similar to: encfs on top of zfs

Hi, I am facing issue with zfs destroy, this takes almost 3 Hours to delete the snapshot of size 150G. Could you please help me to resolve this issue, why zfs destroy takes this much time. While taking snapshot, it''s done within few seconds. I have tried with removing with old snapshot but still problem is same. =========================== I am using : Release : OpenSolaris

Hi, I was suffering for weeks from the following problem: a zfs dataset contained an automatic snapshot (monthly) that used 2.8 TB of data. The dataset was deprecated, so I chose to destroy it after I had deleted some files; eventually it was completely blank besides the snapshot that still locked 2.8 TB on the pool. ''zfs destroy -r pool/dataset'' hung the machine within seconds

I created a zfs pool with dedup with the following settings: zpool create data c8t1d0 zfs create data/shared zfs set dedup=on data/shared The thing I was wondering about was it seems like ZFS only dedup at the file level and not the block. When I make multiple copies of a file to the store I see an increase in the deup ratio, but when I copy similar files the ratio stays at 1.00x. -- This

I have some questions about the choice of SSDs to use for ZIL and L2ARC. I''m trying to build an OpenSolaris iSCSI SAN out of a whitebox system, which is intended to be used as a backup SAN during storage migration, so it''s built on a tight budget. The system currently has 4GB RAM, 3GHz Core2-Quad and 8x 500GB WD REII SATA HDDs attached to an Areca 8port ARC-1220 controller

Hi, as I have learned from the discussion about which SSD to use as ZIL drives, I stumbled across this article, that discusses short stroking for increasing IOPs on SAS and SATA drives: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/short-stroking-hdd,2157.html Now, I am wondering if using a mirror of such 15k SAS drives would be a good-enough fit for a ZIL on a zpool that is mainly used for file

Hi, Created a zpool with 64k recordsize and enabled dedupe on it. zpool create -O recordsize=64k TestPool device1 zfs set dedup=on TestPool I copied files onto this pool over nfs from a windows client. Here is the output of zpool list Prompt:~# zpool list NAME SIZE ALLOC FREE CAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT TestPool 696G 19.1G 677G 2% 1.13x ONLINE - When I ran a

I see in NexentaStor''s announcement of Community Edition 3.0.3 they mention some backported patches in this release. Aside from their management features / UI what is the core OS difference if we move to Nexenta from OpenSolaris b134? These DeDup bugs are my main frustration - if a staff member does a rm * in a directory with dedup you can take down the whole storage server - all with

Hello all, It was often asked and discussed on the list about "how to change rpool HDDs from AHCI to IDE mode" and back, with the modern routine involving reconfiguration of the BIOS, bootup from separate live media, simple import and export of the rpool, and bootup from the rpool. The documented way is to reinstall the OS upon HW changes. Both are inconvenient to say the least.

On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Stephan Budach <stephan.budach at jvm.de> wrote: > Brent, > > I had known about that bug a couple of weeks ago, but that bug has been files against v111 and we''re at v130. I have also seached the ZFS part of this forum and really couldn''t find much about this issue. > > The other issue I noticed is that, as opposed to the

Hello all, I am not sure my original mail got through to the list (I haven''t received it back), so I attach it below. Anyhow, now I have a saved kernel crash dump of the system panicking when it tries to - I believe - deferred-release the corrupted deduped blocks which are no longer referenced by the userdata/blockpointer tree. As I previously wrote in my thread on unfixeable

Hello list, I''m having trouble with a server holding a lot of data. After a few months of uptime, it is currently rebooting from a lockup (reason unknown so far) but it is taking hours to boot up again. The boot process is stuck at the stage where it says: mounting zfs filesystems (1/5) the machine responds to pings and keystrokes. I can see disk activity; the disk leds blink one after

I tried the deduplication feature but the performance of my fileserver dived from writing 50MB/s via CIFS to 4MB/s. what happens to the deduped blocks when you set dedup=off? are they written back to disk? is the deduptable deleted or is it still there? thanks -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hello all, I am thinking about a new laptop. I see that there are a number of higher-performance models (incidenatlly, they are also marketed as "gamer" ones) which offer two SATA 2.5" bays and an SD flash card slot. Vendors usually position the two-HDD bay part as either "get lots of capacity with RAID0 over two HDDs, or get some capacity and some performance by mixing one

My google-fu is coming up short on this one... I didn''t see that it had been discussed in a while ... What is the status of ZFS support for TRIM? For the pool in general... and... Specifically for the slog and/or cache??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

So, what is the story about 4KB disk sectors? Should such disks be avoided with ZFS? Or, no problem? Or, need to modify some config file before usage? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hello ZFS experts: I would like to study ZFS de-duplication feature. Can someone please let me know which directory/files I should be looking at? Thanks in advance. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hello. I am looking to see if performance data exists for on-disk dedup. I am currently in the process of setting up some tests based on input from Roch, but before I get started, thought I''d ask here. Thanks for the help, Janice

Hi, Out of pure curiosity, I was wondering, what would happen if one tries to use a regular 7200RPM (or 10K) drive as slog or L2ARC (or both)? I know these are designed with SSDs in mind, and I know it''s possible to use anything you want as cache. So would ZFS benefit from it? Would it be the same? Would it slow down? I guess it would slow things down, because it would be trying to

Hello all, I understand that relatively high fragmentation is inherent to ZFS due to its COW and possible intermixing of metadata and data blocks (of which metadata path blocks are likely to expire and get freed relatively quickly). I believe it was sometimes implied on this list that such fragmentation for "static" data can be currently combatted only by zfs send-ing existing

Good morning. I am in the process of planning a system which will have 2 ZFS servers, one on site, one off site. The on site server will be used by workstations and servers in house, and most of that will stay in house. There will, however, be data i want backed up somewhere else, which is where the offsite server comes in... This server will be sitting in a Data Center and will have some storage