similar to: Big JBOD: what would you do?

Hi all, I''m putting together a OpenSolaris ZFS-based system and need help picking hardware. I''m thinking about using this 26-disk case: [FYI: 2-disk RAID1 for the OS & 4*(4+2) RAIDZ2 for SAN] http://rackmountpro.com/productpage.php?prodid=2418 Regarding the mobo, cpus, and memory - I searched goggle and the ZFS site and all I came up with so far is that, for a

Hi all, I''m putting together a OpenSolaris ZFS-based system and need help picking hardware. I''m thinking about using this 26-disk case: [FYI: 2-disk RAID1 for the OS & 4*(4+2) RAIDZ2 for SAN] http://rackmountpro.com/productpage.php?prodid=2418 Regarding the mobo, cpus, and memory - I searched goggle and the ZFS site and all I came up with so far is that, for a

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

Ciao, the rot filesystem of my thumper is a ZFS with a single disk: bash-3.2# zpool status rpool pool: rpool state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM rpool ONLINE 0 0 0 c5t0d0s0 ONLINE 0 0 0 spares c0t7d0 AVAIL c1t6d0 AVAIL c1t7d0

I currently have a 7x1.5tb raidz1. I want to add "phase 2" which is another 7x1.5tb raidz1 Can I add the second phase to the first phase and basically have two raid5''s striped (in raid terms?) Yes, I probably should upgrade the zpool format too. Currently running snv_104. Also should upgrade to 110. If that is possible, would anyone happen to have the simple command lines to

Hi, i''m new to the list so please bare with me. This isn''t an OpenSolaris related problem but i hope it''s still the right list to post to. I''m on the way to move a backup server to using zfs based storage, but i don''t want to spend too much drives to parity (the 16 drives are attached to a 3ware raid controller so i could also just use raid6 there). I

This must be resliver day :) I just had a drive failure. The hot spare kicked in, and access to the pool over NFS was effectively zero for about 45 minutes. Currently the pool is still reslivering, but for some reason I can access the file system now. Resliver speed has been beaten to death I know, but is there a way to avoid this? For example, is more enterprisy hardware less susceptible to

Greetings, I followed closely the thread "ZFS and Storage", and other discussions about using ZFS on hardware RAID arrays, since we are deploying ZFS in a similar situation here. I''m sure I''m oversimplifying, but the consensus for general filesystem-type storage needs, as I''ve read it, tends toward doing ZFS RAID-Z (or RAID-Z2) on LUNS consisting of hardware

Hey folks, I guess this is an odd question to be asking here, but I could do with some feedback from anybody who''s actually using ZFS in anger. I''m about to go live with ZFS in our company on a new fileserver, but I have some real concerns about whether I can really trust ZFS to keep my data alive if things go wrong. This is a big step for us, we''re a 100% windows

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

Which consumer-priced 1.5TB drives do people currently recommend? I had zero read/write/checksum errors so far in 2 years with my trusty old Western Digital WD7500AAKS drives, but now I want to upgrade to a new set of drives that are big, reliable and cheap. As of Jan 2010 it seems the price sweet spot is the 1.5TB drives. As I had a lot of success with Western Digital drives I thought I would

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.

As mentioned last night, we''ve been reviewing a proposal for hot spare support in ZFS. Below you can find a current draft of the proposed interfaces. This has not yet been submitted for ARC review, but comments are welcome. Note that this does not include any enhanced FMA diagnosis to determine when a device is "faulted". This will come in a follow-on project, of which some

I''m currently planning on running FreeBSD with ZFS, but I wanted to double-check how much memory I''d need for it to be stable. The ZFS wiki currently says you can go as low as 1 GB, but recommends 2 GB; however, elsewhere I''ve seen someone claim that you need at least 4 GB. Does anyone here know how much RAM FreeBSD would need in this case? Likewise, how much RAM

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

I have a 5-500GB disk Raid-Z pool that has been producing checksum errors right after upgrading SXCE to build 121. They seem to be randomly occurring on all 5 disks, so it doesn''t look like a disk failure situation. Repeatingly running a scrub on the pools randomly repairs between 20 and a few hundred checksum errors. Since I hadn''t physically touched the machine, it seems a

Hello, i have an 8 port sata-controller and i don''t want to spend the money for 8 x 750 GB Sata Disks right now. I''m thinking about an optimal way of building a growing raidz-pool without loosing any data. As far as i know there are two ways to achieve this: - Adding 750 GB Disks from time to time. But this would lead to multiple groups with multiple redundancy/parity disks. I

Currently I''m trying to figure out the best zfs layout for a thumper wrt. to read AND write performance. I did some simple mkfile 512G tests and found out, that per average ~ 500 MB/s seems to be the maximum on can reach (tried initial default setup, all 46 HDDs as R0, etc.). According to http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAssets/ArchitectureWP_062806.pdf I would

Hello, Is it possible to non-destructively change RAID types in zpool while the data remains on-line? -J

I'm setting up this huge RAID 6 box. I've always thought of hot spares, but I'm reading things that are comparing RAID 5 with a hot spare to RAID 6, implying that the latter doesn't need one. I *certainly* have enough drives to spare in this RAID box: 42 of 'em, so two questions: should I assign one or more hot spares, and, if so, how many? mark