Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool status output confusing

If I run # zdb -l /dev/dsk/c#t#d# the result is "failed to unpack label" for any disk attached to controllers running on ahci or arcmsr controllers. Cheers, Tonmaus -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-disc

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool status output confusing

Goog morning Cindy, > Hi, > > Testing how ZFS reacts to a failed disk can be > difficult to anticipate > because some systems don't react well when you remove > a disk. I am in the process of finding that out for my systems. That's why I am doing these tests. > On an > x4500, for example, you h

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool status output confusing

I beileve to have seen the same issue. Mine was documented as: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6843555 Areca did issue a fixed firmware, but i can't say whether that indeed was the end of it, since we didn't do a controlled disk mixing experiment since then. I did fi

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:58 PM, matthew patton wrote: > what with the home NAS conversations, what's the trick to buy a J4500 without > any drives? SUN like every other "enterprise" storage vendor thinks it's ok > to rape their customers and I for one, am not interested in paying 10x for a > si

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool status output confusing

On 2/02/10 06:52 PM, Moshe Vainer wrote: I beileve to have seen the same issue. Mine was documented as: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6843555 Areca did issue a fixed firmware, but i can't say whether that indeed was the end of it, since we didn't do a controlled di

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

A dumb question: I see 24 drives in an external chassi. I presume that chassis does only hold drives, it does not hold a motherboard. How do you connect all drives to your OpenSolaris server? Do you place them next to each other, and then you have three 8 SATA ports in your OpenSolaris server

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

Ok, I see that the chassi contains a mother board. So never mind that question. Another q: Is it possible to have large chassi with lots of drives, and the opensolaris in another chassi, how do you connect them both? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___

Re: [zfs-discuss] Workaround for mpt timeouts in snv_127

> My timeout issue is definitely the WD10EARS disks. > WD has chosen to cripple their consumer grade disks > when used in quantities greater than one. > > I'll now need to evaluate alternative supplers of low > cost disks for low end high volume storage. > > Mark. > > typo ST32000542AS not NS T

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, February 2, 2010 02:24, matthew patton wrote: > true. but I buy a Ferrari for the engine and bodywork and chassis > engineering. It is totally criminal what Sun/EMC/Dell/Netapp do charging > customers 10x the open-market rate for standard drives. A RE3/4 or NS > drive is the same damn thin

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

> true. but I buy a Ferrari for the engine and bodywork and chassis > engineering. It is totally criminal what Sun/EMC/Dell/Netapp do charging its interesting to read this with another thread containing: > timeout issue is definitely the WD10EARS disks. > replaced 24 of them with ST32000542AS (f

Re: [zfs-discuss] Workaround for mpt timeouts in snv_127

Hi Simon, I am running 5 WD20EADS in a raidz-1+spare on ahci controller without any problems I could relate to TLER or head parking. Cheers, Tonmaus -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool status output confusing

Even if the pool is created with whole disks, you'll need to use the s* identifier as I provided in the earlier reply: # zdb -l /dev/dsk/cvtxdysz Cindy On 02/02/10 01:07, Tonmaus wrote: If I run # zdb -l /dev/dsk/c#t#d# the result is "failed to unpack label" for any disk attached to contro

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, February 2, 2010 01:26, James C. McPherson wrote: > The engineering ratings are different to what you can buy from > your local corner PC store, and the firmware is different. The > qualification is done with the assumption that the disks will be > spinning every single second for a numbe

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool status output confusing

Thanks. That fixed it. Tonmaus -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool status output confusing

Hi James, am I right to understand that in a nutshell the problem is that if page 80/83 information is present but corrupt/inaccurate/forged (name it as you want), zfs will not get to down to the GUID? regards, Tonmaus -- This message posted from opensolaris.org __

[zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

Hi, I am trying to find a way to grow the filesystems in a thumper. The idea is to take single disks offline and to replace them by bigger ones. For this reason, I did run the following test: mkfile 100m f1 mkfile 100m f2 mkfile 100m f3 mkfile 100m f4 mkfile 100m f5 mkfile 200m F1 mkfile 20

Re: [zfs-discuss] 3ware 9650 SE

Hi, It's a few day now that I try to use a 9650SE 3ware controller to work on opensolaris and I found the following problem : the tw driver seems work, I can see my controller whith the tw_cli of 3ware. I can see that 2 drives are created with the controller, but when I try to use "pfexec forma

