Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs streams & data corruption

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 01:17:47PM -0600, Nicolas Williams wrote: > > I don't think there's any way to ask svc.config to pause. > > Well, IIRC that's not quite right. You can pstop svc.startd, gently > kill (i.e., not with SIGKILL) svc.co

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs streams & data corruption

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote: > > > > > > > Hot Backup? > > > > # Connect to the database > > sqlite3 db $dbfile > > # Lock the database, copy and commit or rollback > > if {[catch {db transaction immediate {file copy $dbfile ${dbfile}.bak}} > res]} { > >puts "Ba

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motherboard for home zfs/solaris file server

Given the current state of AMD, I think we all know that's not likely. Why cut into the revenue of your server line chips when you don't have to? Right? --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Motherboard for home zfs/solaris file server

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Brandon High wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Tim wrote: > > Given the current state of AMD, I think we all know that's not likely. > Why > > cut into the revenue of your server line chips when you don't have to? > >

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can VirtualBox run a 64 bit guests on 32 bit host

Then you would be looking for AMD-V extensions. VT is only for Intel chips. I highly doubt a 3200+ has the AMD-V extensions. --Tim On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: > I've seen some talk on vmware forums indicating it is possible to run > 64 bit guests on a 32

Re: [zfs-discuss] GSoC 09 zfs ideas?

d arises. > That's not entirely true. Maybe it will put it to shame at streaming sequential I/O. The 10k drives will still wipe the floor with any modern 7200rpm drive for random IO and seek times. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs related google summer of code ideas - your vote

ll most likely require answering daily/weekly technical > questions, ideally being on irc and having patience. On top of this I'll be > available to help as much as technically possible, keep the student > motivated and the projects on schedule. > > ./Christopher > > I kn

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs related google summer of code ideas - your vote

t, it's my opinion, years of reading this list haven't changed it). As it stands, either you put your workload where the disks are, or you're wasting disk doing raid twice. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Nexsan SATABeast and ZFS

ing else. If you do, put the zfs filesystem directly on top without software raid and be done with it. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] reboot when copying large amounts of data

lt;http://www.provantage.com/lsi-logic-lsi00117%7E7LSIG03X.htm> > > > > I believe the MCP55's SATA controllers are actually PCI-E based. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] reboot when copying large amounts of data

anyone though :) ANYWAYS, a bit of research goes a long ways :) You'll find the various pci device ID's towards the bottom. http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/zfs-crypto/phase2/usr/src/pkgdefs/SUNWmegasas/postinstall?&r=6542 Looks like there's a TON of supported cards.

Re: [zfs-discuss] reboot when copying large amounts of data

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Miles Nordin wrote: > > "c" == Miles Nordin writes: > > c> Is there some file in OpenSolaris against which I can > c> cross-reference this? or...really, just use instead of > c> pci.ids, since only the PCI ID not the description is enough > > I f

Re: [zfs-discuss] reboot when copying large amounts of data

5 or 6. See: http://www.lsi.com/storage_home/products_home/host_bus_adapters/software_solutions/integrated_raid/ IT==initiator. In other words it should function as a regular non-RAID adapter or as a target. Initiator vs. target depends entirely on the driver bound to the card. See: http://www.super

Re: [zfs-discuss] Freezing OpenSolaris with ZFS

2.00G 874G 2.00G - > > rpool/export 172M 874G19K /export > > rpool/export/home 172M 874G21K /export/home > > rpool/swap2.00G 876G24K - > > tank 1.81T 6.17T 32.2K /tank > > tank/data 1.81T 6.17T 1.77T /data > > tank/public-share 34.9K 6.17T 34.9K /public-share Might also be helpful to provide the version of Opensolaris you're on, as well as the zfs version. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do I "mirror" zfs rpool, x4500?

. > > > Any ideas why the mapping is not matching s10 or the docs? > > As far as I read, the docs are giving you an example. They're not > declaring that yours will be the same. > Just an observation, but it sort of defeats the purpose of buying sun hardware with sun software if you can't even get a "this is how your drives will map" out of the deal... --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do I "mirror" zfs rpool, x4500?

On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > Tim wrote: > >> >> Just an observation, but it sort of defeats the purpose of buying sun >> hardware with sun software if you can't even get a "this is how your drives >> will map" out of the

Re: [zfs-discuss] How do I "mirror" zfs rpool, x4500?

