search for: 159g

...t;> them. > > If shutting the machines down is feasible, I?d put the source hard drive > into the destination machine and use rsync to copy it from one drive to > the other (rather than using rsync to copy from one machine to the other > over the network). Why? I just rsync'd 159G in less than one workday from one server to another. Admittedly, we allegedly have a 1G network, but.... mark

Hi all, I have 2 questions about ZFS. 1. I have create a snapshot in my pool1/data1, and zfs send/recv it to pool2/data2. but I found the USED in zfs list is different: NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT pool2/data2 160G 1.44T 159G /pool2/data2 pool1/data 176G 638G 175G /pool1/data1 It keep about 30,000,000 files. The content of p_pool/p1 and backup/p_backup is almost same. But why is the size different? 2. /pool2/data2 is a RAID5 Disk Array with 8 disks, and , and /pool1/data1 is a RAIDZ2 with 5 disks. The configure...

On 5/17/17, 5:27 PM, "CentOS on behalf of m.roth at 5-cent.us" <centos-bounces at centos.org on behalf of m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: >Why? I just rsync'd 159G in less than one workday from one server to >another. Admittedly, we allegedly have a 1G network, but.... Well, I?ve don?t recall ever having to rsync more than 100G (although I am doing multiple rsyncs of about 86G as we speak), and I?ve never been able to do it with machines on their own, iso...

...39;target/u05'': size is less than current used or reserved space [root at osprey /] # zfs list -o name,used,available NAME USED AVAIL target 1.32T 206G target/u02 72.2G 148G target/u02 at 1 12.0G - target/u03 61.1G 159G target/u03 at 1 12.1G - target/u04 126G 93.6G target/u04 at 1 14.5G - target/u05 1.06T 206G target/u05 at 1 671G - target/zoneroot 3.70G 4.30G target/zoneroot at 1 12.9M - zfspool 553G 1018G zfspool/u02...

An entire filesystem (~180g) needs to be copied from one local linux machine to another. Since both systems are on the same local subnet, there's no need for encryption. I've done this sort of thing before a few times in the past in different ways, but wanted to get input from others on what's worked best for them. One consideration is that the source filesystem contains quite a

...ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t6d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c0t7d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors [root at nas01 ~]# zpool list NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT rpool 149G 11.4G 138G 7% ONLINE - tank 9.50T 9.34T 159G 98% ONLINE - [root at nas01 ~]#