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, February 2, 2010 01:27, Tim Cook wrote: > Except you think the original engineering is just a couple grand, and > that's > where you're wrong. I hate the prices just as much as the next guy, but > they do in fact need to feed their families. In fact, they need to do a > hell of a lot mo

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

Hi Jörg, On Tuesday 02 February 2010 16:40:50 Joerg Schilling wrote: > After that, the zpool did notice that there is more space: > > zpool list > NAME SIZE USED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT > test 476M 1,28M 475M 0% ONLINE - > That's the size already after the initial creation

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 9:45 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: > > On Tue, February 2, 2010 01:27, Tim Cook wrote: > > > Except you think the original engineering is just a couple grand, and > > that's > > where you're wrong. I hate the prices just as much as the next guy, but > > they do in fact need

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, February 2, 2010 09:58, Tim Cook wrote: > It's called spreading the costs around. Would you really rather pay 10x > the price on everything else besides the drives? This seems to miss the point. I presented an argument for why I think the qualified drives are a huge profit-center, not

Re: [zfs-discuss] Workaround for mpt timeouts in snv_127

Hi Tonmaus, That's good to hear. Which revision are they: 00R6B0 or 00P8B0? It's marked on the drive top. >From what I've seen elsewhere, people seem to be complaining about the newer >00P8B0 revision, so I'd be interested to hear from you. These revision numbers >are listed in the first post

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

Carsten Aulbert wrote: > Hi Jörg, > > On Tuesday 02 February 2010 16:40:50 Joerg Schilling wrote: > > After that, the zpool did notice that there is more space: > > > > zpool list > > NAME SIZE USED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT > > test 476M 1,28M 475M 0% ONLINE - > > > > That'

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: Now, I'm sure not ALL drives offered at Newegg could qualify; but the question is, how much do I give up by buying an enterprise-grade drive from a major manufacturer, compared to the Sun-certified drive? If you have a Sun service contract, you give

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

On 02/02/2010 16:09, Joerg Schilling wrote: Carsten Aulbert wrote: Hi Jörg, On Tuesday 02 February 2010 16:40:50 Joerg Schilling wrote: After that, the zpool did notice that there is more space: zpool list NAME SIZE USED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT test 476M 1,28M 475M 0% O

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

I agree wholeheartedlyyou're paying to make the problem "go away" in an expedient manner. That said, I see how much we spend on NetApp storage at work and it makes me shudder ;) I think someone was wondering if the large storage vendors have their own microcode on drives? I can tell you that N

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

Darren J Moffat wrote: > > Did yours grow? > > If yes, what did I do wrong? > > What does this return: > > zpool get autoexpand test zpool get autoexpand test NAME PROPERTYVALUE SOURCE test autoexpand off default Thank you for this hint! BTW: setting autoexpand later did not help

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

Marc Nicholas wrote: > I think someone was wondering if the large storage vendors have their own > microcode on drives? I can tell you that NetApp do...and that's one way they > "lock you in" (if the drive doesn't report NetApp firmware, the filer will > "reject" the drive) and also how they do t

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

Hi Joerg, Eabling the autoexpand property after the disk replacement is complete should expand the pool. This looks like a bug. I can reproduce this issue with files. It seems to be working as expected for disks. See the output below. Thanks, Cindy Create pool test with 2 68 GB drives: # zpool

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, February 2, 2010 10:21, Marc Nicholas wrote: > I agree wholeheartedlyyou're paying to make the problem "go away" in > an > expedient manner. That said, I see how much we spend on NetApp storage at > work and it makes me shudder ;) Yes, exactly. Pricing must be about right, people win

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

On 02/02/2010 16:48, Cindy Swearingen wrote: Hi Joerg, Eabling the autoexpand property after the disk replacement is complete should expand the pool. This looks like a bug. I can reproduce this issue with files. It seems to be working as expected for disks. See the output below. If you use lof

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

This reminds me of this attorney that charged very much for a contract template he copied and gave to a client. To that, he responded: -You dont pay for me finding this template and copying to you, which took me 5 minutes. You pay me because I sat 5 years in the university, and have 15 years of

Re: [zfs-discuss] Workaround for mpt timeouts in snv_127

> That's good to hear. Which revision are they: 00R6B0 > or 00P8B0? It's marked on the drive top. Interesting. I wonder if this is the issue too with the 01U1B0 2.0TB drives? I have 24 WD2002FYPS-01U1B0 drives under OpenSolaris with an LSI 1068E controller that have weird timeout issues and I

