similar to: ''zfs recv'' is very slow

>> How do i compile mbuffer for our system, Thanks to Mike Futerko for help with the compile, i now have it installed OK. >> and what syntax to i use to invoke it within the zfs send recv? Still looking for answers to this one? Any example syntax, gotchas etc would be much appreciated. -- Kind regards, Jules free. open. honest. love. kindness. generosity. energy. frenetic.

On Wed 07/01/09 20:31 , Carsten Aulbert carsten.aulbert at aei.mpg.de sent: > Brent Jones wrote: > > > > Using mbuffer can speed it up dramatically, but > > this seems like a hack> without addressing a real problem with zfs > > send/recv.> Trying to send any meaningful sized snapshots > > from say an X4540 takes> up to 24 hours, for as little as 300GB

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:05 PM, Richard Elling <Richard.Elling at sun.com> wrote: > Philip Brown wrote: >> I''ve recently started down the road of production use for zfs, and am hitting my head on some paradigm shifts. I''d like to clarify whether my understanding is correct, and/or whether there are better ways of doing things. >> I have one question for

Hi all, What is the current preferred method for backing up ZFS data pools, preferably using free ($0.00) software, and assuming that access to individual files (a la ufsbackup/ufsrestore) is required? TIA, -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member CEO, My Online Home Inventory URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer

FULL backup to a file zfs snapshot -r rpool at 0908 zfs send -Rv rpool at 0908 > /net/remote/rpool/snaps/rpool.0908 INCREMENTAL backup to a file zfs snapshot -i rpool at 0908 rpool at 090822 zfs send -Rv rpool at 090822 > /net/remote/rpool/snaps/rpool.090822 As I understand the latter gives a file with changes between 0908 and 090822. Is this correct? How do I restore those files? I know

Hi guys, we are proposing a customer a couple of X4500 (24 Tb) used as NAS (i.e. NFS server). Both server will contain the same files and should be accessed by different clients at the same time (i.e. they should be both active) So we need to guarantee that both x4500 contain the same files: We could simply copy the contents on both x4500 , which is an option because the "new

It wouldn''t be proper to start my first post here without congratulations and thanks to the ZFS team for such an impressive piece of work. Anyway, on to my query. I''ve been trying out ZFS, with a particular focus in reducing latency in a specific application. This application has a fair amount of random writing going on in the background (which, of course, ZFS will make

Here''s some exciting news! Chris Emura, the Filesystem Development Manager within Apple''s CoreOS organization is interested in porting ZFS to OS X. For more information, please e-mail him directly at cemura at apple.com. Speaking for the zfs team (at Sun), this is great news and we fully support the effort. my powerbook hungers for ZFS, eric This message posted from

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

We have finished a beta version of the feature. A webrev for it can be found here: http://cr.illumos.org/~webrev/sensille/fits-send/ It adds a command ''zfs fits-send''. The resulting streams can currently only be received on btrfs, but more receivers will follow. It would be great if anyone interested could give it some testing and/or review. If there are no objections,

Hi, I was wondering if there have been any conversations with backup vendors like Veritas or EMC regarding better integration with ZFS. While I understand they can use the "native" mode of reading files from the filesystem, it would be great if there were agents that had options like making a snapshot and storing a "zfs backup" datastream that could be used for zfs restore.

I''ve tried ssh blowfish and scp arcfour. both are CPU limited long before the 10g link is. I''vw also tried mbuffer, but I get broken pipe errors part way through the transfer. I''m open to ideas for faster ways to to either zfs send directly or through a compressed file of the zfs send output. For the moment I; zfs send > pigz scp arcfour the file gz file to the

Hi, I''m still debating wether I should use ZFS or not and how. Here is my scenario. I want to run a server with a lot of storage, that gets disks added/upgraded from time to time to expand space. I''d want to store large files on it, 15mb - 5gb per file, and they''d only need to be accessible via NFS/FTP and maybe CIFS. The machine I have dedicated for this job would be

I have a question that has been puzzling me for some time ... what is the reason RedHat chose to go with btrfs rather than working with the ZFS-on-Linux folks (now OpenZFS)? Is it a licensing issue, political, etc? Although btrfs is making progress, ZFS is far more mature, has a few more stable features (especially Raid-z3) and has worked flawlessly for me on CentOS-6 and Scientific Linux-6.

Hello. I''m a nobody. I use Linux. I have a hard-drive. I want the best / sexiest / what ever fs for my hard-drive, as it isn''t one of those flashy flash drives, which I presume don''t need an fs (???). I was THRILLED that the ZFS for Linux thread started. And, I was equally horrified (and sufficiently annoyed that I am starting this new thread) when it degraded in to

Hello, I believe that ZFS and it''s concepts is truly revolutionary to the point that I no longer see any OS as modern if it does not have comparable storage functionality. Therefore I think that file system/disk manager with similar qualities should be written for Linux. Does Sun have plans to dual license ZFS as GPL so it can be ported to native Linux? If not, is it legal to write

> > > OK, plese note that I am not willing to tolerate anti-oss claims and will > continue to correct similar false claims. If you don't like those > discussions > at all, you should try to avoid false claims and the need for corrections. > If I were RedHat, including a non GPL filesystem into my operating system would make me sweat a bit. Intel were facing a similar

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > >>> 4. CDDL annoys a lot of people. >> >> The CDDL does not annoy people, this is just a fairy tale from some OSS enemies. > > The following irritates me, I am a ?people,? and I am not an OSS enemy: > > http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#WhatAboutTheLicensingIssue It is

ZFS introduces a new and incompatible ACL interface into Solaris and this seems to be not yet fully completed in addition to the fact that is causes a lot of problems for software that needs to be compatible with Solaris-2.5 like star. Proof for incompatibility: create a file on UFS and set an ACL for this file. Use Sun tar cpf out file to archive this file. Unpack this archive file on ZFS

Once upon a time, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> said: > Note that it is without doubt that ZFS was not derived from the Linux kernel > and thus cannot be a derived work. All that matters for CentOS is: 1: Red Hat doesn't ship ZFS because of Red Hat's lawyers' interpretation of GPL+CDDL 2: Arguing about it here will not change #1 3: CentOS