On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Neal Pollack wrote: > On 03/18/09 10:43 AM, Tim wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Richard Elling > wrote: > >> Tim wrote: >> >>> >>> Just an observation, but it sort of defeats the purpose of buying su

Re: [zfs-discuss] Zpools on USB & zpool.cache

ve what you would like to see is zfs automatically scan if the cache is invalid vs. requiring manual intervention, no? It would seem to me this would be rather sane behavior and a legitimate request to add this as an option. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can this be done?

#2: raidz2 isn't always "wise" to choose. It's a matter of performance, space, security requirements. 7+1 is fine for raidz1. If he was pushing 10 data disks that'd be another story. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can this be done?

On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Bob Friesenhahn < bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote: > On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Tim wrote: > >> >> #1: yes, there is harm as he may very well run into inconsistent >> performance >> which is a complete PITA to track down

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can this be done?

AID6, but Sun offers ZFS's raidz2 so it does not > matter. > > I did NOT say nobody recommends using raid5. What I *DID* say was that NOBODY supports using raid-5 and raid-6 under a single pool of storage. Which IBM array are you referring to that is supported with RAI

Re: [zfs-discuss] Can this be done?

ID6, but Sun offers ZFS's raidz2 so it does not > matter. > > Oh, and NetApp supporting RAID5? Have any other good jokes for us? --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] j4200 drive carriers

's $500 (so they're apparently made entirely of diamond and platinum). In Sun marketing's defense, that was a great way of making the drive prices seem reasonable. http://sunsolve.sun.com/handbook_pub/validateUser.do?target=Systems/J4200/components --Tim ___

Re: [zfs-discuss] Zfs using java

time now. > > > > Is any one is Jacksonville, Florida?? > ev0l top poster! I'm assuming he means the web interface, but I could be crazy. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Error ZFS-8000-9P

g me to read a document for additional > information, and then denying me access. > On that front... I'm wondering if we could get a project going to mirror all of those pages to a non-sun hosted site. Just in case that IBM thing really does come to fruition :) --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Error ZFS-8000-9P

read a document for additional >> information, and then denying me access. >> > > Yes, this sucks. Presumably if you paid for a support contract you could > see the additional information. > > Bob > I have a support contract and cannot see it. I'm assuming it&#x

Re: [zfs-discuss] [storage-discuss] Supermicro SAS/SATA controllers?

rds bracket. Now if it's got external facing ports you'll be in trouble, but for an internal sas card, it's really not a big deal. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Supermicro AOC-SASLP-MV8

outh. I'm not going to buy something just to throw it in the garbage (if it can't handle hot swap it'd go right into the garbage vs. being re-used). --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] How recoverable is an 'unrecoverable error'?

e systems don't detect the corruption, or require lots of work to recover, does not make it OK for zfs to do the same. Excuses are just that, excuses. He isn't asking for an excuse, he's asking for an answer. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] sharenfs settings ignored

00.113 > Exports list on 192.168.100.113: > /n01p01/nfs01 @192.168.254.0/24 @192.168.0.0/24 > > Time to file a bug report? Or is there already one for this issue? > Searching "nfs subnet" on defect.opensolaris.org returns nothing. > &

Re: [zfs-discuss] How recoverable is an 'unrecoverable error'?

ed an error. A successful attempt >> to >>correct the error was made using a replicated copy of the data. >>Data on the pool is unaffected. >> > > I think this is on the right track. But the repair method, "replicated > copy > of the data,&q

Re: [zfs-discuss] How recoverable is an 'unrecoverable error'?

..@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ > GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ > Because the CXX wouldn't have a frigging clue what you were talking about if you started referencing collections of bits? "We need to bu

Re: [zfs-discuss] What causes slow performance under load?

ges? Might make sense to disable write/sync in > > /etc/system to be sure. > > So far I haven't been able to get an answer to that question from > Netapp. I'm assuming that it acks it as soon as it's in the Netapp's > non-volatile write cache. > IIRC, it shou

Re: [zfs-discuss] What causes slow performance under load?

> > -- richard > > So does that mean you don't work for Sun anymore...? --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] What causes slow performance under load?

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Richard Elling wrote: > Tim wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Richard Elling >> > richard.ell...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >>I see no evidence of an I/O or file system bottleneck here. While

Re: [zfs-discuss] Peculiarities of COW over COW?

not just serve NFS off the filer to the Solaris box? ZFS on a LUN served off a filer seems to make about as much sense as sticking a ZFS based lun behind a v-filer (although the latter might actually might make sense in a world where it were supported

Re: [zfs-discuss] Raidz vdev size... again.

