similar to: mirroring zfs slice

1. I have a 4x18GB drive setup as RAIDZ. Now when thinking about it in terms of RAID5 I would expect to get (4-1)x18 worth of drive space, but DF -h shows 4x18. Is this a bug or do I not understand? 2. Once again thinking in RAID5 terms if I have 4X18GB and 12X9GB drives and I want to make a RAIDZ of all of them I would expect the 18GB to be treated at 9GB so the RAIDZ would be 16X9GB. Is

If it''s of interest, I''ve written up some articles on my experiences of building a ZFS NAS box which you can read here: http://breden.org.uk/2008/03/02/a-home-fileserver-using-zfs/ I used CIFS to share the filesystems, but it will be a simple matter to use NFS instead: issue the command ''zfs set sharenfs=on pool/filesystem'' instead of ''zfs set

''bh'' is forgot to release if no error is detected Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com> --- fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c index 8b9fb8c..69fc902 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c @@ -631,6 +631,7 @@ static int

Hi, yesterday evening I tried to upgrade my Ultra 60 to 2009.06 from SXCE snv_98. I can''t use AI Installer because OpenPROM is version 3.27. So I built IPS from source, then created a zpool on a spare drive and installed OS 2006.06 on it To make the disk bootable I used: installboot -F zfs /usr/platform/`uname -i`/lib/fs/zfs/bootblk /dev/rdsk/c0t1d0s0 using the executable from my new

In my testing, I''ve found the following error: zpool status -v pool: local state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data corruption. Applications may be affected. action: Restore the file in question if possible. Otherwise restore the entire pool from backup. see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-8A scrub: none requested

I believe ZFS is causing a panic whenever I attempt to mount an iso image (SXCR build 39) that happens to reside on a ZFS file system. The problem is 100% reproducible. I''m quite new to OpenSolaris, so I may be incorrect in saying it''s ZFS'' fault. Also, let me know if you need any additional information or debug output to help diagnose things. Config: [b]bash-3.00#

Hello, I have a Dell 2950 with a Perc 5/i, two 300GB 15K SAS drives in a RAID0 array. I am considering going to ZFS and I would like to get some feedback about which situation would yield the highest performance: using the Perc 5/i to provide a hardware RAID0 that is presented as a single volume to OpenSolaris, or using the drives separately and creating the RAID0 with OpenSolaris and ZFS? Or

We''re running a Solaris 10 container, with an Oracle 9.2.0.4 database - every 5-10 min, an Oracle process shoots up (using 20% + CPU) and then goes down in CPU %, doing a [i]pollsys [/i](see it via dtruss). I tried using some of the trace scripts in the Dtracetoolkit to see what the process is doing, but without any luck - also tried with the following, but dtrace process goes up to 30%

Hi, I was wondering if anyone would know if this is just an accounting-type error with the recorded "version=" stored on disk, or if there are/could-be any deeper issues with an "upgraded" zpool? I created a pool under a Sol10_x86_u3 install (11/06?), and zdb correctly reported the pool as a "version=3" pool. I reinstalled the OS with a u4 (08/07), ran zpool

I''m using zfs not to have access to a fail-safe backed up system, but to easily manage my file system. I would like to be able to, as I buy new harddrives, just to be able to replace the old ones. I''m very environmentally concious, so I don''t want to leave old drives in there to consume power as they''ve already been replaced by larger ones. However, ZFS

So I have attached to my system two 7-disk SCSI arrays, each of 18.2 GB disks. Each of them is a RAID-Z1 zpool. I had a disk I thought was a dud, so I pulled the fifth disk in my array and put the dud in. Sure enough, Solaris started spitting errors like there was no tomorrow in dmesg, and wouldn''t use the disk. Ah well. Remove it, put the original back in - hey, Solaris still thinks

I''m seeing odd behaviour when I create a ZFS raidz pool using three disks. The output of "zpool status" shows the pool size as the size of the three disks combined (as if it were a Raid 0 volume). This isn''t expected behaviour is it? When I create a mirrored volume in ZFS everything is as one would expect the pool is the size of a single drive. My setup: Compaq

Suppose I have a single ZFS pool on a single disk; I want to upgrade the system to use two different, larger disks and I want to mirror. Can I do something like: - I start with disk #0 - add mirror on disk #1 (resilver) - replace first disk (#0) with disk #2 (resilver) Casper

Hi All ! i?m running Clearcase (IBM Rational) and have some strange problems ... when i use Samba ver 3.21b i can?t access the samba share by name (\\servername\sambashare) but i can access it on ip (\\192.168.1.100\sambashare\) i?m running debug level 10 and it seems like it can?t authenticate when access on netbios/dns/host name but on ip it can ? when running samba ver 3.23b from

I have a lot of people whispering "zfs" in my virtual ear these days, and at the same time I have an irrational attachment to xfs based entirely on its lack of the 32000 subdirectory limit. I''m not afraid of ext4''s newness, since really a lot of that stuff has been in Lustre for years. So a-benchmarking I went. Results at the bottom:

Hi all, I've searched high and low on this and found nothing of help. I'm using v2.6.2 and trying to write a function that will count how many people from a dataset fall under a poverty line of 50% of the mean income. a9 is my 100-element vector of incomes. I want pa9 to be my vector that counts how many of these are classed as in poverty. My problem is that my command if(a9[i] <

All temporary files are kept in a single directory. At the end of the autotests that one directory is deleted. Signed-off-by: Darryl L. Pierce <dpierce at redhat.com> --- autotest.sh | 20 +++++++++++--------- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/autotest.sh b/autotest.sh index c9f8a2d..d658cf3 100755 --- a/autotest.sh +++ b/autotest.sh @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ # an

Hi there, i''m building a small NAS with 5x1TB Disks. The disks contains at the moment some data, ntfs as the fs and aren''t a raid. Now my im wondering if its possible to add the parity later. So that i add step by step one disk to the pool. And when i add the last disk, i enable the parity. (i have only one another 1 tb disk to backup the files) Thank you for you replies and

Hi. I''d like to request a feature be added to zfs. Currently, on SAN attached disk, zpool shows up with a big WWN for the disk. If ZFS (or the zpool command, in particular) had a text field for arbitrary information, it would be possible to add something that would indicate what LUN on what array the disk in question might be. This would make troubleshooting and general

I''m hoping to get some general clues about what all is required to get an experiment going with zfs. I''ve managed to install osol-11 in a vmware on windowsXP host from a recent *.iso. I''m following along with Simon''s blog showing how to set up ZFS. I''m newbie with both ZFS and Solaris but the instructions seem pretty clear. However I''m