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Feb 2, 2010, at 8:49 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: > On Tue, February 2, 2010 10:21, Marc Nicholas wrote: >> I agree wholeheartedlyyou're paying to make the problem "go away" in >> an >> expedient manner. That said, I see how much we spend on NetApp storage at >> work and it makes me shudder

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

* On 02 Feb 2010, Darren J Moffat wrote: > > zpool get autoexpand test This seems to be a new property -- it's not in my Solaris 10 or OpenSolaris 2009.06 systems, and they have always expanded immediately upon replacement. In what build number or official release does autoexpand appear, and do

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

On 02/02/2010 17:29, David Champion wrote: * On 02 Feb 2010, Darren J Moffat wrote: zpool get autoexpand test This seems to be a new property -- it's not in my Solaris 10 or OpenSolaris 2009.06 systems, and they have always expanded immediately upon replacement. In what build number or offic

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

On Feb 2, 2010, at 9:29 AM, David Champion wrote: > * On 02 Feb 2010, Darren J Moffat wrote: >> >> zpool get autoexpand test > > This seems to be a new property -- it's not in my Solaris 10 or > OpenSolaris 2009.06 systems, and they have always expanded immediately > upon replacement. In what

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

Hi David, This feature integrated into build 117, which would be beyond your OpenSolaris 2009.06. We anticipate this feature will be available in an upcoming Solaris 10 release. You can read about it here: http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-2271/githb?a=view ZFS Device Replacement Enhancemen

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On February 2, 2010 8:57:32 AM -0800 Orvar Korvar wrote: I love that Sun shares their products for free. Which other big Unix vendor does that? Who's left? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/l

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Frank Cusack wrote: > On February 2, 2010 8:57:32 AM -0800 Orvar Korvar < > knatte_fnatte_tja...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> I love that Sun shares their products for free. Which other big Unix >> vendor does that? >> > > Who's left? > > Pretty sure HP and IBM are still

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

* On 02 Feb 2010, Orvar Korvar wrote: > Ok, I see that the chassi contains a mother board. So never mind that > question. > > Another q: Is it possible to have large chassi with lots of drives, > and the opensolaris in another chassi, how do you connect them both? The J4500 and most other storage

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On February 2, 2010 11:58:17 AM -0600 Tim Cook wrote: On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Frank Cusack wrote: On February 2, 2010 8:57:32 AM -0800 Orvar Korvar < knatte_fnatte_tja...@yahoo.com> wrote: I love that Sun shares their products for free. Which other big Unix vendor does that? Who'

Re: [zfs-discuss] How to grow ZFS on growing pool?

* On 02 Feb 2010, Richard Elling wrote: > > This behaviour has changed twice. Long ago, the pools would autoexpand. > This is a bad thing, by default, so it was changed such that the expansion > would only occur on pool import (around 3-4 years ago). The autoexpand > property allows you to expa

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Frank Cusack wrote: > On February 2, 2010 11:58:17 AM -0600 Tim Cook wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Frank Cusack >> wrote: >> >> On February 2, 2010 8:57:32 AM -0800 Orvar Korvar < >>> knatte_fnatte_tja...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> I love that Sun

Re: [zfs-discuss] Is LSI SAS3081E-R suitable for a ZFS NAS ?

The problems you had with the x8dtn, did the affect the x8dtn+-o that you know of, or just the -6? I'm thinking of building a system around this due to the PCI-X so I can use the AOC-SAT2-MV8. Any thoughts? Thanks. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org __

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 5:41 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: > I see 24 drives in an external chassi. I presume that chassis does only hold > drives, it does not hold a motherboard. > > How do you connect all drives to your OpenSolaris server? Do you place them > next to each other, and then you have thr

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On February 2, 2010 12:08:13 PM -0600 Tim Cook wrote: Not exactly unix, but there's still VMS clusters running around out there with 100% uptime for over 20 years. I wouldn't mind seeing it opened up. Agreed, I'd love to see that opened up. Might even give it new life. __

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best 1.5TB drives for consumer RAID?

