Ok...got a break from the 25xx release...
Trying to catch up so...sorry for the late response...
The 6120 firmware does not support the Cache Sync command at all...
You could try using a smaller blocksize setting on the array to attempt to
reduce the number of read/modify/writes that you will in
I think you have a problem with pool fragmentation. We have the same problem
and changing
recordsize will help. You have to set smaller recordsize for pool ( all
filesystem must have the same size or smaller size ). First check if you have
problems with finding blocks with this dtrace script:
#
Albert Chin writes:
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 09:05:01AM +0200, Selim Daoud wrote:
> > isn't there another flag in /etc/system to force zfs not to send flush
> > requests to NVRAM?
>
> I think it's zfs_nocacheflush=1, according to Matthew Ahrens in
> http://blogs.digitar.com/jjww/?itemid=44.
to zvol iscsi targets.
thanks anyways.. back to the drawing board on how to resolve this!
-Andy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Torrey McMahon
Sent: Fri 4/20/2007 6:00 PM
To: Marion Hakanson
Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS+NFS on s
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 09:05:01AM +0200, Selim Daoud wrote:
> isn't there another flag in /etc/system to force zfs not to send flush
> requests to NVRAM?
I think it's zfs_nocacheflush=1, according to Matthew Ahrens in
http://blogs.digitar.com/jjww/?itemid=44.
> s.
>
>
> On 4/20/07, Marion Haka
Roch,
isn't there another flag in /etc/system to force zfs not to send flush
requests to NVRAM?
s.
On 4/20/07, Marion Hakanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> We have been combing the message boards and it looks like there was a lot of
> talk about this interaction of zfs
From: Bill Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 4/20/2007 5:13 PM
To: Andy Lubel
Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS+NFS on storedge 6120 (sun t4)
When you say rewrites, can you give more detail? For example, are you
rewriting in 8K chunks, random sizes, etc? The
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> The 6120 isn't the same as a 6130/61340/6540. The instructions referenced
> above won't work on a T3/T3+/6120/6320
Sigh. I can't keep up (:-). Thanks for the correction.
Marion
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@ope
solve this!
-Andy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Torrey McMahon
Sent: Fri 4/20/2007 6:00 PM
To: Marion Hakanson
Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS+NFS on storedge 6120 (sun t4)
Marion Hakanson wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
Marion Hakanson wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
We have been combing the message boards and it looks like there was a lot of
talk about this interaction of zfs+nfs back in november and before but since
i have not seen much. It seems the only fix up to that date was to disable
zil, is that sti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> We have been combing the message boards and it looks like there was a lot of
> talk about this interaction of zfs+nfs back in november and before but since
> i have not seen much. It seems the only fix up to that date was to disable
> zil, is that still the case? Did any
When you say rewrites, can you give more detail? For example, are you
rewriting in 8K chunks, random sizes, etc? The reason I ask is because
ZFS will, by default, use 128K blocks for large files. If you then
rewrite a small chunk at a time, ZFS is forced to read 128K, modify the
small chunk you'
12 matches
Mail list logo
