I was really hoping for some option other than ZIL_DISABLE, but finally gave up
the fight. Some people suggested NFSv4 helping over NFSv3 but it didn't... at
least not enough to matter.
ZIL_DISABLE was the solution, sadly. I'm running B43/X86 and hoping to get up
to 48 or so soonish (I BFU'd
rks, though). Currently I just grep the
commit log for the last merge from trunk (I use a consistent log
message so this is easy).
svn log https://svn.example.com/project/branches/ben | grep 'Merged
from trunk'
(note last merged revision)
svn merge -r$LAST_MERGED_REV:HEAD https://svn.ex
here, but lots and lots of
fsync(2)s would result in no useful versioning.
Presumably you'd create a different fs for your database, turning the
versioning property off. You'd be likely to want to adjust other fs
parameters anyway, judging from some recent posts discussing how to
get t
I've got a Thumper doing nothing but serving NFS. Its using B43 with
zil_disabled. The system is being consumed in waves, but by what I don't know.
Notice vmstat:
3 0 0 25693580 2586268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 926 91 703 0 25 75
21 0 0 25693580 2586268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
eric kustarz wrote:
So i'm guessing there's lots of files being created over NFS in one
particular dataset?
We should figure out how many creates/second you are doing over NFS (i
should have put a timeout on the script). Here's a real simple one
(from your snoop it looked like you're only do
Spencer Shepler wrote:
Good to hear that you have figured out what is happening, Ben.
For future reference, there are two commands that you may want to
make use of in observing the behavior of the NFS server and individual
filesystems.
There is the trusty, nfsstat command. In this case, you
Bill Moore wrote:
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 12:15:27AM -0800, Ben Rockwood wrote:
Clearly ZFS file creation is just amazingly heavy even with ZIL
disabled. If creating 4,000 files in a minute squashes 4 2.6Ghz Opteron
cores we're in big trouble in the longer term. In the meantime I
to) - is it a thumper?
It's not clear why NFS-enforced synchronous semantics would induce
different behavior than the same
load to a local ZFS.
ek> Actually i forgot he had 'zil_disable' turned on, so it won't matter in
ek> this case.
Ben, are you
Stuart Glenn wrote:
A little back story: I have a Norco DS-1220, a 12 bay SATA box, it is
connected to eSATA (SiI3124) via PCI-X two drives are straight
connections, then the other two ports go to 5x multipliers within the
box. My needs/hopes for this was using 12 500GB drives and ZFS make a
v
Andrew Summers wrote:
> So, I've read the wikipedia, and have done a lot of research on google about
> it, but it just doesn't make sense to me. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you
> can take a simple 5/10/20 GB drive or whatever size, and turn it into
> exabytes of storage space?
>
> If that is n
Brad Plecs wrote:
I had a user report extreme slowness on a ZFS filesystem mounted over NFS over the weekend.
After some extensive testing, the extreme slowness appears to only occur when a ZFS filesystem is mounted over NFS.
One example is doing a 'gtar xzvf php-5.2.0.tar.gz'... over NFS onto
Hi,
Does anybody know what is the latest status with ClearCase support for ZFS?
I noticed this from IBM:
http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=0&uid=swg21155708
I would like to make sure someone has installed and tested it before
recommending to a customer.
Regards,
Nissim Ben-
How can I remove a device or a partition from a pool.
NOTE: The devices are not mirrored or raidz
Thanks
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zf
101 - 113 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
