similar to: zfs performance on fuse (Linux) compared to other fs

Hi, Since almost all operations in the FUSE low-level API identify files by inode number, I''ve been using zfs_zget() to get the corresponding znode/vnode in order to call the corresponding VFS function in zfs_vnops.c. However, there are some cases when zfs_zget() behaves slightly different than I need: 1) If zp->z_unlinked != 0 then zfs_zget() returns ENOENT. I need it to return

Hi. I noticed that when non-64bit variable is given as a second argument to atomic_add_64() function, the result is invalid. I found few places where such situation occurs. I wonder how this got unnoticed with ztest, which fails on me within a few seconds (after I started to use Solaris atomic operations) on assertions. Maybe this only doesn''t work when compiled with gcc? Not sure, but

Hi. I''m all set for doing performance comparsion between Solaris/ZFS and FreeBSD/ZFS. I spend last few weeks on FreeBSD/ZFS optimizations and I think I''m ready. The machine is 1xQuad-core DELL PowerEdge 1950, 2GB RAM, 15 x 74GB-FC-10K accesses via 2x2Gbit FC links. Unfortunately the links to disks are the bottleneck, so I''m going to use not more than 4 disks, probably.

Folks My experiments with installing ZFS-FUSE in a Centos 6 system reveal behavior different from that observed in Centos 5.6. The version of ZFS-FUSE is that provided on the EPEL repository, and was installed on a 32-bit machine. I use it because of its deduplication facility. In Centos 5.6, the facility worked as advertised. In Centos 6, however, the system "hung" in

I wonder if this is the right place to ask, as the Filesystem in User Space implementation is a separate project. In Solaris ZFS runs in kernel. FUSE implementations are slow, no doubt. Same goes for other FUSE implementations, such as for NTFS. Regards, Tonmaus -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

On 2019-12-10, Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev wrote: >I bet if you use `-target i386-linux` it will work. You passed `-target -i386`, >which is a triple with no OS, so Clang is doing something arbitrary. Grepping >Clang sources shows that this flag is handled in an OS-specific manner: > >$ git grep -i fuse_init_array ../clang/lib/Driver/ >../clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Fuchsia.cpp:

On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 09:14:09PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 03:29:37PM -0500, Andre Goree wrote: > > Ahhh, understood. I do have have an image I can provide that was > > installed onto and MBR layout (seemed the easiest for libguestfs to > > understand, GPT is preferred if libguestfs works well with it, but > > that's another matter

Hi there, juliusr at rainforest:~$ cat /etc/issue Ubuntu 9.04 \n \l juliusr at rainforest:~$ dpkg -l | grep -i zfs-fuse ii zfs-fuse 0.5.1-1ubuntu5 I have two 320gb sata disks connected to a PCI raid controller: juliusr at rainforest:~$ lspci | grep -i sata 00:08.0 RAID bus controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 3512 [SATALink/SATARaid] Serial ATA Controller (rev

I'm wondering whether or not anyone has tried to use guestmount on an image with a ZFS partition (MBR partition table). I can't seem to find much on the internet regarding it, but I do see hints that may lead me to a solution. I'm under the impression that libguestfs can use what ever is available to the kernel on the host -- in my case I have zfs-use installed and running. I

Hi all, Centos 5.7 samba-common-3.0.33-3.29.el5_7.4 samba-3.0.33-3.29.el5_7.4 zfs-fuse-0.6.9_p1-6.20100709git.el5.1 smb.conf [depot] path = /data/depot public = no writable = yes directory mask = 2775 create mask = 0664 vfs objects = recycle recycle:repository = .deleted/%U recycle:keeptree = Yes recycle:touch = Yes recycle:versions = Yes recycle:maxsixe =

Hi Devs, consider below testcases, $cat test.cc class B { public: B(int t) { j=t; } int j; }; B b(1); ============== $clang test.cc -target -i386 -c -fuse-init-array $llvm-objdump -h test.o |grep ctors 7 .ctors 00000004 00000000 DATA 8 .rel.ctors 00000008 00000000 As you can see it ignores the -fuse-init-array options.It happens for x86,Other target like aarch64 is doing fine.

Hi all, I installed glusterfs (version 3.1.3) with zfs-fuse (0.6.9) as the underlying filesystem. After renaming a file, I found the file duplicated. Following is my test scenario. root at ubuntu:/# zpool create tank /dev/sdb root at ubuntu:/# gluster volume create test-volume ubuntu:/tank/exp1 ubuntu:/exp2 root at ubuntu:/# gluster volume start test-volume root at ubuntu:/# mount -t glusterfs

Hello, A college friend of mine is using Debian Linux on his desktop, and wondered if he could tap into ZFS goodness without adding another server in his small quiet apartment or changing the desktop OS. According to his research, there are some kernel modules for Debian which implement ZFS, or a FUSE variant. Can anyone comment how stable and functional these are? Performance is a

Hello, I''m quite interested in ZFS, like everybody else I suppose, and am about to install FBSD with ZFS. On that note, i have a different first question to start with. I personally am a Linux fanboy, and would love to see/use ZFS on linux. I assume that I can use those ZFS disks later with any os that can work/recognizes ZFS correct? e.g. I can install/setup ZFS in FBSD, and later use

Hi, I don''t know if this has been discussed before, but have you thought about adding LZO compression to ZFS? One zfs-fuse user has provided a patch which implements LZO compression, and he claims better compression ratios *and* better speed than lzjb. The miniLZO library is licensed under the GPL, but the author specifically says that other licenses are available by request. Has this

Previously: http://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2009-December/msg00044.html we had to disable a lot of packages which were missing in Ubuntu Karmic. However with the patch I just posted: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2010-May/msg00132.html we don't need to remove packages just because they are missing. But there is still one package which is present but doesn't install

On 02/03/2014 3:16 pm, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 03:12:28PM -0500, Andre Goree wrote: >> I'm wondering whether or not anyone has tried to use guestmount on >> an image with a ZFS partition (MBR partition table). I can't seem >> to find much on the internet regarding it, but I do see hints that >> may lead me to a solution. I'm

Hi. I''m happy to inform that the ZFS file system is now part of the FreeBSD operating system. ZFS is available in the HEAD branch and will be available in FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE as an experimental feature. Commit log: Please welcome ZFS - The last word in file systems. ZFS file system was ported from OpenSolaris operating system. The code in under CDDL license. I''d

Tuning should not be done in general and Best practices should be followed. So get very much acquainted with this first : http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Best_Practices_Guide Then if you must, this could soothe or sting : http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide So drive carefully. -r

ZFS works really stable on FreeBSD, but I''m biggest problem is how to control ZFS memory usage. I''ve no idea how to leash that beast. FreeBSD has a backpresure mechanism. I can register my function so it will be called when there are memory problems, which I do. I using it for ARC layer. Even with this in place under heavy load the kernel panics, because memory with KM_SLEEP