Hi Robert,
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 02:42:33PM +0100, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Tuesday, January 23, 2007, 1:48:50 PM, you wrote:
> CD> On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 12:07:34PM +0100, Robert Milkowski wrote:
>
> >> Of course the question is why use ZFS over DID?
>
> CD> Actually the question is probably
Hello Ceri,
Tuesday, January 23, 2007, 1:48:50 PM, you wrote:
CD> On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 12:07:34PM +0100, Robert Milkowski wrote:
>> Hello Zoram,
>>
>> Tuesday, January 23, 2007, 11:27:48 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> ZT> Hi Ceri,
>>
>> ZT> I just saw your mail today. I'm replying In case you haven't
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 12:07:34PM +0100, Robert Milkowski wrote:
> Hello Zoram,
>
> Tuesday, January 23, 2007, 11:27:48 AM, you wrote:
>
> ZT> Hi Ceri,
>
> ZT> I just saw your mail today. I'm replying In case you haven't found a
> ZT> solution.
>
> ZT> This is
>
> ZT> 6475304 zfs core dumps
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 03:57:48PM +0530, Zoram Thanga wrote:
> Hi Ceri,
>
> I just saw your mail today. I'm replying In case you haven't found a
> solution.
>
> This is
>
> 6475304 zfs core dumps when trying to create new spool using "did" device
>
> The workaround suggests:
>
> Set environm
Hello Zoram,
Tuesday, January 23, 2007, 11:27:48 AM, you wrote:
ZT> Hi Ceri,
ZT> I just saw your mail today. I'm replying In case you haven't found a
ZT> solution.
ZT> This is
ZT> 6475304 zfs core dumps when trying to create new spool using "did" device
ZT> The workaround suggests:
ZT> Set
Hi Ceri,
I just saw your mail today. I'm replying In case you haven't found a
solution.
This is
6475304 zfs core dumps when trying to create new spool using "did" device
The workaround suggests:
Set environmental variable
NOINUSE_CHECK=1
And the problem does not exists.
Thanks,
Zoram
C
On an up to date Solaris 10 11/06 with Sun Cluster 3.2 and iSCSI backed
did devices, zpool dumps core on creation if I try to use a did device.
Using the underlying device works, and this might not be supported
(though I don't know), but I thought you would probably prefer to see
the error than no