similar to: Configuring a 3510 for ZFS

Hi there Is it fair to compare the 2 solutions using Solaris 10 U2 and a commercial database (SAP SD scenario). The cache on the HW raid helps, and the CPU load is less... but the solution costs more and you _might_ not need the performance of the HW RAID. Has anybody with access to these units done a benchmark comparing the performance (and with the pricelist in hand) came to a conclusion.

Does ZFS support any type of remote mirroring? It seems at present my only two options to achieve this would be Sun Cluster or Availability Suite. I thought that this functionality was in the works, but I haven''t heard anything lately. Thanks! Aaron Newcomb http://opennewsshow.org http://thesourceshow.org 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

Hello zfs-discuss, Relatively low traffic to the pool but sync takes too long to complete and other operations are also not that fast. Disks are on 3510 array. zil_disable=1. bash-3.00# ptime sync real 1:21.569 user 0.001 sys 0.027 During sync zpool iostat and vmstat look like: f3-1 504G 720G 370 859 995K 10.2M misc 20.6M 52.0G 0 0

Hello, I have a Dell 2950 with a Perc 5/i, two 300GB 15K SAS drives in a RAID0 array. I am considering going to ZFS and I would like to get some feedback about which situation would yield the highest performance: using the Perc 5/i to provide a hardware RAID0 that is presented as a single volume to OpenSolaris, or using the drives separately and creating the RAID0 with OpenSolaris and ZFS? Or

All, I understand that ZFS gives you more error correction when using two LUNS from a SAN. But, does it provide you with less features than UFS does on one LUN from a SAN (i.e is it less stable). Thanks, Shawn This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hi All, Its been a while since I touched zfs. Is the below still the case with zfs and hardware raid array? Do we still need to provide two luns from the hardware raid then zfs mirror those two luns? http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/faq/#hardwareraid Thanks, Shawn -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

I''m trying to get maybe 200 MB/sec over NFS for large movie files (need large capacity to hold all of them). Are there any rules of thumb on how much RAM is needed to handle this (probably RAIDZ for all the disks) with zfs, and how large a server should be used? The throughput required is not so large, so I am thinking an X4100 M2 or X4150 should be plenty. This message posted from

Hi I wanted to get some expert advice on this. I have an ordinary hardware SAN from Promise Tech that presents the LUNs via iSCSI. I would like to use that if possible with my VMware environment where I run several Solaris / OpenSolaris virtual machines. My question is regarding the virtual disks. 1. Should I create individual iSCSI LUNs and present those to the VMware ESXi host as iSCSI storage,

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, I do have a disk array that is providing striped LUNs to my Solaris box. Hence I''d like to simply concat those LUNs without adding another layer of striping. Is this possibile with ZFS? As far as I understood, if I use zpool create myPool lun-1 lun-2 ... lun-n I will get a RAID0 striping where each data block is split across all "n" LUNs. If that''s

This may not be the answer you''re looking for, but I don''t know if it''s something you''ve thought of. If you''re pulling a LUN from an expensive array, with multiple HBA''s in the system, why not run mpxio? If you ARE running mpxio, there shouldn''t be an issue with a path dropping. I have the setup above in my test lab and pull cables

I contacted the author of ''lsof'' regarding the missing ZFS support. The command works but fails to display any files that are opened by the process in a ZFS filesystem. He indicates that the required ZFS kernel structure definitions (header files) are not shipped with the OS. He further indicated that he rummaged through the OpenSolaris source tree and the files doesn''t

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

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 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

Rick McNeal and I have been working on building support for sharing ZVOLs as iSCSI targets directly into ZFS. Below is the proposal I''ll be submitting to PSARC. Comments and suggestions are welcome. Adam ---8<--- iSCSI/ZFS Integration A. Overview The goal of this project is to couple ZFS with the iSCSI target in Solaris specifically to make it as easy to create and export ZVOLs

Dear all, we''re currently looking forward to restructure our hardware environment for our datawarehousing product/suite/solution/whatever. We''re currently running the database side on various SF V440''s attached via dual FC to our SAN backend (EMC DMX3) with UFS. The storage system is (obviously in a SAN) shared between many systems. Performance is mediocre in terms

I''m building a system with two Apple RAIDs attached. I have hardware RAID5 configured so no RAIDZ or RAIDZ2, just a basic zpool pointing at the four LUNs representing the four RAID controllers. For on-going maintenance, will a zpool scrub be of any benefit? From what I''ve read with this layer of abstration ZFS is only maintaining the metadata and not the actual data on the

How much fun can you have with a simple thing like powerpath? Here''s the story: I have a (remote) system with access to a couple of EMC LUNs. Originally, I set it up with mpxio and created a simple zpool containing the two LUNs. It''s now been reconfigured to use powerpath instead of mpxio. My problem is that I can''t import the pool. I get: pool: ###### id: