search for: b70

This past weekend, but holiday was ruined due to a log device "replacement" gone awry. I posted all about it here: http://jmlittle.blogspot.com/2008/05/problem-with-slogs-how-i-lost.html In a nutshell, an resilver of a single log device with itself, due to the fact one can''t remove a log device from a pool once defined, cause ZFS to fully resilver but then attach the log

Hi, We are trying to validate Asterisk as a media gateway PRI <-> SIP with two T400P (8 T1s) per box. The first experience with BOX1 (Compaq, 2.53 GHz, 1 Gb RAM) and just one T400P was encouraging - on the load test with 3 T1s worth of calls we had on average 75% idle CPU. Not so with BOX2 (Dell, single 2.6 GHz Xeon, 1 Gb RAM, 2 T400P) and BOX3 (Dell, dual 2.6 GHz Xeon, 2 Gb RAM, 2 T400P,

...fs tank/usr /mnt/usr /usr/sfw/bin/gtar Ccp /usr . | /usr/sfw/bin/gtar Cxp /mnt/usr echo >>/zfsroot/etc/vfstab tank/usr - /usr zfs - yes - If you move /var to a separate partition, make sure you keep /var/run directory in your zfs root. Tested on b75a and b75a xVm should also work with b70, etc. kugutsumen You can find a patch for Tim''s script here: http://www.kugutsumen.com/showthread.php?t=1740 This message posted from opensolaris.org

...c_skb+361/370> Trace; c012c063 <vmtruncate+d3/9e0> Trace; c0159c76 <inode_setattr+106/190> Trace; f88c473c <[ext3]ext3_setattr+25c/320> Trace; c024601e <inet_recvmsg_R__ver_inet_recvmsg+4e/70> Trace; c0159fce <notify_change+2ce/350> Trace; c013e2e6 <fd_install+b6/b70> Trace; c0148bb3 <cdput+8c3/bb0> Trace; c013f98d <generic_file_open+55d/650> Trace; c013e397 <fd_install+167/b70> Trace; c010770f <__read_lock_failed+144b/183c> Code; f88ab5df <[jbd]journal_start+5f/c0> 00000000 <_EIP>: Code; f88ab5df <[jbd]journal_start...

Hello, I have several ~12TB storage servers using Solaris with ZFS. Two of them have recently developed performance issues where the majority of time in an spa_sync() will be spent in the space_map_*() functions. During this time, "zpool iostat" will show 0 writes to disk, while it does hundreds or thousands of small (~3KB) reads each second, presumably reading space map data from

...in ZFS, when ever there is a heavy writer to a pool via NFS, the reads can held back (basically paused). An example is a RAID10 pool of 6 disks, whereby a directory of files including some large 100+MB in size being written can cause other clients over NFS to pause for seconds (5-30 or so). This on B70 bits. I''ve gotten used to this behavior over NFS, but didn''t see it perform as such when on the server itself doing similar actions. To improve upon the situation, I thought perhaps I could dedicate a log device outside the pool, in the hopes that while heavy writes went to the l...

...ands, such as "zfs set", or when creating a snapshot. While it is running, the load of the server stays approximately the same (0.30), no process goes above 1% CPU usage, and the server does not utilize swap. The server I am using for testing is running Solaris Express DE 9/07, based on B70. It has 15 SATA drives in a RAID-Z2 pool, and the actual I/O performance is good as far as I can tell. The pool contains 150 filesystems, including snapshots. It is an active server, and generally has several users writing to the disk at any one time. Below is a snippet of output from a "t...

...one. It registers with the * server, and I am able to make calls from DIAX. However, when I try to call the DIAX phone from another phone, I get a busy signal. My extensions.conf: exten => 70,1,Dial(IAX/mike/mike,30,tr) # IAX Mike exten => 70,2,Voicemail(u70) exten => 70,102,Voicemail(b70) and my iax.conf: [mike] type=friend username=mike host=dynamic secret=pass1 ;auth=md5,plaintext,rsa ;mailbox=70 context=local permit=0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 Is my configuration correct? Thanks in advance.

...om/jjww/?itemid=44 > I cant find a santricity download that will work with a 6130, but that''s ok.. I just created 14 volumes per shelf :) hardware raid is so yesterday. > That data is somewhat dated, as we now have the ability to put the ZIL > on a different log device (Nevada b70 or later). This will be more obvious > if the workload creates a lot of small files, less of a performance problem > for large files. > -- richard > Got my hands on a Ram-San SSD 64gb and I''m using that for the zil.. Its crazy fast now. -Andy --

Hello R users, For the last few days I am struggling with the following task: my data.frame: A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 58.81 53.292 54.501 13.013 17.39 19.407 56.02 56.251 54.033 20.099 13.15 10.411 55.376 53.099 57.625 13.396 21.031 13.22 58.584 53.194 54.218 13.038 16.854 19.289 55.7 55.921 53.847 19.942 13.153 9.828 55.093 52.934

..... [B30] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ ........ [B40] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ ........ [B50] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ ........ [B60] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ ........ [B70] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ ........ [B80] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ ........ [B90] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ ........ [BA0] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ ........ [BB0] 00...

Hi. Just migrated to zfs on opensolaris. I copied data to the server using rsync and got this message: Oct 10 17:24:04 zetta ^Mpanic[cpu1]/thread=ffffff0007f1bc80: Oct 10 17:24:04 zetta genunix: [ID 683410 kern.notice] BAD TRAP: type=e (#pf Page fault) rp=ffffff0007f1b640 addr=fffffffecd873000 Oct 10 17:24:04 zetta unix: [ID 100000 kern.notice] Oct 10 17:24:04 zetta unix: [ID 839527 kern.notice]

..... [B30] 63 C0 01 F8 65 B1 FB 0E 01 FF 80 82 00 82 00 CD c...e... ........ [B40] 00 03 03 FE 00 00 C1 58 00 F8 6D C1 01 00 F8 63 .......X ..m....c [B50] C0 01 F8 65 B1 FB 2C 01 FF 80 B3 00 01 00 7F FB ...e..,. ........ [B60] FF F5 00 02 1F FF FF D8 00 F9 FF 02 FF FF F8 E4 ........ ........ [B70] 00 03 00 00 00 03 FD FF 02 FF FF F8 90 00 03 03 ........ ........ [B80] FE 00 00 C1 59 00 F8 6D C1 01 00 F8 63 C0 01 F8 ....Y..m ....c... [B90] 65 B1 FB 2F 01 FF 80 B3 00 01 00 7F FB FF 00 F8 e../.... ........ [BA0] F6 00 02 1F FF FF D8 00 F9 FF 02 FF FF F8 E4 00 ........ ........ [BB0] 03...

Hello list. I'm trying to rebuild the 2.6.9.67.0.20.EL kernel, but it fails even without modifications. How did I try it? Created a (non-root) build environment (not a mock ) Installed the kernel.scr.rpm and did a rpmbuild -ba --target=`uname -m` kernel-2.6.spec 2> prep-err.log | tee prep-out.log The build failed at the end: Processing files: kernel-xenU-devel-2.6.9-67.0.20.EL Checking