached from the previous day's run. In m
On Tue, March 5, 2013 10:02, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> Rsync does need to read files on the destination filesystem to see if
> they have changed. If the system has sufficient RAM (and/or L2ARC)
> then files may still be cached from the previous day's run. In most
> cases only a small subset of th
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
Magic rsync options used:
-a --inplace --no-whole-file --delete-excluded
This causes rsync to overwrite the file blocks in place rather than writing
to a new temporary file first. As a result, zfs COW produces primitive
"deduplication" of at least t
> >> We do the same for all of our "legacy" operating system backups.
> Take
> >> a snapshot then do an rsync and an excellent way of maintaining
> >> incremental backups for those.
> >
> >
> > Magic rsync options used:
> >
> > -a --inplace --no-whole-file --delete-excluded
> >
> > This causes rs
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Ian Collins wrote:
>>>
>>> I am finding that rsync with the right options (to directly
>>> block-overwrite) plus zfs snapshots is providing me with pretty
>>> amazing "deduplication" for backups without even enabling
>>
On 2/27/2013 2:05 PM, Tim Cook wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:57 AM, Dan Swartzendruber
mailto:dswa...@druber.com>> wrote:
I've been using it since rc13. It's been stable for me as long as
you don't
get into things like zvols and such...
Then it definitely isn't at the le
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:57 AM, Dan Swartzendruber wrote:
>
> I've been using it since rc13. It's been stable for me as long as you
> don't
> get into things like zvols and such...
>
>
>
Then it definitely isn't at the level of FreeBSD, and personally I would
not consider that production ready.
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Ian Collins wrote:
Magic rsync options used:
-a --inplace --no-whole-file --delete-excluded
This causes rsync to overwrite the file blocks in place rather than
writing to a new temporary file first. As a result, zfs COW produces
primitive "deduplication" of at least th
uary 27, 2013 6:37 AM
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Distro Advice
On 02/27/2013 12:32 PM, Ahmed Kamal wrote:
> How is the quality of the ZFS Linux port today? Is it comparable to
> Illumos or at least FreeBSD ? Can I trust production data to it ?
Can&
On 02/27/2013 12:32 PM, Ahmed Kamal wrote:
> How is the quality of the ZFS Linux port today? Is it comparable to Illumos
> or at least FreeBSD ? Can I trust production data to it ?
Can't speak from personal experience, but a colleague of mine has been
PPA builds on Ubuntu and has had, well, less t
as.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/**
> users/bfriesen/ <http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/>
> GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
> ___________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris
On 2013-02-27 05:36, Ian Collins wrote:
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Ian Collins wrote:
I am finding that rsync with the right options (to directly
block-overwrite) plus zfs snapshots is providing me with pretty
amazing "deduplication" for backups without even enabling
deduplicat
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Ian Collins wrote:
I am finding that rsync with the right options (to directly
block-overwrite) plus zfs snapshots is providing me with pretty
amazing "deduplication" for backups without even enabling
deduplication in zfs. Now backup storage goes a ve
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Ian Collins wrote:
I am finding that rsync with the right options (to directly
block-overwrite) plus zfs snapshots is providing me with pretty
amazing "deduplication" for backups without even enabling
deduplication in zfs. Now backup storage goes a very long way.
We do the
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013, Richard Elling wrote:
Consider using different policies for different data. For traditional file
systems, you
had relatively few policy options: readonly, nosuid, quota, etc. With ZFS,
dedup and
compression are also policy options. In your case, dedu
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013, Richard Elling wrote:
Consider using different policies for different data. For traditional file
systems, you
had relatively few policy options: readonly, nosuid, quota, etc. With ZFS,
dedup and
compression are also policy options. In your case, dedup for your media is not
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013, Gary Driggs wrote:
On Feb 26, 2013, at 12:44 AM, "Sašo Kiselkov" wrote:
I'd also recommend that you go and subscribe to z...@lists.illumos.org,
since this list is going to get shut
down by Oracle next month.
Whose description still reads, "everything ZFS runn
users/bfriesen/zfs-discuss/zfs-cache-test.ksh";.
The script will exercise an initial uncached read from disks, and then
a (hopefully) cached re-read from disks. I think that it serves as a
useful benchmark.
Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/user
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Solaris 11.1 (free for non-prod use).
But a ticking bomb if you use a cache device.