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 8:25 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > > I do not believe you can achieve five 9s with current consumer disk > drives for an extended period, say >1 year. > Just to pipe up, while very few vendors can pull it off, we've seen five 9's with Hitach

Re: [zfs-discuss] Raidz vdev size... again.

systems. Then there's the little issue with you ignoring parity when you quote "a disk drives life". I'll stick with the 3 year life cycle of the system followed by a hot migration to new storage, thank you very much. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] Raidz vdev size... again.

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:12 PM, Bob Friesenhahn < bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote: > On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Tim wrote: > > I'll stick with the 3 year life cycle of the system followed by a hot >> migration to new storage, thank you very much. >> > > Once

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs filesystem mirroring

d as in raid-1, or mirrored as in replication? You can do zfs send/recieve to replicate filesystems, and you can crank the frequency way up so that it's near real-time. --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.o

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS, difference in reported available space?

rite user data to parity disks/devices. I suppose you could complain that the zpool list command should account for user data as well as parity data being subtracted from the entire pool, bug regardless, you shouldn't be using zpool list to track your data usage as it doesn't "hide" pari

[zfs-discuss] Solaris 8/07 Zfs Raidz NFS dies during iozone test on client host

# Sets the maximum version of the NFS protocol that will be registered # and offered by the server. The default is 4. NFS_SERVER_VERSMAX=3 At this point I have no clue what the issue is On the NFS server I've successfully ran 'iozone' 2X. I've also ran scrub on this

Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz and compression, difficulties

Why not create a sample dataset and throw some large .txt files out there and see what happens? That way you'll know for certain if there's some bug you're hitting, or if it's just not applicable to your current dataset. On 1/27/08, Joachim Pihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, 26 Jan 200

Re: [zfs-discuss] ? Removing a disk from a ZFS Storage Pool

You weren't dreaming, that's been a request for quite some time, and is being worked on. I couldn't tell you the status though. On 1/28/08, Tim Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi > > my understanding is that you cannot remove a disk from a ZFS storage pool

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS configuration for a thumper

zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > I'd take a look at bonnie++ http://www.sunfreeware.com/programlistintel10.html#bonnie++ --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] mounting a copy of a zfs pool /file system while orginal is still active

ng thought. I guess what you'd have to have is an import flag that allows you to "import as". So you could: zpool import --import-as yourpool.backup yourpool I definitely see why you'd want to do it. I haven't a clue if you can :) --Tim ___

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS+ config for 8 drives, mostly reads

On 2/5/08, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > I posted in the Solaris install forum as well about the fileserver I'm > building for media files but wanted to ask more specific questions about zfs > here. The setup is 8x500GB SATAII drives to start and down the road another > 4x750 SATAII dri

Re: [zfs-discuss] 3ware support

On 2/12/08, Johan Kooijman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Goodmorning all, > > can anyone confirm that 3ware raid controllers are indeed not working > under Solaris/OpenSolaris? I can't seem to find it in the HCL. > > We're now using a 3Ware 9550SX as a S-ATA RAID controller. The > original plan wa

Re: [zfs-discuss] 3ware support

On 2/13/08, Tom Buskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Are you using the Supermicro in Solaris or OpenSolaris? Which version? > 64 bit or 32 bits? > > I'm asking because I recently went through a number of SCSI cards that are > in the HCL as supported, but do not have 64 bit drivers. So they only

Re: [zfs-discuss] Performance with Sun StorageTek 2540

.7G 267G134143 16.6M > 17.6M > c4t600A0B800039C9B50AB047B457ADd0 - - 66141 > 8.30M 17.6M > c4t600A0B800039C9B50AB447B4595Fd0 - - 66141 > 8.29M 17.6M > > -----

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS vs. Novell NSS

On 2/28/08, Christine Tran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Alan Perry wrote: > > Alan Perry wrote: > > > > > I gave a talk on ZFS at a local user group meeting this evening. > > What I didn't > > > know going in was that the meeting was hosted at a Novell consulting > > shop. I got > > > asked a

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS vs. Novell NSS

On 2/28/08, Alan Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tim wrote: > > > Don't forget, ZFS is open source, and can be ported to any other > > number of platforms as well. It's also currently supported on FreeBSD > > 7.0, and is basically production ready on t

