134 it is. This is an OpenSolaris rig that's going to be replaced within the next 60 days, so just need to get it to something that won't through false checksum errors like the 120-123 builds do and has decent rebuild times.
Future boxes will be NexentaStor. Thank you guys. :) -J On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Richard Elling <rich...@nexenta.com> wrote: > On Sep 26, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote: > >>> Upgrading is definitely an option. What is the current snv favorite > >>> for ZFS stability? I apologize, with all the Oracle/Sun changes I > >>> haven't been paying as close attention to big reports on zfs-discuss > >>> as I used to. > >> > >> OpenIndiana b147 is the latest binary release, but it also includes > >> the fix for > >> CR6494473, ZFS needs a way to slow down resilvering > >> http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6494473 > >> http://www.openindiana.org > > > > Are you sure upgrading to OI is safe at this point? 134 is stable unless > you start fiddling with dedup, and OI is hardly tested. For a production > setup, I'd recommend 134 > > For a production setup? For production I'd recommend something that is > supported, preferably NexentaStor 3 (which is b134 + important ZFS fixes > :-) > -- richard > > -- > OpenStorage Summit, October 25-27, Palo Alto, CA > http://nexenta-summit2010.eventbrite.com > > Richard Elling > rich...@nexenta.com +1-760-896-4422 > Enterprise class storage for everyone > www.nexenta.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
