“zfs 'userused@' properties” and “'zfs userspace' command” are good enough to
gather usage statistics.
I think I mix that with NetApp. If my memory is correct, we have to set quotas
to get usage statistics under DataOnTAP.
Further, if we can add an ILM-like feature to poll the time-related
info(
On 2012-04-26 2:20, Ian Collins wrote:
On 04/26/12 09:54 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012, Rich Teer wrote:
Perhaps I'm being overly simplistic, but in this scenario, what would
prevent
one from having, on a single file server, /exports/nodes/node[0-15],
and then
having each node
On 26 April, 2012 - Jim Klimov sent me these 1,6K bytes:
> Which reminds me: older Solarises used to have a nifty-looking
> (via descriptions) cachefs, apparently to speed up NFS clients
> and reduce traffic, which we did not get to really use in real
> life. AFAIK Oracle EOLed it for Solaris 11,
On 04/26/12 10:12 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
On 2012-04-26 2:20, Ian Collins wrote:
On 04/26/12 09:54 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012, Rich Teer wrote:
Perhaps I'm being overly simplistic, but in this scenario, what would
prevent
one from having, on a single file server, /exports/nod
On 2012-04-26 14:47, Ian Collins wrote:
> I don't think it even made it into Solaris 10.
Actually, I see the kernel modules available in both Solaris 10,
several builds of OpenSolaris SXCE and an illumos-current.
$ find /kernel/ /platform/ /usr/platform/ /usr/kernel/ | grep -i cachefs
/kernel/fs
On 04/26/12 04:17 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
On 04/26/12 10:12 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
On 2012-04-26 2:20, Ian Collins wrote:
On 04/26/12 09:54 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012, Rich Teer wrote:
Perhaps I'm being overly simplistic, but in this scenario, what would
prevent
one from hav
On 2012-04-26 11:27, Fred Liu wrote:
“zfs 'userused@' properties” and “'zfs userspace' command” are good
enough to gather usage statistics.
...
Since no one is focusing on enabling default user/group quota now, the
temporarily remedy could be a script which traverse all the users/groups
in the
2012/4/26 Fred Liu
>
> ** **
>
> Currently, dedup/compression is pool-based right now, they don’t have the
> granularity on file system or user or group level. There is also a lot of
> improving space in this aspect.
>
Compression is not pool-based, you can control it with the 'compression'
prop
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Deepak Honnalli
wrote:
> cachefs is present in Solaris 10. It is EOL'd in S11.
And for those who need/want to use Linux, the equivalent is FSCache.
--
Freddie Cash
fjwc...@gmail.com
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-
On 4/25/12 10:10 PM, Richard Elling wrote:
On Apr 25, 2012, at 8:30 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
And applications that don't pin the mount points, and can be idled
during the migration. If your migration is due to a dead server, and
you have pending writes, you have no choice but to reboot the
clie
Shared storage is evil (in this context). Corrupt the storage, and you have
no DR.
Now I am confused. We're talking about storage which can be used for
failover, aren't we? In which case we are talking about HA not DR.
That goes for all block-based replication products as well. This is
no
On 4/26/12 2:17 PM, J.P. King wrote:
Shared storage is evil (in this context). Corrupt the storage, and you
have no DR.
Now I am confused. We're talking about storage which can be used for
failover, aren't we? In which case we are talking about HA not DR.
Depends on how you define DR - we h
>
>2012/4/26 Fred Liu
>
>Currently, dedup/compression is pool-based right now, they don't have the
>granularity on file system or user or group level. There is also a lot of
>improving space in this aspect.
>
>Compression is not pool-based, you can control it with the 'compression'
>property on a
Depends on how you define DR - we have shared storage HA in each datacenter
(NetApp cluster), and replication between them in case we lose a datacenter
(all clients on the MAN hit the same cluster unless we do a DR failover). The
latter is what I'm calling DR.
It's what I call HA. DR is wha
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
> On 4/26/12 2:17 PM, J.P. King wrote:
>> I don't know SnapMirror, so I may be mistaken, but I don't see how you
>> can have non-synchronous replication which can allow for seamless client
>> failover (in the general case). Technically this doe
>On 2012-04-26 11:27, Fred Liu wrote:
>> "zfs 'userused@' properties" and "'zfs userspace' command" are good
>> enough to gather usage statistics.
>...
>> Since no one is focusing on enabling default user/group quota now, the
>> temporarily remedy could be a script which traverse all the
>> users
On Apr 26, 2012, at 12:27 AM, Fred Liu wrote:
> “zfs 'userused@' properties” and “'zfs userspace' command” are good enough to
> gather usage statistics.
> I think I mix that with NetApp. If my memory is correct, we have to set
> quotas to get usage statistics under DataOnTAP.
> Further, if we ca
On Apr 25, 2012, at 11:00 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Richard Elling
> wrote:
>> On Apr 25, 2012, at 8:30 PM, Carson Gaspar wrote:
>> Reboot requirement is a lame client implementation.
>
> And lame protocol design. You could possibly migrate read-write NFSv3
>
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Richard Elling
wrote:
> [...]
NFSv4 had migration in the protocol (excluding protocols between
servers) from the get-go, but it was missing a lot (FedFS) and was not
implemented until recently. I've no idea what clients and servers
support it adequately besides
19 matches
Mail list logo