It's been fixed in SRU (although this is only for customers with a support
contract - still, will be in 11.2 as well).
Then, I'm sure there are other bugs whic
>
> Robert Milkowski wrote:
> >
> > Solaris 11.1 (free for non-prod use).
> >
>
> But a ticking bomb if you use a cache device.
It's been fixed in SRU (although this is only for customers with a support
contract - still, will be in 11.2 as well).
Then, I'm sure there are other bugs which are
Robert Milkowski wrote:
Solaris 11.1 (free for non-prod use).
But a ticking bomb if you use a cache device.
--
Ian.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On Feb 26, 2013, at 12:33 AM, Tiernan OToole wrote:
> Thanks all! I will check out FreeNAS and see what it can do... I will also
> check my RAID Card and see if it can work with JBOD... fingers crossed... The
> machine has a couple internal SATA ports (think there are 2, could be 4) so i
> was
Be careful when testing ZFS with ozone, I ran a bunch of stats many
years ago that produced results that did not pass a basic sanity check. There
was *something* about the ozone test data that ZFS either did not like or liked
very much, depending on the specific test.
I eventual
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 06:01:39PM +0100, Sašo Kiselkov wrote:
> On 02/26/2013 05:57 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 06:51:08AM -0800, Gary Driggs wrote:
> >> On Feb 26, 2013, at 12:44 AM, "Sašo Kiselkov" wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd also recommend that you go and subscribe to z...@lists
On 02/26/2013 05:57 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 06:51:08AM -0800, Gary Driggs wrote:
>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 12:44 AM, "Sašo Kiselkov" wrote:
>>
>> I'd also recommend that you go and subscribe to z...@lists.illumos.org, since
>
> I can't seem to find this list. Do you have an U
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 06:51:08AM -0800, Gary Driggs wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 12:44 AM, "Sašo Kiselkov" wrote:
>
> I'd also recommend that you go and subscribe to z...@lists.illumos.org, since
I can't seem to find this list. Do you have an URL for that?
Mailman, hopefully?
> this list is go
On 02/26/2013 03:51 PM, Gary Driggs wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 12:44 AM, "Sašo Kiselkov" wrote:
>
> I'd also recommend that you go and subscribe to z...@lists.illumos.org, since
> this list is going to get shut down by Oracle next month.
>
> Whose description still reads, "everything ZFS runnin
On Feb 26, 2013, at 12:44 AM, "Sašo Kiselkov" wrote:
I'd also recommend that you go and subscribe to z...@lists.illumos.org, since
this list is going to get shut down by Oracle next month.
Whose description still reads, "everything ZFS running on illumos-based
distributions."
-Gary
for what is worth..
I had the same problem and found the answer here -
http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=27207
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Solaris 11.1 (free for non-prod use).
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org
[mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Tiernan OToole
Sent: 25 February 2013 14:58
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Distro Advice
Good morning all.
My home
Thanks again lads. I will take all that info into advice, and will join
that new group also!
Thanks again!
--Tiernan
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Tim Cook wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Tiernan OToole wrote:
>
>> Thanks all! I will check out FreeNAS and see what it can do.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Tiernan OToole wrote:
> Thanks all! I will check out FreeNAS and see what it can do... I will also
> check my RAID Card and see if it can work with JBOD... fingers crossed...
> The machine has a couple internal SATA ports (think there are 2, could be
> 4) so i was
On 02/26/2013 09:33 AM, Tiernan OToole wrote:
> As a follow up question: Data Deduplication: The machine, to start, will
> have about 5Gb RAM. I read somewhere that 20TB storage would require about
> 8GB RAM, depending on block size...
The typical wisdom is that 1TB of dedup'ed data = 1GB of RAM.
Thanks all! I will check out FreeNAS and see what it can do... I will also
check my RAID Card and see if it can work with JBOD... fingers crossed...
The machine has a couple internal SATA ports (think there are 2, could be
4) so i was thinking of using those for boot disks and SSDs later...
As a f
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Volker A. Brandt wrote:
> Tim Cook writes:
> > > I need something that will allow me to share files over SMB (3 if
> > > possible), NFS, AFP (for Time Machine) and iSCSI. Ideally, i would
> > > like something i can manage "easily" and something that works with
> >
Tim Cook writes:
> > I need something that will allow me to share files over SMB (3 if
> > possible), NFS, AFP (for Time Machine) and iSCSI. Ideally, i would
> > like something i can manage "easily" and something that works with
> > the Dell...