On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Simon Breden wrote: > Which consumer-priced 1.5TB drives do people currently recommend? I happened to be looking at the Hitachi product information, and noticed that the Deskstar 7K2000 appears to be supported in RAID configurations. One of the applications listed

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

100% uptime for 20 years? So what makes OpenVMS so much more stable than Unix? What is the difference? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

Also, both of those chassis come in SAS expander version and JBOD. the SAS expander version is the E1 version of the case. With the SAS Expander, and a motherboard using the LSI2008 or LSI1068 chipset, you can attach one cable from the SAS port (SFF8087) to the SAS expander and have all the dr

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

1) SAS HBA seems to be an I/O card which has SAS cable connection. It sits in the OSol server. It is basically just a simple I/O card, right? I hope these cards are cheap? 2) So I can buy a disk chassi with 24 disks, connect all disks to one SAS cable and connect that SAS cable to my OSol serv

Re: [zfs-discuss] Workaround for mpt timeouts in snv_127

If I'm not mistaken then the WD2002FYPS is an enterprise model: WD RE4-GP (RAID Edition, Green Power), so you almost certainly have the firmware that allows (1) the idle time before spindown to be modified with WDIDLE3.EXE and (2) the error reporting time to be modified with WDTLER.EXE. So I e

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best 1.5TB drives for consumer RAID?

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Brandon High wrote: > On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Simon Breden wrote: > > Which consumer-priced 1.5TB drives do people currently recommend? > > I happened to be looking at the Hitachi product information, and > noticed that the Deskstar 7K2000 appears to be s

Re: [zfs-discuss] Zfs over iscsi bad status

Just for the record, using 127.0.0.1 as the target instead of localhost's external IP, the problem didn't show up anymore. Le 16/01/10 15:55, Arnaud Brand a écrit : OK, the third question (localhost transmission failure) should have been posted to storage-discuss. I'll subscribe to this list

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best 1.5TB drives for consumer RAID?

The thing that puts me off the 7K2000 is that it is a 5 platter model. The latest 2TB drives use 4 x 500GB platters. A bit less noise, vibration and heat, in theory :) And the latest 1.5TB drives use only 3 x 500GB platters. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org __

Re: [zfs-discuss] Obtaining zpool volume size from a C coded application.

You can use the DKIOCGMEDIAINFO ioctl to get this information. - Eric -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best 1.5TB drives for consumer RAID?

IIRC the Black range are meant to be the 'performance' models and so are a bit noisy. What's your opinion? And the 2TB models are not cheap either for a home user. The 1TB seem a good price. And from what little I read, it seems you can control the error reporting time with the WDTLER.EXE utilit

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best 1.5TB drives for consumer RAID?

I'm running the 500GB models myself, but I wouldn't say they're overly noisyand I've been doing ZFS/iSCSI/IOMeter/Bonnie++ stress testing with them. They "whine" rather than "click" FYI. -marc On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Simon Breden wrote: > IIRC the Black range are meant to be the 'p

[zfs-discuss] Help needed with zfs send/receive

Hi folks, I'm having (as the title suggests) a problem with zfs send/receive. Command line is like this : pfexec zfs send -Rp tank/t...@snapshot | ssh remotehost pfexec zfs recv -v -F -d tank This works like a charm as long as the snapshot is small enough. When it gets too big (meaning somew

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best 1.5TB drives for consumer RAID?

On February 2, 2010 11:58:12 AM -0800 Simon Breden wrote: IIRC the Black range are meant to be the 'performance' models and so are a bit noisy. What's your opinion? And the 2TB models are not cheap either for a home user. The 1TB seem a good price. And from what little I read, It depends what

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, February 2, 2010 11:26, Richard Elling wrote: > On Feb 2, 2010, at 8:49 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: >> On Tue, February 2, 2010 10:21, Marc Nicholas wrote: >>> I agree wholeheartedlyyou're paying to make the problem "go away" >>> in >>> an >>> expedient manner. That said, I see how mu

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Orvar Korvar < knatte_fnatte_tja...@yahoo.com> wrote: > 100% uptime for 20 years? > > So what makes OpenVMS so much more stable than Unix? What is the > difference? > > > They had/have clustering software that was/is bulletproof. I don't think anyone in the Unix c

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:14 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: > > On Tue, February 2, 2010 11:26, Richard Elling wrote: > > On Feb 2, 2010, at 8:49 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: > >> On Tue, February 2, 2010 10:21, Marc Nicholas wrote: > >>> I agree wholeheartedlyyou're paying to make the problem "

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, February 2, 2010 14:21, Tim Cook wrote: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:14 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: > >> >> On Tue, February 2, 2010 11:26, Richard Elling wrote: >> > On Feb 2, 2010, at 8:49 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: >> >> On Tue, February 2, 2010 10:21, Marc Nicholas wrote: >> >>> I ag

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On 2010-Feb-03 00:12:43 +0800, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: >On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: >> >> Now, I'm sure not ALL drives offered at Newegg could qualify; but the >> question is, how much do I give up by buying an enterprise-grade drive >> from a major manufacturer, compared to the S

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Peter Jeremy < peter.jer...@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote: > > OTOH, if I'm paying 10x the street drive price upfront, plus roughly > the street price annually in "support", I can save a fair amount of > money by just buying a pile of spare drives - when one fails, just

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best 1.5TB drives for consumer RAID?

