Displaying 20 results from an estimated 400 matches similar to: "iostat numbers for ZFS disks, build 39"
2008 Apr 11
0
How to replace root drive if ZFS data is on it?
Hi, Experts:
A customer has X4500 and the boot drives mirrored (c5t0d0s0 and
c5t4d0s0) by SVM,
The ZFS uses the two other partitions on these two drives(c5t0d0s3 and
c5t4d0s3).
If we need to replace the disk drive c5t0d0, do we need to do anything
on the ZFS
(c5t0d0s3 and c5t4d0s3) first or just follow the regular boot drive
replacement procedure?
Below is the summary of their current ZFS
2008 Apr 02
1
delete old zpool config?
Hi experts
zpool import shows some weird config of an old zpool
bash-3.00# zpool import
pool: data1
id: 7539031628606861598
state: FAULTED
status: One or more devices are missing from the system.
action: The pool cannot be imported. Attach the missing
devices and try again.
see: http://www.sun.com/msg/ZFS-8000-3C
config:
data1 UNAVAIL insufficient replicas
2006 Jul 19
1
Q: T2000: raidctl vs. zpool status
Hi all,
IHACWHAC (I have a colleague who has a customer - hello, if you''re
listening :-) who''s trying to build and test a scenario where he can
salvage the data off the (internal ?) disks of a T2000 in case the sysboard
and with it the on-board raid controller dies.
If I understood correctly, he replaces the motherboard, does some magic to
get the raid config back, but even
2007 Jan 11
4
Help understanding some benchmark results
G''day, all,
So, I''ve decided to migrate my home server from Linux+swRAID+LVM to Solaris+ZFS, because it seems to hold much better promise for data integrity, which is my primary concern.
However, naturally, I decided to do some benchmarks in the process, and I don''t understand why the results are what they are. I though I had a reasonable understanding of ZFS, but now
2007 Apr 11
0
raidz2 another resilver problem
Hello zfs-discuss,
One of a disk started to behave strangely.
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv sata: [ID 801593 kern.notice] NOTICE: /pci at 1,0/pci1022,7458 at 3/pci11ab,11ab at 1:
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv port 6: device reset
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv scsi: [ID 107833 kern.warning] WARNING: /pci at 1,0/pci1022,7458 at 3/pci11ab,11ab at 1/disk at 6,0 (sd27):
Apr 11 16:07:42 thumper-9.srv
2008 Jul 11
3
Linux equivalent of 'format' in solaris
It shows the physical disks on the server
bash-2.05b# format
Searching for disks...done
AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS:
0. c0t2d0 <SUN18G cyl 7506 alt 2 hd 19 sec 248>
/sbus at 3,0/SUNW,fas at 3,8800000/sd at 2,0
1. c0t3d0 <SUN18G cyl 7506 alt 2 hd 19 sec 248>
/sbus at 3,0/SUNW,fas at 3,8800000/sd at 3,0
2. c0t4d0 <SUN18G cyl 7506 alt 2
2010 Sep 07
3
zpool create using whole disk - do I add "p0"? E.g. c4t2d0 or c42d0p0
I have seen conflicting examples on how to create zpools using full disks. The zpool(1M) page uses "c0t0d0" but OpenSolaris Bible and others show "c0t0d0p0". E.g.:
zpool create tank raidz c0t0d0 c0t1d0 c0t2d0 c0t3d0 c0t4d0 c0t5d0
zpool create tank raidz c0t0d0p0 c0t1d0p0 c0t2d0p0 c0t3d0p0 c0t4d0p0 c0t5d0p0
I have not been able to find any discussion on whether (or when) to
2010 Feb 04
1
Bug in as.character? (PR#14206)
A long formula which is converted using as.character, looses its last
part: ``diagonal = 1e-12)''
Shorter formula is ok though.
Best,
H??vard
************
Browse[2]> formula.str
y ~ -1 + b1 + b2 + b3 + b4 + b5 + b6 + b7 + b8 + b9 + b10 + b11 +
b12 + b13 + b14 + b15 + b16 + b17 + b18 + b19 + b20 + b21 +
b22 + b23 + b24 + b25 + b26 + b27 + b28 + b29 + b30 + b31 +
b32 +
2007 Mar 07
0
anyone want a Solaris 10u3 core file...
I executed sync just before this happened....
ultra:ultra# mdb -k unix.0 vmcore.0
Loading modules: [ unix krtld genunix specfs dtrace ufs sd pcipsy md ip sctp
usba fctl nca crypto zfs random nfs ptm cpc fcip sppp lofs ]
> $c
vpanic(7b653bd8, 7036fca0, 7036fc70, 7b652990, 0, 60002d0b480)
zio_done+0x284(60002d0b480, 0, a8, 7036fca0, 0, 60000b08d80)
zio_vdev_io_assess+0x178(60002d0b480, 8000,
2007 Feb 22
0
ZFS vs UFS performance Using Different Raid Configurations
Since most of our customers are predominantly UFS based, we would like to use the same configuration and compare ZFS performance, so that we can announce support for ZFS.
