similar to: ZFS layout on hardware RAID-5?

I want to configure my zfs like this : concatination_stripe_pool : concatination lun0_controller0 lun1_controller0 concatination lun2_controller1 lun3_controller1 1. There is any option to implement it in ZFS? 2. there is other why to get the same configuration? thanks This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hi experts, I have few issues about ZFS and virtualization: [b]Virtualization and performance[/b] When filesystem traffic occurs on a zpool containing only spindles dedicated to this zpool i/o can be distributed evenly. When the zpool is located on a lun sliced from a raid group shared by multiple systems the capability of doing i/o from this zpool will be limited. Avoiding or limiting i/o to

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

Hi folks, Myself and a colleague are currently involved in a prototyping exercise to evaluate ZFS against our current filesystem. We are looking at the best way to arrange the disks in a 3510 storage array. We have been testing with the 12 disks on the 3510 exported as "nraid" logical devices. We then configured a single ZFS pool on top of this, using two raid-z arrays. We are getting

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, 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 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 All, Is there a way to tune the zfs prefetch on a per pool basis? I have a customer that is seeing slow performance on a pool the contains multiple tablespaces from an Oracle database, looking at the LUNs associated to that pool they are constantly at 80% - 100% busy. Looking at the output from arcstat for the miss % on data, prefetch and metadata we are getting around 5 - 10 % on data,

Hi, I read some articles on solarisinternals.com like "ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide" on http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide . They clearly suggest to disable cache flush http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/ZFS_Evil_Tuning_Guide#FLUSH . It seems to be the only serious article on the net about this subject. Could someone here state on this

We''re setting up ZFS in front of an MD3000i (and attached MD1000 expansion trays). The rule of thumb is to let ZFS manage all of the disks, so we wanted to expose each MD3000i spindle via a JBOD mode of some sort. Unfortunately, it doesn''t look like the MD3000i this (though this[1] post seems to reference an Enhanced JBOD mode....), so we decided to create a whole bunch of

This question is concerning ZFS. We have a Sun Fire V890 attached to a EMC disk array. Here''s are plan to incorporate ZFS: On our EMC storage array we will create 3 LUNS. Now how would ZFS be used for the best performance? What I''m trying to ask is if you have 3 LUNS and you want to create a ZFS storage pool, would it be better to have a storage pool per LUN or combine the 3

The paragraph below is from ZFS admin guide Traditional Volume Management As described in ?ZFS Pooled Storage? on page 18, ZFS eliminates the need for a separate volume manager. ZFS operates on raw devices, so it is possible to create a storage pool comprised of logical volumes, either software or hardware. This configuration is not recommended, as ZFS works best when it uses raw physical

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''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

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.

Hello, I know, that you had this discussion a view days ago but I''m in the installation phase of our new production servers and I intend to migrate the data from UFS volumes to ZFS volumes in near future. For doing this it must be ABSOLUTELY sure that I can resize the SAN LUNs because during the last 4 years I had to double the LUN size every year. I tried to resize a test volume

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:

This question is concerning ZFS. We have a Sun Fire V890 attached to a EMC disk array. Here''s are plan to incorporate ZFS: On our EMC storage array we will create 3 LUNS. Now how would ZFS be used for the best performance? What I''m trying to ask is if you have 3 LUNS and you want to create a ZFS storage pool, would it be better to have a storage pool per LUN or combine the 3

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,

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