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS vs. Novell NSS

On 2/28/08, Alan Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Tim wrote: > > > Don't forget, ZFS is open source, and can be ported to any other > > number of platforms as well. It's also currently supported on FreeBSD > > 7.0, and is basically production ready o

Re: [zfs-discuss] Newbie question removing disk

On 3/3/08, John R. Sconiers II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > New user question. In ZFS (solaris 10) are we able to "evacuate" a disk > if I later decide to remove it from a ZFS pool. I know the answer use > to be no but I'm not sure if that has changed or will change. > JOHN > > -- > *

Re: [zfs-discuss] Newbie question removing disk

On 3/3/08, John R. Sconiers II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > New user question. In ZFS (solaris 10) are we able to "evacuate" a disk > if I later decide to remove it from a ZFS pool. I know the answer use > to be no but I'm not sure if that has changed or will change. > JOHN > > -- > *

Re: [zfs-discuss] What is likely the best way to accomplish this task?

On 3/4/08, Brian Hechinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I realize I can't remove devices from a vdev, which, well, sucks and > all, but I'm not going to complain about that. ;) > > I have 4x500G disks in a RAIDZ. I'd like to repurpose one of them as > I'm finding that all that space isn't really

Re: [zfs-discuss] Round-robin NFS protocol with ZFS

o/zfs-discuss He wants to mount the ZFS filesystem (I'm assuming off of a backend SAN storage array) to two heads, then round-robin NFS connections between the heads to essentially *double* the throughput. >From what he's described here, it isn't going to work. ZFS isn&#

Re: [zfs-discuss] Cpying between pools

On 3/14/08, Vahid Moghaddasi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks for your reply Jim, > The current pool is consist of a few EMC LUNs and we are moving the entire > pool to the new EMC storage with different devices. > What would be my old or new device? Here is some parts of zpool status: > > NAM

Re: [zfs-discuss] Cpying between pools

On 3/14/08, Vahid Moghaddasi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:26 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > replace your LUNs one at a time: > > > > zpool replace -f rd_01 c4t600604818787015052524435354

Re: [zfs-discuss] 7-disk raidz achieves 430 MB/s reads and 220 MB/s writes on a $1320 box

> Woah, why would you spend 1600$ on that tower? For a LOT less money, you can have more drives, and all hot swappable. http://www.supermicro.com/products/chassis/3U/933/SC933T-R760.cfm I paired one of those with a pair of the supermicro 8-port sata cards. Works like a charm. --Tim

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS on Sun X2100?

p://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > Assuming you don't need their standard enterprise support, your plan is to await the release of opensolaris snv_b87. This will include the zfs boot bits, so that you can use zfs as your root filesystem. --Tim ___

[zfs-discuss] cifs permissions

Can someone please enlighten me what exactly it is I need to do to get access to this file? I can't copy/cut this file currently from a cifs share, when coming in as user "r00t". If I right click it and check the windows ACL's, it says I have full control, as does everyone, and the group cifs (w

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS performance lower than expected

/mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > Have you considered building one solaris system and using its iSCSI target? When it comes to software iSCSI, you tend to get VERY different results when moving from one platform to the next. In my experience, L

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS performance lower than expected

On 3/20/08, Kyle McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Bart Smaalders wrote: > > On 4 commodity 500 GB SATA drives set up w/ RAID Z, my 2.6 Ghz dual > > core AMD box sustains > > 100+ MB/sec read or write it happily saturates a GB nic w/ multiple > > concurrent reads over > > Samba. > > > Th

Re: [zfs-discuss] Wired behavour of MS-Excel file on a Solaris 10 8/07 Samba Share

what version of office? I remember a similar issue with office 2k7 and a netapp filer. It ended up being a bug in office that ms had a patch for. On 3/21/08, Lin Xiao Song <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am deploying a new file server using Samba+ZFS running on Solaris 10 8/07 > which play as

Re: [zfs-discuss] uncorrectable error during zfs send; what are the right next steps?

On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Matt Ingenthron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One more scrub later, and now the snapshot I was trying to send, > @laptopmigration, is now showing errors but the errors on the old snapshots > are gone, since I destroyed the snapshots. > > Is this expected behavior?

Re: [zfs-discuss] not able to create file greate than 2gb on zfs file system over NFS

What are you using to create the files? Is this x86/32bit solaris 9, or 64bit sparc? On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Sachin Palav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Team, > I have a file server running solaris 10 (X86), I have ZFS on the file > server and the file systems are exported using

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practices for ZFS plaiding

What you want to do should actually be pretty easy. On the thumper's, just do your normal raid-z/raid-z2, and export them to the solaris box. Then on the solaris box, you just create a zpool, and add the LUN's one at a time. No raid at all. The system should just stripe across all of the LUN's a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Best practices for ZFS plaiding

die since > the data would be across all the thumpers. > > Tim wrote: > > What you want to do should actually be pretty easy. On the thumper's, > > just do your normal raid-z/raid-z2, and export them to the solaris box. > > Then on the solaris box, you just create a

Re: [zfs-discuss] Problem importing pool from BSD 7.0 into Nexenta

What's on the rest of the disk? On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Michael Armbrust < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I have a pool of four raidz-ed drives that I created in BSD that I would > like to move to a box with a solaris kernel. However, when I run zpool > import it displays the fo

Re: [zfs-discuss] Problem importing pool from BSD 7.0 into Nexenta

d1 On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Michael Armbrust < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 30, 2008, at 7:42 PM, Tim wrote: > > What's on the rest of the disk? > > > Nothing, when I created the pool I used the entire disk. > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 7:25 PM,

Re: [zfs-discuss] Simple monitoring of ZFS pools, email alerts?

On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 4:23 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Been goggling around on this to no avail... > > We're hoping to soon put into production an x4500 with a big ZFS pool, > replacing a (piece of junk) NAS head which replaced our old trusty NetApp. > > In each of those older boxes, we con

Re: [zfs-discuss] OpenSolaris ZFS NAS Setup

On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 12:25 AM, Jonathan Loran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This guy seems to have had lots of fun with iSCSI :) > > http://web.ivy.net/~carton/oneNightOfWork/20061119-carton.html > > > > > This is scaring the h

Re: [zfs-discuss] OpenSolaris ZFS NAS Setup

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Christine Tran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Crazy question here... but has anyone tried this with say, a QLogic > > hardware iSCSI card? Seems like it would solve all your issues. Granted, > > they aren't free like the software stack, but if you're trying to s

Re: [zfs-discuss] LZO compression?

On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Bob Friesenhahn < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 12 Apr 2008, roland wrote: > > > > i'm really wondering that interest in alternative compression > > schemes is that low, especially due to the fact that lzo seems to > > compress better and be faster than lzjb.

Re: [zfs-discuss] 24-port SATA controller options?

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Will Murnane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:25 AM, Bob Friesenhahn > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For obvious reasons (redundancy and throughput), it makes more sense > > to purchase two 12 port cards. I see that there is an option to

Re: [zfs-discuss] 24-port SATA controller options?

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:09 AM, Maurice Volaski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have 16 disks in RAID 5 and I'm not worried. > > >I'm sure you're already aware, but if not, 22 drives in a raid-6 is > >absolutely SUICIDE when using SATA disks. 12 disks is the upper end of > what > >you want even

Re: [zfs-discuss] 24-port SATA controller options?

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Keith Bierman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Apr 15, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Tim wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:09 AM, Maurice Volaski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I have 16 disks in RAID 5 and I'

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS raidz write performance:what to expect from SATA drives on ICH9R (AHCI)

On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Bob Friesenhahn < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Pascal Vandeputte wrote: > > > > At the moment I'm seeing read speeds of 200MB/s on a ZFS raidz > > filesystem consisting of c1t0d0s3, c1t1d0 and c1t2d0 (I'm booting > > from a small 700MB slice on

Re: [zfs-discuss] Cifs and Solaris

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Zlotnick Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The in-kernel CIFS stack is not in Solaris 10 Update 5, > and will never appear in any Solaris 10 update, because > the kernel changes required are too invasive. You need > OpenSolaris. > > -- Fred > > > Fred, Correct m

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Brian Hechinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:25:34PM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote: > > > > > >I'm running a 3124 with snv81 and haven't had a single problem with it. > > >Whatever problems you ran into have likely been resolved. > > > > > Th

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Brandon High <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm looking on their site and don't even see any data on the 3134... this > > *something new* that hasn't