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Frank Cusack wrote: > > That said, I doubt 2TB drives represent good value for a home user. > They WILL fail more frequently and as a home user you aren't likely > to be keeping multiple spares on hand to avoid warranty replacement > time. I'm having a hard time

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On February 2, 2010 2:17:30 PM -0600 Tim Cook wrote: http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.html interesting page, if somewhat dated. e.g. maybe it wasn't true at the time but don't we now know from the SCO lawsuit that SCO does indeed own "UNIX"? as long as we're OT. :) _

Re: [zfs-discuss] Help needed with zfs send/receive

On Feb 2, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Arnaud Brand wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'm having (as the title suggests) a problem with zfs send/receive. > Command line is like this : > pfexec zfs send -Rp tank/t...@snapshot | ssh remotehost pfexec zfs recv -v -F > -d tank > > This works like a charm as long as the

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

> "bh" == Brandon High writes: > "ok" == Orvar Korvar writes: > "mp" == matthew patton writes: bh> This one holds "only" 24 drives: bh> http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/4U/846/SC846TQ-R900.cfm bh> ($950) This one holds only 20 drives. includes fan, not power

Re: [zfs-discuss] Help needed with zfs send/receive

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > On Feb 2, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Arnaud Brand wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > I'm having (as the title suggests) a problem with zfs send/receive. > > Command line is like this : > > pfexec zfs send -Rp tank/t...@snapshot | ssh remotehost pfexec zfs

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Feb 2, 2010, at 10:54 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: > 100% uptime for 20 years? > > So what makes OpenVMS so much more stable than Unix? What is the difference? Software reliability studies show that the more reliable software is old software that hasn't changed :-) On Feb 2, 2010, at 12:42 PM, D

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On February 2, 2010 4:31:47 PM -0500 Miles Nordin wrote: and FCoE is just dumb if you have IB, honestly. by FCoE are you talking about iSCSI? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-d

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Frank Cusack wrote: On February 2, 2010 4:31:47 PM -0500 Miles Nordin wrote: and FCoE is just dumb if you have IB, honestly. by FCoE are you talking about iSCSI? No. They are different. FCoE uses "raw" ethernet packets and ethernet switches can/should be specially d

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Feb 2, 2010, at 1:56 PM, Frank Cusack wrote: > On February 2, 2010 4:31:47 PM -0500 Miles Nordin wrote: >> and FCoE is just dumb if you have IB, honestly. > > by FCoE are you talking about iSCSI? FCoE is to iSCSI as Netware (IPX/SPX) is to NFS :-) -- richard __

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Feb 2, 2010, at 15:17, Tim Cook wrote: On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Orvar Korvar wrote: 100% uptime for 20 years? So what makes OpenVMS so much more stable than Unix? What is the difference? They had/have clustering software that was/is bulletproof. I don't think anyone in the U

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Feb 2, 2010, at 15:21, Tim Cook wrote: How exactly do you suggest the drive manufacturers make their drives "just work" with every SAS/SATA controller on the market, and all of the quirks they have? You're essentially saying you want the drive manufacturers to do what the storage vendor

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Feb 2, 2010, at 2:56 PM, David Magda wrote: > > On Feb 2, 2010, at 15:17, Tim Cook wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Orvar Korvar wrote: >> >>> 100% uptime for 20 years? >>> >>> So what makes OpenVMS so much more stable than Unix? What is the >>> difference? >>> >> >> They had/h

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

I believe magical unicorn controllers and drives are both bug-free and 100% spec compliant. The leprichorns sell them if you're trying to find them ;) -marc On 2/2/10, David Magda wrote: > On Feb 2, 2010, at 15:21, Tim Cook wrote: > >> How exactly do you suggest the drive manufacturers make thei

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

> "fc" == Frank Cusack writes: fc> by FCoE are you talking about iSCSI? FCoE is an L2 design where ethernet ``pause'' frames can be sent specific to one of the seven CoS levels instead of applying to the entire port, which makes PAUSE abuseable for other purposes than their former one.

