similar to: ZFS snv_b39 and S10U2

So, I noticed that a lot of the fixes discussed here recently, including the ZFS/NFS interaction bug fixes and the deadlock fix has made it into 20060327 that was released this morning. My question is whether we''ll see all these up to the minute bug fixes in the Solaris 10 update that brings ZFS to that product, or if there is a specific date where no further updates will make it in to

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

Hello zfs-discuss, What would you rather propose for ZFS+ORACLE - zvols or just files from the performance standpoint? -- Best regards, Robert mailto:rmilkowski at task.gda.pl http://milek.blogspot.com

NFS server (b39): bash-3.00# zfs get quota nfs-s5-s8/d5201 nfs-s5-p0/d5110 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE nfs-s5-p0/d5110 quota 600G local nfs-s5-s8/d5201 quota 600G local bash-3.00# bash-3.00# df -h | egrep "d5201|d5110" nfs-s5-p0/d5110 600G 527G 73G 88% /nfs-s5-p0/d5110

I''m not sure if this is the right place for the question or not, but I''ll throw it out there anyways. Does anyone know, if you create your pool(s) with a system running fishworks, can that pool later be imported by a standard solaris system? IE: If for some reason the head running fishworks were to go away, could I attach the JBOD/disks to a system running snv/mainline

I build two zfs filesystems using b29 (from brandz). I then re-installed solaris express b28, preserving the zfs filesystems. When I tried to "zpool import" my zfs filesystems I got a kernel panic: > debugging crash dump vmcore.0 (32-bit) from blackbird > operating system: 5.11 snv_28 (i86pc) > panic message: > ZFS: bad checksum (read on /dev/dsk/c1d0p0 off 24d5e000: zio

I filed this RFE earlier, since there is no way for non sun personel to see this RFE for a while I am posting it here, and asking for feedback from the community. [Fwd: CR 6470231 Created P5 opensolaris/triage-queue Add an inuse check that is inforced even if import -f is used.] Inbox Assign a GTD Label to this Conversation: [Show] Statuses: Next Action, Action, Waiting On, SomeDay, Finished

Hello ZFS, System was rebooted and after reboot server again System is snv_39, SPARC, T2000 bash-3.00# ptree 7 /lib/svc/bin/svc.startd -s 163 /sbin/sh /lib/svc/method/fs-local 254 /usr/sbin/zfs mount -a [...] bash-3.00# zfs list|wc -l 46 Using df I can see most file systems are already mounted. > ::ps!grep zfs R 254 163 7 7 0 0x4a004000

This past weekend, but holiday was ruined due to a log device "replacement" gone awry. I posted all about it here: http://jmlittle.blogspot.com/2008/05/problem-with-slogs-how-i-lost.html In a nutshell, an resilver of a single log device with itself, due to the fact one can''t remove a log device from a pool once defined, cause ZFS to fully resilver but then attach the log

On Solaris x86, does zpool (or anything) support PATA (or SATA) IDE SMART data? With the Predictive Self Healing feature, I assumed that Solaris would have at least some SMART support, but what I''ve googled so far has been discouraging. http://prefetch.net/blog/index.php/2006/10/29/solaris-needs-smart-support-please-help/ Bug ID: 4665068 SMART support in IDE driver

Please reply to david.curtis at sun.com ******** Background / configuration ************** zpool will not create a storage pool on fibre channel storage. I''m attached to an IBM SVC using the IBMsdd driver. I have no problem using SVM metadevices and UFS on these devices. List steps to reproduce the problem(if applicable): Build Solaris 10 Update 2 server Attach to an external

The time has come to review the current Contributor and Core contributor grants for ZFS. Since all of the ZFS core contributors grants are set to expire on 02-24-2009 we need to renew the members that are still contributing at core contributor levels. We should also add some new members to both Contributor and Core contributor levels. First the current list of Core contributors: Bill

Hello, I am trying to configure ZFS with IBM sdd. IBM sdd is like powerpath, MPXIO or VxDMP. Here is the error message when I try to create my pool: bash-3.00# zpool create tank /dev/dsk/vpath1a warning: device in use checking failed: No such device internal error: unexpected error 22 at line 446 of ../common/libzfs_pool.c bash-3.00# zpool create tank /dev/dsk/vpath1c cannot open

This zfs looks great! I really hope this gets put into solaris soon since I don''t think I could live with Solaris express on a production machine. The easy of adding disk and moving directories looks like a life saver, especially for me who deals with trying to store digital media which piles up a couple of gig a day! This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hi There, I looked at the ZFS admin guide in attempt to find a way to leverage ZFS capabilities (storage pool, mirroring, dynamic stripping, etc.) for Xen domU file systems that are not ZFS. Couldn''t find an answer whether ZFS could be used only as a "regular" volume manager to create logical volumes for UFS or even a Linux ext2fs, with ideally, the ability to create

IIRC, uncorrectable bitrot even in a nonessential file detected by ZFS used to cause a kernel panic. Bug ID 4924238 was closed with the claim that bitrot-induced panics is not a bug, but the description did mention an open bug ID 4879357, which suggests that it''s considered a bug after all. Can somebody clarify the intended behavior? For example, if I''m running Solaris in a VM,

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

On a system still running nv_30, I''ve a small RaidZ filled to the brim: 2 3 root at mir pts/9 ~ 78# uname -a SunOS mir 5.11 snv_30 sun4u sparc SUNW,UltraAX-MP 0 3 root at mir pts/9 ~ 50# zfs list NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT mirpool1 33.6G 0 137K /mirpool1 mirpool1/home 12.3G 0 12.3G /export/home mirpool1/install 12.9G

Hi. While submitting SDR-0149 on ZFS bug I encountered problem with format utility. This is v240 with snv_29 with internal disks. On s0 slices there is zfs pool (which is not imported). I did unload zfs modules then moved zfs driver and run format. Now format quits just because there''s no zfs module (and not even one zfs pool is imported). It shouldn''t behave that

Why does ZFS report such small directory sizes? For example, take a maildir directory with ten entries: total 2385 drwx------ 8 17121 vmail 10 Jun 8 23:50 . drwx--x--x 14 root root 14 May 12 2006 .. drwx------ 5 17121 vmail 5 May 25 18:16 .Trash drwx------ 5 17121 staff 6 Jun 9 00:01 .testing -rw------- 1 17121 staff 0 Jun