similar to: Shutting down / exporting zpool without flushing slog devices

I have three zpools on a server and want to add a mirrored pair of ssd''s for the ZIL. Can the same pair of SSDs be used for the ZIL of all three zpools or is it one ZIL SLOG device per zpool? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hi, Out of pure curiosity, I was wondering, what would happen if one tries to use a regular 7200RPM (or 10K) drive as slog or L2ARC (or both)? I know these are designed with SSDs in mind, and I know it''s possible to use anything you want as cache. So would ZFS benefit from it? Would it be the same? Would it slow down? I guess it would slow things down, because it would be trying to

Hello, I''ve looked quickly through the archives and haven''t found mention of this issue. I''m running SXCE (snv_99), which I believe uses zfs version 13. I had an existing zpool: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20081026/a5e2f25b/attachment.html>

Hi I''m running OpenSolaris 148 on a few boxes, and newer boxes are getting installed as we speak. What would you suggest for a good SLOG device? It seems some new PCI-E-based ones are hitting the market, but will those require special drivers? Cost is obviously alsoo an issue here.... Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 roy at karlsbakk.net

Hi, I don''t know if it''s already been discussed here, but while thinking about using the OCZ Vertex 2 Pro SSD (which according to spec page has supercaps built in) as a shared slog and L2ARC device it stroke me that this might not be a such a good idea. Because this SSD is MLC based, write cycles are an issue here, though I can''t find any number in their spec. Why do I

I have a pool with a single SLOG device rated at Y iops. If I add a second (non-mirrored) SLOG device also rated at Y iops will my zpool now theoretically be able to handle 2Y iops? Or close to that? Thanks, Ray

I have a 24 x 1TB system being used as an NFS file server. Seagate SAS disks connected via an LSI 9211-8i SAS controller, disk layout 2 x 11 disk RAIDZ2 + 2 spares. I am using 2 x DDR Drive X1s as the ZIL. When we write anything to it, the writes are always very bursty like this: ool 488K 20.0T 0 0 0 0 xpool 488K 20.0T 0 0 0 0 xpool

Hello list, someone (actually neil perrin (CC)) mentioned in this thread: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2009-December/034340.html that is should be possible to import a pool with failed log devices (with or without data loss ?). >/ />/ Has the following error no consequences? />/ />/ Bug ID 6538021 />/ Synopsis Need a way to force pool startup when

I have historically noticed that in ZFS, when ever there is a heavy writer to a pool via NFS, the reads can held back (basically paused). An example is a RAID10 pool of 6 disks, whereby a directory of files including some large 100+MB in size being written can cause other clients over NFS to pause for seconds (5-30 or so). This on B70 bits. I''ve gotten used to this behavior over NFS, but

The standard controller that has been recommended in the past is the AOC-SAT2-MV8 - an 8 port with a marvel chipset. There have been several mentions of LSI based controllers on the mailing lists and I''m wondering about them. One obvious difference is that the Marvel contoller is PCI-X and the LSI controllers are PCI-E. Supermicro have several LSI controllers. AOC-USASLP-L8i with the

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

Hello all... I''m seeing this behaviour in an old build (89), and i just want to hear from you if there is some known bug about it. I''m aware of the "picket fencing" problem, and that ZFS is not choosing right if write to slog is better or not (thinking if we have a better throughput from disks). But i did not find anything about 100% slog activity (~115MB/s) blocks

I''m working with a Cyrus IMAP server running on a T2000 box under Solaris 10 10/09 with current patches. Mailboxes reside on six ZFS filesystems, each containing about 200 gigabytes of data. These are part of a single zpool built on four Iscsi devices from our Netapp filer. One of these ZFS filesystems contains a number of global and per-user databases in addition to one sixth of the

This might be a stupid question, but here goes... Would adding, say, 4 4 or 8gb usb keys as a zil make enough of a difference for writes on an iscsi shared vol? I am finding reads are not too bad (40is mb/s over gige on 2 500gb drives stripped) but writes top out at about 10 and drop a lot lower... If I where to add a couple usb keys for zil, would it make a difference? Thanks. Sent from a

apt-get update apt-clone upgrade Any first impressions? -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

Recently, I''ve been reading through the ZIL/slog discussion and have the impression that a lot of folks here are (like me) interested in getting a viable solution for a cheap, fast and reliable ZIL device. I think I can provide such a solution for about $200, but it involves a lot of development work. The basic idea: the main problem when using a HDD as a ZIL device are the cache flushes

(From the README) # Jeb Campbell <jebc at c4solutions.net> NOTE: This is last resort if you need your data now. This worked for me, and I hope it works for you. If you have any reservations, please wait for Sun to release something official, and don''t blame me if your data is gone. PS -- This worked for me b/c I didn''t try and replace the log on a running system. My

Are there any drawbacks to partition a SSD in two parts and use L2ARC on one partition, and ZIL on the other? Any thoughts? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

Due to recent experiences, and discussion on this list, my colleague and I performed some tests: Using solaris 10, fully upgraded. (zpool 15 is latest, which does not have log device removal that was introduced in zpool 19) In any way possible, you lose an unmirrored log device, and the OS will crash, and the whole zpool is permanently gone, even after reboots. Using opensolaris,

Hello list, while following this list for more then 1 year, I feel that this list was a great way to get insights into ZFS. Thank you all for contributing. Over the last month''s I was writing a little "whitepaper" trying to consolidate the knowledge collected here. It has now reached a "beta" state and I would like to share the result with you. I call it -