similar to: oops with btrfs on zvol

Hi, am I doing something wrong, ZFS does not support that or there is a bug that zvol clone does not show up under /dev/zvol after creating it from other zvol snapshot? # zfs list -t all | grep local local 136G 76.8G 144K none local/home 117G 76.8G 117G /home local/vm 18.4G 76.8G 144K

> I tried to copy a 8GB Xen domU disk image from a zvol device > to an image file on an ufs filesystem, and was surprised that > reading from the zvol character device doesn''t detect "EOF". > > On snv_66 (sparc) and snv_73 (x86) I can reproduce it, like this: > > # zfs create -V 1440k tank/floppy-img > > # dd if=/dev/zvol/dsk/tank/floppy-img

Looks like I forgot to send this to the alias... MRJ ---- A quick heads up for the iscsi, zvol, and vdisk format putback I did into the 3.3 development gate. ISCSI ===== With this putback, you can now install onto and boot a guest using iSCSI disk(s). The iscsi formats supported are: phy:iscsi:/alias/<iscsi-alias> phy:iscsi:/static/<server IP>/<lun>/<target

Hi, I have a question, let''s say I have a zvol named vol1 which is a clone of a snapshot of another zvol (its origin property is tank/myvol at mysnap). If I send this zvol to a different zpool through a zfs send does it send the origin too that is, does an automatic promotion happen or do I end up whith a broken zvol? Best regards. Maurilio. -- This message posted from

I''ve been experimenting with a two system setup in snv_134 where each system exports a zvol via COMSTAR iSCSI. One system imports both its own zvol and the one from the other system and puts them together in a ZFS mirror. I manually faulted the zvol on one system by physically removing some drives. What I expect to happen is that ZFS will fault the zvol pool and the iSCSI stack will

-bash-3.2# zpool export exchbk cannot remove device links for ''exchbk/exchbk-2'': dataset is busy this is a zvol used for a comstar iscsi backend: -bash-3.2# stmfadm list-lu -v LU Name: 600144F0EAC0090000004A0A4F410001 Operational Status: Offline Provider Name : sbd Alias : /dev/zvol/rdsk/exchbk/exchbk-1 View Entry Count : 1 LU Name:

I''ve upgraded my system from ufs to zfs (root pool). By default, it creates a zvol for dump and swap. It''s a 4GB Ultra-45 and every late night/morning I run a job which takes around 2GB of memory. With a zvol swap, the system becomes unusable and the Sun Ray client often goes into "26B". So I removed the zvol swap and now I have a standard swap partition. The

After multiple power outages caused by storms coming through, I can no longer access /dev/zvol/dsk/poolname, which are hold l2arc and slog devices in another pool I don''t think this is related, since I the pools are ofline pending access to the volumes. I tried running find /dev/zvol/dsk/poolname -type f and here is the stack, hopefully this someone a hint at what the issue is, I have

ZVOL was recently converted to use range locking, but it seems the comment below wasn''t updated: /* * There must be no buffer changes when doing a dmu_sync() * because * we can''t change the data whilst calculating the checksum. * A better approach than a per zvol rwlock would be to lock * ranges. */ -- Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl

I''ve looked for anything I can find on the topic, but there does not appear to be anything documented. Can a ZVOL be expanded? In particular, can a ZVOL sharded via iscsi be expanded? Thanks, Charles

Hello, I was doing performance testing, validating zvol performance in particularly, and found that zvol write performance to be slow ~35-44MB/s at 1MB blocksize writes. I then tested the underlying zfs file system with the same test and got 121MB/s. Is there any way to fix this? I really would like to have compatible performance between the zfs filesystem and the zfs zvols. # first test is a

I''m just wondering if anyone has tried this, and what the performance has been like. Scenario: I''ve got a bunch of v20z machines, with 2 disks. One has the OS on it, and the other is free. As these are disposable client machines, I''m not going to mirror the OS disk. I have a disk server with a striped mirror zpool, carved into a bunch of zvols, each exported via

How can I set up a ZVOL that''s accessible by non-root users, too? The intent is to use sparse ZVOLs as raw disks in virtualization (reducing overhead compared to file-based virtual volumes). Thanks, -mg This message posted from opensolaris.org

The `lofiadm'' man page describes how to export a file as a block device and then use `mkfs -F pcfs'' to create a FAT filesystem on it. Can''t I do the same thing by first creating a zvol and then creating a FAT filesystem on it? Nothing I''ve tried seems to work. Isn''t the zvol just another block device? -- -Gary Mills- -Unix Group-

I had some trouble installing a zone on ZFS with S10u4 (bug in the postgres packages) that went away when I used a ZVOL-backed UFS filesystem for the zonepath. I thought I''d push on with the experiment (in the hope Live Upgrade would be able to upgrade such a zone). It''s a bit unwieldy, but everything worked reasonably well - performance isn''t much worse than straight

Hi Folks, I was wondering if anyone has an pointers/suggestions on how I might increase disk performance of a HVM zvol-backed DomU? - this is my first DomU, so hopefully its something obvious Running bonnie++ shows the DomU''s performance to be 3 orders of magnitude worse than Dom0''s, which itself is half as good as when not running xVM at all (see bottom for bonnie++ results)

Hey all - Time for my silly question of the day, and before I bust out vi and dtrace... If there a simple, existing way I can observe the read / write / IOPS on a per-zvol basis? If not, is there interest in having one? Cheers! Nathan.

The /dev/[r]dsk nodes implement the O_EXCL flag. If a node is opened using the O_EXCL, subsequent open(2) to that node fail. But I dont think the same is true for /dev/zvol/[r]dsk nodes. Is that a bug (or maybe RFE) ? Thanks Sumit -- This messages posted from opensolaris.org

This looks like the same issue as: 6829176 dd w/ large block size fails on a zvol''s character device (metadb usesthe character interface even if you specify the block one). - Eric -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

I assume that a zvol has a vtoc. What tags are supported? Thanks, Brian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20070427/57e1a64f/attachment.html>