Re: [zfs-discuss] zpool status output confusing

On 3/02/10 01:31 AM, Tonmaus wrote: Hi James, am I right to understand that in a nutshell the problem is that if page 80/83 information is present but corrupt/inaccurate/forged (name > it as you want), zfs will not get to down to the GUID? Hi Tonmaus, If page83 information is present, ZFS wi

[zfs-discuss] Version to upgrade to?

I'm currently running: OpenSolaris 2009.06 snv_111b X86 Copyright 2009 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Use is subject to license terms. Assembled 07 May 2009 Or uname shows "SunOS fsfs 5.11 snv_

[zfs-discuss] CR 6811542: that's interesting

Just got a bunch of change notification emails on my report of a zfs send/receive segfault. I can't find this online anywhere though, so I can't check a couple of things. Strange thing though is that although it just changed ownership and then state today in the system, the history records entered

Re: [zfs-discuss] CR 6811542: that's interesting

On 3/02/10 09:31 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: Just got a bunch of change notification emails on my report of a zfs send/receive segfault. I can't find this online anywhere though, so I can't check a couple of things. Strange thing though is that although it just changed ownership and then state

Re: [zfs-discuss] CR 6811542: that's interesting

On Tue, February 2, 2010 17:34, James C. McPherson wrote: > On 3/02/10 09:31 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: >> >> Can anybody who can see the CR online figure out what release build the >> fix was / will be in? Speaking of what build I should upgrade to :-). > > closed as duplicate of > > > 669685

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Miles Nordin wrote: "fc" == Frank Cusack writes: fc> by FCoE are you talking about iSCSI? FCoE is an L2 design where ethernet ``pause'' frames can be sent specific to one of the seven CoS levels instead of applying to the entire port, which makes PAUSE abuseable for ot

Re: [zfs-discuss] Help needed with zfs send/receive

Le 02/02/10 22:49, Tim Cook a écrit : On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Richard Elling wrote: On Feb 2, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Arnaud Brand wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'm having (as the title suggests) a problem with zfs send/receive. > Command line is like this : > pfe

Re: [zfs-discuss] Version to upgrade to?

As the contents of /etc/release indicates, you're using the 2009.06 release of OpenSolaris, which is the current latest "stable" release. It was based on Build 111b of the source base (as shown by the 'snv_111b' moniker in both 'uname -a' and /etc/release ) There will be some updates to this

Re: [zfs-discuss] PCI-E CF adapter?

On January 14, 2010 1:08:56 PM -0500 Frank Cusack wrote: I know this is slightly OT but folks discuss zfs compatible hardware here all the time. :) Has anyone used something like this combination?

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On 2-Feb-10, at 1:54 PM, Orvar Korvar wrote: 100% uptime for 20 years? So what makes OpenVMS so much more stable than Unix? What is the difference? The short answer is that uptimes like that are VMS *cluster* uptimes. Individual hosts don't necessarily have that uptime, but the cluster

Re: [zfs-discuss] verging OT: how to buy J4500 w/o overpriced drives

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 9:52 PM, Toby Thain wrote: > > On 2-Feb-10, at 1:54 PM, Orvar Korvar wrote: > > 100% uptime for 20 years? >> >> So what makes OpenVMS so much more stable than Unix? What is the >> difference? >> > > > The short answer is that uptimes like that are VMS *cluster* uptimes. >

Re: [zfs-discuss] Help needed with zfs send/receive

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Arnaud Brand wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'm having (as the title suggests) a problem with zfs send/receive. > Command line is like this : > pfexec zfs send -Rp tank/t...@snapshot | ssh remotehost pfexec zfs recv -v -F > -d tank > > This works like a charm as long as th

Re: [zfs-discuss] Help needed with zfs send/receive

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Brent Jones wrote: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Arnaud Brand wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> I'm having (as the title suggests) a problem with zfs send/receive. >> Command line is like this : >> pfexec zfs send -Rp tank/t...@snapshot | ssh remotehost pfexec zfs rec

Re: [zfs-discuss] Version to upgrade to?

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: > As the contents of /etc/release indicates, you're using the 2009.06 release > of OpenSolaris, which is the current latest "stable" release. It was based > on Build 111b of the source base (as shown by the 'snv_111b' moniker in both > 'uname -

Re: [zfs-discuss] Version to upgrade to?

On 2/2/2010 8:16 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: As the contents of /etc/release indicates, you're using the 2009.06 release of OpenSolaris, which is the current latest "stable" release. It was based on Build 111b of the source base (as shown by the 'snv_111b' moniker in both 'uname -a' and /etc/relea