We''re planning on measuring the performance of a ZFS file system vs UFS file system.
Please look at the following scenario and let us know if this is a good performance measurement criterion.
2010 Mar 17
0
checksum errors increasing on "spare" vdev?
Hi,
One of my colleagues was confused by the output of ''zpool status'' on a pool
where a hot spare is being resilvered in after a drive failure:
$ zpool status data
pool: data
state: DEGRADED
status: One or more devices is currently being resilvered. The pool will
continue to function, possibly in a degraded state.
action: Wait for the resilver to complete.
scrub:
2009 Nov 18
0
open(2), but no I/O to large files creates performance hit
I''m seeing a performance anomaly where opening a large file (but doing
*no* I/O to it) seems to cause (or correlates to) a significant
performance hit on a mirrored ZFS filesystem. Unintuitively, if I
disable zfs_prefetch_disable, I don''t see the performance degradation.
It doesn''t make sense that this would help unless there is some cache/VM
pollution resulting
2009 Nov 05
1
stepAIC(coxph) forward selection
Dear R-Help,
I am trying to perform forward selection on the following coxph model:
>my.bpfs <- Surv(bcox$pfsdays, bcox$pfscensor)
> b.cox <- coxph(my.bpfs ~ Cbase + Abase + Cbave + CbSD + KPS + gender +
as.factor(eor) + Age)>stepAIC(b.cox, scope=list(upper =~ Cbase + Abase +
Cbave + CbSD + KPS + gender + as.factor(eor) + Age, lower=~1), direction=
c("forward"))
However
2007 Sep 08
1
zpool degraded status after resilver completed
I am curious why zpool status reports a pool to be in the DEGRADED state
after a drive in a raidz2 vdev has been successfully replaced. In this
particular case drive c0t6d0 was failing so I ran,
zpool offline home/c0t6d0
zpool replace home c0t6d0 c8t1d0
and after the resilvering finished the pool reports a degraded state.
Hopefully this is incorrect. At this point is the vdev in question
now has
2008 Mar 12
3
Mixing RAIDZ and RAIDZ2 zvols in the same zpool
I have a customer who has implemented the following layout: As you can
see, he has mostly raidz zvols but has one raidz2 in the same zpool.
What are the implications here? Is this a bad thing to do? Please
elaborate.
Thanks,
Scott Gaspard
Scott.J.Gaspard at Sun.COM
> NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
>
> chipool1 ONLINE 0 0 0
>
>
2004 Sep 08
4
WellGate 3504A with Asterisk SIP authentication and config
hey * folk,
am trying to configure a WellGate 3504A FXS SIP ATA
(http://www.welltech.com.tw/products_ea01.htm) with asterisk. i've set
up two SIP clients in sip.conf as follows:
[general]
port = 5060 ; Port to bind to
bindaddr = 0.0.0.0 ; Address to bind SIP channel to
context = default ; Default context for incoming calls
[1235]
host = dynamic
secret = somepass
context = default
type
2006 Oct 24
3
determining raidz pool configuration
Hi all,
Sorry for the newbie question, but I''ve looked at the docs and haven''t
been able to find an answer for this.
I''m working with a system where the pool has already been configured and
want to determine what the configuration is. I had thought that''d be
with zpool status -v <poolname>, but it doesn''t seem to agree with the
2012 Oct 10
1
Regarding R's png device in linux
Hi,
I am a developer from Oracle. I wanted to create a png file out of png device with a bit depth of 8. I am using R on linux. But I noticed that R automatically switches between 8 and 24 bit depth. i tried a lot of things from your grDevices package but unable to control the bitdepth. I would be really grateful to you guys if you can suggest me some way to solve this issue.
-/Ag
Anshul Gupta
2009 Jun 19
8
x4500 resilvering spare taking forever?
I''ve got a Thumper running snv_57 and a large ZFS pool. I recently noticed a drive throwing some read errors, so I did the right thing and zfs replaced it with a spare.
Everything went well, but the resilvering process seems to be taking an eternity:
# zpool status
pool: bigpool
state: ONLINE
status: One or more devices has experienced an unrecoverable error. An
attempt was
2011 Jan 12
6
ZFS slows down over a couple of days
Hi all,
I have exchanged my Dell R610 in favor of a Sun Fire 4170 M2 which has
32 GB RAM installed. I am running Sol11Expr on this host and I use it to
primarily serve Netatalk AFP shares. From day one, I have noticed that
the amount of free RAM decereased and along with that decrease the
overall performance of ZFS decreased as well.
Now, since I am still quite a Solaris newbie, I seem to