>
> All of them should provide the basic functionality
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Tiernan OToole wrote:
> Good morning all.
>
> My home NAS died over the weekend, and it leaves me with a lot of spare
> drives (5 2Tb and 3 1Tb disks). I have a Dell Poweredge 2900 Server sitting
> in the house, which has not been doing much over the last while (b
____
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Hi Tiernan!
> But, now i am confused as to what OS to use... OpenIndiana? Nexenta?
> FreeNAS/FreeBSD?
>
> I need something that will allow me to share files over SMB (3 if
> possible), NFS, AFP (for Time Machine) and iSCSI. Ideally, i would
> like something i can manage "easily" and something tha
Good morning all.
My home NAS died over the weekend, and it leaves me with a lot of spare
drives (5 2Tb and 3 1Tb disks). I have a Dell Poweredge 2900 Server sitting
in the house, which has not been doing much over the last while (bought it
a few years back with the intent of using it as a storage
Hello,
Any comments/suggestions about this would be very nice..
Thanks!
-- Pasi
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 05:09:56PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>
> I'm seeing weird output aswell:
>
> # zpool list foo
> NAME SIZE ALLOC FREECAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT
> foo 5.44T 4.44T 102
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.
should try to roll back 10 transaction sets or so, possibly giving
you an intact state of ZFS data structures and a usable pool. Maybe not.
//Jim
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-d
Well I can't see anything else to help you, except trying to replace your
failed vdev and resilver from there…
On Feb 19, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Konstantin Kuklin
wrote:
> zfs set canmount=off zroot/var/crash
>
> i can`t do this, because zfs list empty
>
> 2013/2/19 Fleuriot Damien :
>> The thi
If I understand you correctly, you have:
- booted another system from flash
- NOT replaced the failed device
- under this booted system, resilvering takes place automatically
While I cannot tell why ZFS tries to resilver without a new, proper device, I
think it will only work once you've replace
On 2013-02-19 14:24, Konstantin Kuklin wrote:
zfs set canmount=off zroot/var/crash
i can`t do this, because zfs list empty
I'd argue that in your case it might be desirable to evacuate data and
reinstall the OS - just to be certain that ZFS on-disk structures on
new installation have no def
zfs set canmount=off zroot/var/crash
i can`t do this, because zfs list empty
2013/2/19 Fleuriot Damien :
> The thing is, perhaps you have corrupted blocks that weren't caught either by
> ZFS or your drives' firmware, preventing the pool's operation.
>
> Seeing zroot/var/crash is the problem, cou
On 2013-02-19 12:39, Konstantin Kuklin wrote:
i did`t replace disk, after reboot system not started (zfs installed
as default root system) and i boot from another system(from flash) and
resilvering has auto start and show me warnings with freeze
progress(dead on checking zroot/var/crash )
Well,
i did`t replace disk, after reboot system not started (zfs installed
as default root system) and i boot from another system(from flash) and
resilvering has auto start and show me warnings with freeze
progress(dead on checking zroot/var/crash )
replacing dead disk healing var/crash with <0x0> adress
it lives on - Oracle did
something good for karma... win-win, at no price).
Thanks for your helpfulness in the past years,
//Jim
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mai
Reassure me here, you've replaced your failed vdev before trying to resilver
right ?
Your zpool status suggests otherwise, so I only want to make sure this is a
status from before replacing your drive.
On Feb 18, 2013, at 8:48 AM, Konstantin Kuklin
wrote:
> i can`t do it, because resilverin
i can`t do it, because resilvering in progress(freeze on 0.1%) and zfs
list empty
2013/2/17 Fleuriot Damien :
> Hmmm, zfs destroy -f zroot/var/crash ?
>
> Then you can try to zfs mount -a
>
>
>
> Removing pjd and mm from cc, if they want to read your message they're old
> enough to check their ML
Ian Collins writes:
> Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) wrote:
> >> From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms]
> >>
> >> We can agree to disagree.
> >>
> >> I think you're still operating under the auspices of Oracle
> >> wanting to have an open discussion. This is patently false.
Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) wrote:
From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms]
We can agree to disagree.
I think you're still operating under the auspices of Oracle wanting to have an
open discussion. This is patently false.
