[zfs-discuss] Pool revcovery from replaced disks.

Is it possible to recover a pool (as it was) from a set of disks that were replaced during a capacity upgrade? ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Pool revcovery from replaced disks.

wow, that's a truly excelent question. If you COULD do it, it might work with a simple import but i have no idea...i'd love to know myself. On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 7:06 AM, Demian Phillips wrote: > Is it possible to recover a pool (as it was) from a set of disks that > were replaced during a c

[zfs-discuss] Very serious performance degradation

Hi, I'm running Opensolaris 2009.06, and I'm facing a serious performance loss with ZFS ! It's a raidz1 pool, made of 4 x 1TB SATA disks : zfs_raidONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c7t3d

Re: [zfs-discuss] Very serious performance degradation

On Tue, 18 May 2010, Philippe wrote: The usage of the pool is for daily backups, with rsync. Some big files are updated simulteanously, in different FS. So, I suspect a huge fragmentation of the files ! Or maybe..., a need of more RAM ?? You forgot to tell us what brand/model of disks you ar

Re: [zfs-discuss] Using WD Green drives?

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 09:40:15AM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > Thus, you'll get good throughput for resilver on these drives pretty > > much in just ONE case: large files with NO deletions. If you're using > > them for write-once/read-many/no-delete archives, then you're OK. > > Anything el

[zfs-discuss] ZFS in campus clusters

I'm building a campus cluster with identical storage in two locations with ZFS mirrors spanning both storage frames. Data will be mirrored using zfs. I'm looking for the best way to add log devices to this campus cluster. I am considering building a separate mirrored zpool of Flash disk that s

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in campus clusters

On 18/05/2010 15:40, John Hoogerdijk wrote: I'm building a campus cluster with identical storage in two locations with ZFS mirrors spanning both storage frames. Data will be mirrored using zfs. I'm looking for the best way to add log devices to this campus cluster. So this is a single pool w

Re: [zfs-discuss] Very serious performance degradation

Hi, The 4 disks are Western Digital ATA 1TB (one is slighlty different) : 1 x ATA-WDC WD10EACS-00D-1A01-931.51GB 3 x ATA-WDC WD10EARS-00Y-0A80-931.51GB I've done lots of tests (speed tests + SMART reports) with each of these 4 disk on another system (another computer, running Windows 2003 x64)

Re: [zfs-discuss] Very serious performance degradation

Howdy, Is dedup on? I was having some pretty strange problems including slow performance when dedup was on. Disabling dedup helped out a whole bunch. My system only has 4gig of ram, so that may have played a part too. Good luck! John On May 18, 2010, at 7:51 AM, Philippe wrote: > Hi, > > T

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in campus clusters

> On 18/05/2010 15:40, John Hoogerdijk wrote: > > I'm building a campus cluster with identical > storage in two locations with ZFS mirrors spanning > both storage frames. Data will be mirrored using zfs. > I'm looking for the best way to add log devices to > this campus cluster. > So this is a sin

Re: [zfs-discuss] Very serious performance degradation

On 18 May, 2010 - Philippe sent me these 6,0K bytes: > Hi, > > The 4 disks are Western Digital ATA 1TB (one is slighlty different) : > 1 x ATA-WDC WD10EACS-00D-1A01-931.51GB > 3 x ATA-WDC WD10EARS-00Y-0A80-931.51GB > > I've done lots of tests (speed tests + SMART reports) with each of these 4

Re: [zfs-discuss] Very serious performance degradation

I note in your iostat data below that one drive (sd5) consistently performs MUCH worse than the others, even when doing less work. -Original Message- From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of John J Balestrini Sent: Tuesday, M

Re: [zfs-discuss] Very serious performance degradation

On Tue, 18 May 2010, Philippe wrote: The 4 disks are Western Digital ATA 1TB (one is slighlty different) : 1 x ATA-WDC WD10EACS-00D-1A01-931.51GB 3 x ATA-WDC WD10EARS-00Y-0A80-931.51GB I've done lots of tests (speed tests + SMART reports) with each of these 4 disk on another system (another co

Re: [zfs-discuss] Ideal SATA/SAS Controllers for ZFS

Nice write-up, Marc. Aren't the SuperMicro cards their funny "UIO" form factor? Wouldn't want someone buying a card that won't work in a standard chassis. -marc On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Marc Bevand wrote: > The LSI SAS1064E slipped through the cracks when I built the list. > This is a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Ideal SATA/SAS Controllers for ZFS

Marc Nicholas gmail.com> writes: > > Nice write-up, Marc.Aren't the SuperMicro cards their funny "UIO" form > factor? Wouldn't want someone buying a card that won't work in a standard > chassis. Yes, 4 or the 6 Supermicro cards are UIO cards. I added a warning about it. Thanks. -mrb __

Re: [zfs-discuss] Ideal SATA/SAS Controllers for ZFS

A really great alternative to the UIO cards for those who don't want the headache of modifying the brackets or cases is the Intel SASUC8I * * * * *This is a rebranded LSI SAS3081E-R* * * *It can be flashed with the LSI IT firmware from the LSI website and is physically identical to the LSI card. I

[zfs-discuss] spares bug: explain to me status of bug report.

Hi. In bugster i found bug about spares. I can to reproduce the problem. but developer set status "Not a defect". Why? http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6905317 Thanks. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org h

Re: [zfs-discuss] spares bug: explain to me status of bug report.

Hi-- The scenario in the bug report below is that the pool is exported. The spare can't kick in if the pool is exported. It looks like the issue reported in this CR's See Also section, CR 6887163 is still open. Thanks, Cindy On 05/18/10 11:19, eXeC001er wrote: Hi. In bugster i found bug abo

Re: [zfs-discuss] spares bug: explain to me status of bug report.

