On Sat, 27 Feb 2010, Jens Elkner wrote:
> At least on S10u8 its not that bad. Last time I patched and rebooted
> a X4500 with ~350 ZFS it took about 10min to come up, a X4600 with
> a 3510 and ~2350 ZFS took about 20min (almost all are shared via NFS).
Our x4500's with about 8000 filesystems per
Speaking of long boot times, Ive heard that IBM power servers boot in 90
minutes or more.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 09:25:57PM -0700, Eric D. Mudama wrote:
...
> I agree with the above, but the best practices guide:
>
> http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Best_Practices_Guide#ZFS_file_service_for_SMB_.28CIFS.29_or_SAMBA
>
> states in the SAMBA section that "Beware that mo
On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:59 PM, Richard Elling wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:25 PM, Eric D. Mudama wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 25 at 20:21, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>>> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Alastair Neil wrote:
>>>
I do not know and I don't think anyone would deploy a system in that way
with UFS
Ironically It's nfs exporting that is the real hog, cifs shares seem to come
up pretty fast. The fact that cifs shares can be fast makes it hard for me
to understand why Sun/Oracle seem to be making such a meal of this bug.
Possibly because it only critically affects poor universities and not
clie
On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:25 PM, Eric D. Mudama wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25 at 20:21, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Alastair Neil wrote:
>>
>>> I do not know and I don't think anyone would deploy a system in that way
>>> with UFS.
>>> This is the model that is imposed in order to take f
On Thu, Feb 25 at 20:21, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Alastair Neil wrote:
I do not know and I don't think anyone would deploy a system in that way with
UFS.
This is the model that is imposed in order to take full advantage of zfs
advanced
features such as snapshots, encryptio
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Alastair Neil wrote:
I do not know and I don't think anyone would deploy a system in that way with
UFS.
This is the model that is imposed in order to take full advantage of zfs
advanced
features such as snapshots, encryption and compression and I know many
universities
i
I do not know and I don't think anyone would deploy a system in that way
with UFS. This is the model that is imposed in order to take full advantage
of zfs advanced features such as snapshots, encryption and compression and I
know many universities in particular are eager to adopt it for just that
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Alastair Neil wrote:
I don't think I have seen this addressed in the follow-ups to your message. One
issue we have is with deploying large numbers of files systems per pool - not
necessarily large numbers of disk. There are major scaling issues with the
sharing
of large n
I don't think I have seen this addressed in the follow-ups to your message.
One issue we have is with deploying large numbers of files systems per pool
- not necessarily large numbers of disk. There are major scaling issues
with the sharing of large numbers of file systems, in my configuration I
.ozyo...@sun.com
-Original Message-
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org
[mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Henrik Johansen
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 10:45 AM
To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Large scale ZFS deployments out there (>2
On 01/29/10 07:36 PM, Richard Elling wrote:
On Jan 29, 2010, at 12:45 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote:
On 01/28/10 11:13 PM, Lutz Schumann wrote:
While thinking about ZFS as the next generation filesystem
without limits I am wondering if the real world is ready for this
kind of incredible technology
+--
| On 2010-01-29 10:36:29, Richard Elling wrote:
|
| Nit: Solaris 10 u9 is 10/03 or 10/04 or 10/05, depending on what you read.
| Solaris 10 u8 is 11/09.
Nit: S10u8 is 10/09.
| Scrub I/O is given the lowest priority
On Jan 29, 2010, at 12:45 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote:
> On 01/28/10 11:13 PM, Lutz Schumann wrote:
>> While thinking about ZFS as the next generation filesystem without
>> limits I am wondering if the real world is ready for this kind of
>> incredible technology ...
>>
>> I'm actually speaking of h
On 01/28/10 11:13 PM, Lutz Schumann wrote:
While thinking about ZFS as the next generation filesystem without
limits I am wondering if the real world is ready for this kind of
incredible technology ...
I'm actually speaking of hardware :)
ZFS can handle a lot of devices. Once in the import bug
16 matches
Mail list logo