I'm just going to respond to this by saying th
> From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms]
>
> We can agree to disagree.
>
> I think you're still operating under the auspices of Oracle wanting to have an
> open discussion. This is patently false.
I'm just going to respond to this by saying thank you, Cindy, Casper, Neil, and
others, for all t
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Edward Ned Harvey
(opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) <
opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com> wrote:
> > From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms]
> >
> > Why would I spend all that time and
> > energy participating in ANOTHER list controlled by Oracle,
Hmmm, zfs destroy -f zroot/var/crash ?
Then you can try to zfs mount -a
Removing pjd and mm from cc, if they want to read your message they're old
enough to check their ML subscription.
On Feb 17, 2013, at 3:46 PM, Konstantin Kuklin
wrote:
> hi, i have raid1 on zfs with 2 device on pool
>
Also, adding to my recent post: instead of resilvering, try to run
"zpool scrub" first - it should verify all checksums and repair
whatever it can via redundancy (for metadata - extra copies).
Resilver is similar to scrub, but it has its other goals and
implementation, and might be not so forgivi
On 2013-02-17 15:46, Konstantin Kuklin wrote:
hi, i have raid1 on zfs with 2 device on pool
first device died and boot from second not working...
You didn't say which OS version created the pool (ultimately -
which pool version is there) and I'm not sure about support of
the zfs versions in tha
> From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms]
>
> Why would I spend all that time and
> energy participating in ANOTHER list controlled by Oracle, when they have
> shown they have no qualms about eliminating it with basically 0 warning, at
> their whim?
>From an open source, community perspective, I und
hi, i have raid1 on zfs with 2 device on pool
first device died and boot from second not working...
i try to get http://mfsbsd.vx.sk/ flash and load from it with zpool import
http://puu.sh/2402E
when i load zfs.ko and opensolaris.ko i see this message:
Solaris: WARNING: Can't open objset for zro
> From: cindy swearingen [mailto:cindy.swearin...@gmail.com]
>
> This was new news to use too and we're just talking over some options
> yesterday
> afternoon so please give us a chance to regroup and provide some
> alternatives.
>
> This list will be shutdown but we can start a new one on java.n
On 02/17/2013 06:40 AM, Ian Collins wrote:
> Toby Thain wrote:
>> Signed up, thanks.
>>
>> The ZFS list has been very high value and I thank everyone whose wisdom
>> I have enjoyed, especially people like you Sašo, Mr Elling, Mr
>> Friesenhahn, Mr Harvey, the distinguished Sun and Oracle engineers
+--
| On 2013-02-17 01:17:58, Tim Cook wrote:
|
| While I'm sure many appreciate the offer as I do, I can tell you for me
| personally: never going to happen. Why would I spend all that time and
| energy participating in
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 3:42 PM, cindy swearingen <
cindy.swearin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Ned and Everyone,
>
> This was new news to use too and we're just talking over some options
> yesterday
> afternoon so please give us a chance to regroup and provide some
> alternatives.
>
> This list will
Richard Elling wrote:
On Feb 16, 2013, at 10:16 PM, Bryan Horstmann-Allen
wrote:
+--
| On 2013-02-17 18:40:47, Ian Collins wrote:
|
One of its main advantages is it has been platform agnostic. We see
Solaris, Illumo
On Feb 16, 2013, at 10:16 PM, Bryan Horstmann-Allen
wrote:
> +--
> | On 2013-02-17 18:40:47, Ian Collins wrote:
> |
>> One of its main advantages is it has been platform agnostic. We see
>> Solaris, Illumos, BSD and m
+--
| On 2013-02-17 18:40:47, Ian Collins wrote:
|
> One of its main advantages is it has been platform agnostic. We see
> Solaris, Illumos, BSD and more recently ZFS on Linux questions all give the
> same respect.
>
>
Toby Thain wrote:
Signed up, thanks.
The ZFS list has been very high value and I thank everyone whose wisdom
I have enjoyed, especially people like you Sašo, Mr Elling, Mr
Friesenhahn, Mr Harvey, the distinguished Sun and Oracle engineers who
post here, and many others.
Let the Illumos list thr
eally that simple.