6887163 11-Closed:Duplicate (Closed) 6945634 11-Closed:Duplicate (Closed) 2010/5/18 Cindy Swearingen > Hi-- > > The scenario in the bug report below is that the pool is exported. > > The spare can't kick in if the pool is exported. It looks like the > issue reported in this CR's See Also se

Re: [zfs-discuss] spares bug: explain to me status of bug report.

I think the remaining CR is this one: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6911420 cs On 05/18/10 12:08, eXeC001er wrote: 6887163 11-Closed:Duplicate (Closed) 6945634 11-Closed:Duplicate (Closed) 2010/5/18 Cindy Swearingen >

Re: [zfs-discuss] Ideal SATA/SAS Controllers for ZFS

Thomas Burgess gmail.com> writes: > > A really great alternative to the UIO cards for those who don't want the > headache of modifying the brackets or cases is the Intel SASUC8I > > This is a rebranded LSI SAS3081E-R > > It can be flashed with the LSI IT firmware from the LSI website and > is p

[zfs-discuss] Is dedupe ready for prime time?

I've been reading this list for a while, there's lots of discussion about b134 and deduplication. I see some stuff about snapshots not being destroyed, and maybe some recovery issues. What I'd like to know is, is ZFS with deduplication stable enough to use? I have two NFS servers, each running

Re: [zfs-discuss] Is dedupe ready for prime time?

- "Paul Choi" skrev: > I've been reading this list for a while, there's lots of discussion > about b134 and deduplication. I see some stuff about snapshots not > being > destroyed, and maybe some recovery issues. What I'd like to know is, > is > ZFS with deduplication stable enough to use?

Re: [zfs-discuss] Hashing files rapidly on ZFS

Thanks Dan, this is exactly what I had in mind (hashing the block checksums). You convinced me to do it independently from zfs. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.o

Re: [zfs-discuss] Is dedupe ready for prime time?

Roy, Thanks for the info. Yeah, the bug you mentioned is pretty critical. In terms of SSDs, I have Intel X25-M for L2ARC and X25-E for ZIL. And the host has 24G RAM. I'm just waiting for that "2010.03" release or whatever we want to call it when it's released... -Paul On 5/18/10 12:49 PM, R

Re: [zfs-discuss] Is dedupe ready for prime time?

- "Paul Choi" skrev: > Roy, > > Thanks for the info. Yeah, the bug you mentioned is pretty critical. > In > terms of SSDs, I have Intel X25-M for L2ARC and X25-E for ZIL. And the > host has 24G RAM. I'm just waiting for that "2010.03" release or > whatever we want to call it when it's relea

Re: [zfs-discuss] Pool revcovery from replaced disks.

On 2010-May-18 19:06:11 +0800, Demian Phillips wrote: >Is it possible to recover a pool (as it was) from a set of disks that >were replaced during a capacity upgrade? If no other writes occurred during the capacity upgrade then I'd suspect it would be possible. The transaction numbers would stil

[zfs-discuss] New SSD options

I'm looking for alternatives SSD options to the Intel X25-E and the ZEUS IOPS. The ZEUS IOPS would probably cost as much as my entire current disk system (80 15k SAS drives)- and that's just silly. The Intel is much less expensive, and while fast- pales in comparison to the ZEUS. I've allocate

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS in campus clusters

> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of John Hoogerdijk > > I'm building a campus cluster with identical storage in two locations > with ZFS mirrors spanning both storage frames. Data will be mirrored > using zfs. I'm looking for th

Re: [zfs-discuss] Very serious performance degradation

How full is your filesystem? Give us the output of "zfs list" You might be having a hardware problem, or maybe it's extremely full. Also, if you have dedup enabled, on a 3TB filesystem, you surely want more RAM. I don't know if there's any rule of thumb you could follow, but offhand I'd say 16G

[zfs-discuss] scsi messages and mpt warning in log - harmless, or indicating a problem?

This afternoon, messages like the following started appearing in /var/adm/messages: May 18 13:46:37 fs8 scsi: [ID 365881 kern.info] /p...@0,0/pci8086,2...@1/pci15d9,a...@0 (mpt0): May 18 13:46:37 fs8 Log info 0x3108 received for target 5. May 18 13:46:37 fs8 scsi_status=0x0, ioc_stat

[zfs-discuss] zhist good enough for usage

The purpose of zhist is to simplify access to past snapshots. For example, if you "zhist ls somefile" then the results will be: A list of all the previous snapshot versions of that file or directory. No need to find the right .zfs directory, or check to see which ones have changed. Some reasona

Re: [zfs-discuss] New SSD options

40k IOPS sounds like "best in case, you'll never see it in the real world" marketing to me. There are a few benchmarks if you google and they all seem to indicate the performance is probably +/- 10% of an intel x25-e. I would personally trust intel over one of these drives. Is it even possible

Re: [zfs-discuss] New SSD options

Don wrote: > > With that in mind- Is anyone using the new OCZ Vertex 2 SSD's as a ZIL? > > They're claiming 50k IOPS (4k Write- Aligned), 2 million hour MTBF, TRIM > support, etc. That's more write IOPS than the ZEUS (40k IOPS, $) but at > half the price of an Intel X25-E (3.3k IOPS, $400).

Re: [zfs-discuss] New SSD options

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Don wrote: > With that in mind- Is anyone using the new OCZ Vertex 2 SSD's as a ZIL? The current Sandforce drives out don't have an ultra-capacitor on them, so they could lose data if the system crashed. There are supposed to be enterprise class drives based on th