search for: usca14

Solaris in 32-bit mode has a 1TB device limit. UFS filesystems in 32-bit mode also have a 1TB limit, even if using a logical volume manager to span smaller than 1TB devices. So, what kind of limit does ZFS have when running under 32-bit Solaris? -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca14-102 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA

Why does zfs define raidz/raidz2/mirror/stripe at the pool level instead of the filesystem/volume level? A sample use case: two filesystems in a eight disk pool. The first filesystems is a stripe across four mirrors. The second filesystems is a raidz2. Both utilizing the free space in the 8 disk pool as needed. Thanks in advance... This message posted from opensolaris.org

Folks, We are in the process of purchasing new san/s that our mail server runs on (JES3). We have moved our mailstores to zfs and continue to have checksum errors -- they are corrected but this improves on the ufs inode errors that require system shutdown and fsck. So, I am recommending that we buy small jbods, do raidz2 and let zfs handle the raiding of these boxes. As we need more

hi all, I am hoping to move roughly 1TB of maildir format email to ZFS, but I am unsure of what the most appropriate disk configuration on a 3510 would be. based on the desired level of redundancy and usable space, my thought was to create a pool consisting of 2x RAID-Z vdevs (either double parity, or single parity with two hot-spares). using 300GB drives this would give roughly 2.4TB of usable

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

As mentioned last night, we''ve been reviewing a proposal for hot spare support in ZFS. Below you can find a current draft of the proposed interfaces. This has not yet been submitted for ARC review, but comments are welcome. Note that this does not include any enhanced FMA diagnosis to determine when a device is "faulted". This will come in a follow-on project, of which some