Cheers,
--
Saso
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
_______
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://ma
February 17, 2013 7:42 AM
>To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
>Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs-discuss mailing list & opensolaris EOL
>
>Hello Cindy,
>
>Are there any plans to preserve the official mailing lists' archives, or will
>they
>go the way of Jive forums and the
Hello Cindy,
Are there any plans to preserve the official mailing lists' archives,
or will they go the way of Jive forums and the future digs for bits
of knowledge would rely on alternate mirrors and caches?
I understand that Oracle has some business priorities, but retiring
hardware causes site
t;
> ___
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
>
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On 02/16/2013 06:44 PM, Tim Cook wrote:
> We've got Oracle employees on the mailing list, that while helpful, in no
> way have the authority to speak for company policy. They've made that
> clear on numerous occasions And that doesn't change the fact that we
> literally have heard NOTHING from O
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Edward Ned Harvey
(opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris) <
opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com> wrote:
> > From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms]
> >
> > That would be the logical decision, yes. Not to poke fun, but did you
> really
> > expect an off
On Sat, 16 Feb 2013, Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris)
wrote:
From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms]
That would be the logical decision, yes. Not to poke fun, but did you really
expect an official response after YEARS of nothing from Oracle? This is the
same company that
> From: Bob Friesenhahn [mailto:bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us]
>
> Good for you. I am sure that Larry will be contacting you soon.
hehehehehe... he knows better. ;-)
> Previously Oracle announced and invited people to join their
> discussion forums, which are web-based and virtually dead.
> From: sriram...@gmail.com [mailto:sriram...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Sriram Narayanan
>
> Or, given that this is a weekend, we assume that someone within Oracle
> would see this mail only on Monday morning Pacific Time, then send out
> some mails within, and be able to respond in public only by
> From: Tim Cook [mailto:t...@cook.ms]
>
> That would be the logical decision, yes. Not to poke fun, but did you really
> expect an official response after YEARS of nothing from Oracle? This is the
> same company that refused to release any Java patches until the DHS issued
> a national warning
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013, Edward Ned Harvey (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris)
wrote:
So, I hear, in a couple weeks' time, opensolaris.org is shutting down. What
does that mean for this mailing list? Should we
all be moving over to something at illumos or something?
There is a 'illumos-zfs
;
>
>
> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org
> [mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Edward Ned Harvey
> (opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris)
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 11:00 AM
> To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Subject: [zfs-discuss] zfs-discuss
iveopensolaris)
> *Sent:* Friday, February 15, 2013 11:00 AM
> *To:* zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> *Subject:* [zfs-discuss] zfs-discuss mailing list & opensolaris EOL
>
> ** **
>
> So, I hear, in a couple weeks' time, opensolaris.org is shutting down.
> What d
Edward Ned Harvey
(opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensolaris)
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 11:00 AM
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: [zfs-discuss] zfs-discuss mailing list & opensolaris EOL
So, I hear, in a couple weeks' time, opensolaris.org is shutting down. What
does that mean
So, I hear, in a couple weeks' time, opensolaris.org is shutting down. What
does that mean for this mailing list? Should we all be moving over to
something at illumos or something?
I'm going to encourage somebody in an official capacity at opensolaris to
respond...
I'm going to discourage uno
On Feb 12, 2013, at 11:25 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> I made kstat data available on FreeBSD via 'kstat' sysctl tree:
Yes, I am using the data. I wasn't sure about how getting something meaningful
from it, but I've found the arcstats.pl script and I am using it as a model.
Suggestions wil
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:39:27PM +0100, Jim Klimov wrote:
> On 2013-02-11 17:14, Borja Marcos wrote:
> >
> > On Feb 11, 2013, at 4:56 PM, Tim Cook wrote:
> >
> >> The zpool iostat output has all sorts of statistics I think would be
> >> useful/interesting to record over time.
> >
> >
> > Yes, th
On 2013-02-11 17:14, Borja Marcos wrote:
On Feb 11, 2013, at 4:56 PM, Tim Cook wrote:
The zpool iostat output has all sorts of statistics I think would be
useful/interesting to record over time.
Yes, thanks :) I think I will add them, I just started with the esoteric ones.
Anyway, still t
On 02/11/2013 04:53 PM, Borja Marcos wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'n updating Devilator, the performance data collector for Orca and FreeBSD
> to include ZFS monitoring. So far I am graphing the ARC and L2ARC size, L2ARC
> writes and reads, and several hit/misses data pairs.
>
> Any suggestions to i
1 - 100 of 10145 matches
Mail list logo