Re: [zfs-discuss] Indiana vs Nevada (for ZFS file server)

asy choice. Personally I chose option 3 and loaded nexenta. You get regular updates, but it still *stable* (or has been for me to date). --Tim On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Christopher Gibbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Pretty much what the subject says. I'm wondering which platf

Re: [zfs-discuss] Indiana vs Nevada (for ZFS file server)

Yup. They were the first to do so (as far as I know). --Tim On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Christopher Gibbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One other thing I noticed is that OpenSolaris (.com) will > automatically install ZFS root for you. Will Nexenta do that? > > On Fri,

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS: A general question

very least. Because of this, they aren't ever copying data off of the array and back on, and no destruction is needed. You just add a raidz/raidz2 at a time striped across your 14 disks (or however large the tray of disks is). The gui is a web interface. Just point your browser at https://localhost:6789 --Tim ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] zfs hangs after disk failure

> zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > Is there a way to tell zfs to manually fail it vs. physically removing the drive? Having access to physically remove a disk isn&#x

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Project Hardware

USED hardware is your friend :) He wasn't quoting new prices. On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 8:54 PM, Brandon High <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > One thought on this:for a small server, which is unlikely to ever be > CPU

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS Hardware Check, OS X Compatibility, NEWBIE!!

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Darryl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is my first post here, and i hope it is ok that i posted in this > thread. > > I have been doing a bit of reading on the solaris platforms, and seem to be > inclined to try out the open solaris os or solaris 10. My only worry

Re: [zfs-discuss] Get your SXCE on ZFS here!

On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Kyle McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > andrew wrote: > > With the release of the Nevada build 90 binaries, it is now possible to > install SXCE directly onto a ZFS root filesystem, and also put ZFS swap onto > a ZFS filesystem without worrying about having it de

Re: [zfs-discuss] SATA controller suggestion

s-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > I'm still a fan of the marvell based supermicro card. I run two of them in my fileserver. AOC-SAT2-MV8 http://www.supermicro.com/products/accessories/addon/AOC-SAT2

Re: [zfs-discuss] SATA controller suggestion

On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Joe Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Peeyush Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >> > >>

Re: [zfs-discuss] SATA controller suggestion

> This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > That has FAR, FAR more to do with the drives

Re: [zfs-discuss] Filesystem for each home dir - 10,000 users?

For the cifs side of the house, I think it would be in Sun's best interest to work with a third party vendor like NTP software. The quota functionality they provide is far more robust than anything I expect we'll ever see come directly with zfs. And rightly so... it's what they specialize in. ht

Re: [zfs-discuss] SATA controller suggestion

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Tom Buskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 16:23, Tom Buskey > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I have an AMD 939 MB w/ Nvidea on the motherboard > > and 4 500GB SATA II drives in a RAIDZ. > > ... > > > I get 550 MB/s > > I doubt this number

Re: [zfs-discuss] SATA controller suggestion

On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If your worried about the bandwidth limitations of putting something like > the supermicro card in a pci slot how about using an active riser card to > convert from PCI-E to PCI-X. One of these, or something similar: > > http://www

Re: [zfs-discuss] ZFS root boot failure?

Sounds correct to me. The disk isn't sync'd so boot should fail. If you pull disk0 or set disk1 as the primary boot device what does it do? You can't expect it to resliver before booting. On 6/11/08, Vincent Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So I decided to test out failure modes of ZFS root

Re: [zfs-discuss] SXCE build 90 vs S10U6?

They aren't even close to each other. Things like in-kernel cifs will never be put back. My question is, what is holding you back from just deploying on sxce? Sun now offers support for it. On 6/12/08, Paul B. Henson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > How close is Solaris Express build 90 to what

Re: [zfs-discuss] SXCE build 90 vs S10U6?

I guess I find the "difference" between b90 and opensolaris trivial given we're supposed to be getting constant updates following the sxce builds. On 6/12/08, Mike Gerdts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 9:22 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote

Re: [zfs-discuss] SXCE build 90 vs S10U6?

ng choice day 1. I love the platform, but its nowhere near the league of a filer, or universe of a usp/sym. On 6/12/08, Mike Gerdts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:12 PM, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I guess I find the "difference" betw

Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS mkdir permission problems

Samba is (at least in sxce) installed by default. On 6/14/08, matt estela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been testing opensolaris 2008.05 as a replacement for our main > fileserver. After following the CIFS walthrough on the genunix wiki, its > working great with our render farm. > > Running

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >