similar to: Convert Zpool RAID Types

for s10u2, documentation recommends 3 to 9 devices in raidz. what is the basis for this recommendation? i assume it is performance and not failure resilience, but i am just guessing... [i know, recommendation was intended for people who know their raid cold, so it needed no further explanation] thanks... oz -- ozan s. yigit | oz at somanetworks.com | 416 977 1414 x 1540 I have a hard time

I''m planning on setting up an NFS server for our ESXi hosts and plan on using a virtualized Solaris or Nexenta host to serve ZFS over NFS. The storage I have available is provided by Equallogic boxes over 10Gbe iSCSI. I am trying to figure out the best way to provide both performance and resiliency given the Equallogic provides the redundancy. Since I am hoping to provide a 2TB

Hi all, just after sending a message to sunmanagers I realized that my question should rather have gone here. So sunmanagers please excus ethe double post: I have inherited a X4140 (8 SAS slots) and have just setup the system with Solaris 10 09. I first setup the system on a mirrored pool over the first two disks pool: rpool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME

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

Under Solaris 10 on a 4 core Sun Ultra 40 with 20GB RAM, I am setting up a Sun StorageTek 2540 with 12 300GB 15K RPM SAS drives and connected via load-shared 4Gbit FC links. This week I have tried many different configurations, using firmware managed RAID, ZFS managed RAID, and with the controller cache enabled or disabled. My objective is to obtain the best single-file write performance.

I just got a call from another of our admins, as I am the resident ZFS expert, and they have opened a support case with Oracle, but I figured I''d ask here as well, as this forum often provides better, faster answers :-) We have a server (M4000) with 6 FC attached SE-3511 disk arrays (some behind a 6920 DSP engine). There are many LUNs, all about 500 GB and mirrored via ZFS. The LUNs

Hi, I am using FreeBSD 8.2 and went to add 4 new disks today to expand my offsite storage. All was working fine for about 20min and then the new drive cage started to fail. Silly me for assuming new hardware would be fine :( The new drive cage started to fail, it hung the server and the box rebooted. After it rebooted, the entire pool is gone and in the state below. I had only written a few

Hi, for zfs raidz1, I know for random io, iops of a raidz1 vdev eqaul to one physical disk iops, since raidz1 is like raid5 , so is raid5 has same performance like raidz1? ie. random iops equal to one physical disk''s ipos. Regards Victor -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

I have a lot of people whispering "zfs" in my virtual ear these days, and at the same time I have an irrational attachment to xfs based entirely on its lack of the 32000 subdirectory limit. I''m not afraid of ext4''s newness, since really a lot of that stuff has been in Lustre for years. So a-benchmarking I went. Results at the bottom:

Hi. I installed solaris express developer edition (b79) on a supermicro quad-core harpertown E5405 with 8 GB ram and two internal sata-drives. I installed solaris onto one of the internal drives. I added an areca arc-1680 sas-controller and configured it in jbod-mode. I attached an external sas-cabinet with 16 sas-drives 1 TB (931 binary GB). I created a raidz2-pool with ten disks and one spare.

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

We are looking at the alternatives to VXVM/VXFS. One of the feature which we liked in Veritas, apart from the obvious ones is the ability to call the disks by name and group them in to a disk group. Especially in SAN based environment where the disks may be shared by multiple machines, it is very easy to manage them by disk group names rather than cxtxdx numbers. Does zfs offer such

ZFS fans, I''m preparing some analyses on RAS for large JBOD systems such as the Sun Fire X4500 (aka Thumper). Since there are zillions of possible permutations, I need to limit the analyses to some common or desirable scenarios. Naturally, I''d like your opinions. I''ve already got a few scenarios in analysis, and I don''t want to spoil the brain storming, so

Hi, LUN is connected to solaris 10u9 from NETAP FAS2020a with ISCSI. I''m changing LUN size on netapp and solaris format see new value but zpool still have old value. I tryed zpool export and zpool import but it didn''t resolve my problem. bash-3.00# format Searching for disks...done AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS: 0. c0d1 <DEFAULT cyl 6523 alt 2 hd 255 sec 63>

Hi. I''d like to request a feature be added to zfs. Currently, on SAN attached disk, zpool shows up with a big WWN for the disk. If ZFS (or the zpool command, in particular) had a text field for arbitrary information, it would be possible to add something that would indicate what LUN on what array the disk in question might be. This would make troubleshooting and general

Hi All, I''m new on ZFS, so I hope this isn''t too basic a question. I have a host where I setup ZFS. The Oracle DBAs did their thing and I know have a number of ZFS datasets with their respective clones and snapshots on serverA. I want to export some of the clones to serverB. Do I need to zone serverB to see the same LUNs as serverA? Or does it have to have preexisting,

Hi, I am posting my question to both storage-discuss and zfs-discuss as I am not quite sure what is causing the messages I am receiving. I have recently migrated my zfs volume from b104 to b134 and upgraded it from zfs version 14 to 22. It consist of two zvol''s ''vol01/zvol01'' and ''vol01/zvol02''. During zpool import I am getting a non-zero exit code,

Greeting All I have create a pool that consists oh a hard disk and a ssd as a cache zpool create hdd c11t0d0p3 zpool add hdd cache c8t0d0p0 - cache device I ran an OLTP bench mark to emulate a DMBS One I ran the benchmark, the pool started create the database file on the ssd cache device ??????????? can any one explain why this happening ? is not L2ARC is used to absorb the evicted data

A) Resilver = Defrag. True/false? B) If I buy larger drives and resilver, does defrag happen? C) Does zfs send zfs receive mean it will defrag? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

Dear ZFS-Users, I want to switch to ZFS, but still want to encrypt my data. Native Encryption for ZFS was added in "ZFS Pool Version Number 30<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFS#Release_history>", but I''m using ZFS on FreeBSD with Version 28. My question is how would encfs (fuse encryption) affect zfs specific features like data Integrity and deduplication? Regards