Hi--
From your pre-promotion output, both fs1-patch and snap1 are
referencing the same 16.4 GB, which makes sense. I don't see how fs1
could be a
clone of fs1-patch because it should be REFER'ing 16.4 GB as well in
your pre-promotion zfs list.
If you snapshot, clone, and promote, then the sna
Hello,
# /usr/sbin/zfs list -r rgd3
NAME USEDAVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
rgd3 16.5G23.4G20K
/rgd3
rgd3/fs1 19K 23.4G21K
/app/fs1
rgd3/fs1-patch
Hi Tester,
It is difficult for me to see all that is going on here. Can you provide
the steps and the complete output?
I tried to reproduce this on latest Nevada bits and I can't. The
snapshot sizing looks correct to me after a snapshot/clone promotion.
Thanks,
Cindy
# zfs create tank/fs1
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:25:54AM -0700, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
> an interesting idea. i can file an RFE on this as well, but there are a
> couple side effects to consider with this approach.
>
> setting this property would break "zfs snapshot -r" if there are
> multiple snapshots and clones o
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:59:33AM -0600, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
> Ed,
>
> "zfs destroy [-r] -p" sounds great.
>
> I'm not a big fan of the "-t template". Do you have conflicting snapshot
> names due to the way your (zones) software works, or are you concerned
> about sysadmins creating these confl
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:31:07AM -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:59:33AM -0600, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
> > "zfs destroy [-r] -p" sounds great.
> >
> > I'm not a big fan of the "-t template". Do you have conflicting snapshot
> > names due to the way your (zones) softwar
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:59:33AM -0600, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
> "zfs destroy [-r] -p" sounds great.
>
> I'm not a big fan of the "-t template". Do you have conflicting snapshot
> names due to the way your (zones) software works, or are you concerned
> about sysadmins creating these conflictin
Ed,
"zfs destroy [-r] -p" sounds great.
I'm not a big fan of the "-t template". Do you have conflicting snapshot
names due to the way your (zones) software works, or are you concerned about
sysadmins creating these conflicting snapshots? If it's the former, would
it be possible to change th
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Robin Guo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, Mike,
>
> It's like 6452872, it need enough space for 'zfs promote'
Not really - in 6452872 a file system is at its quota before the
promote is issued. I expect that a promote may cause several KB of
metadata changes th
Hi, Mike,
It's like 6452872, it need enough space for 'zfs promote'
- Regards,
Mike Gerdts wrote:
> I needed to free up some space to be able to create and populate a new
> upgrade. I was caught off guard by the amount of free space required
> by "zfs promote".
>
> bash-3.2# uname -a
> SunO
10 matches
Mail list logo
