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

I know i''m probably doing something REALLY stupid.....but for some reason i can''t get send/recv to work over ssh. I just built a new media server and i''d like to move a few filesystem from my old server to my new server but for some reason i keep getting strange errors... At first i''d see something like this: pfexec: can''t get real path of

Hi folks, I''m having (as the title suggests) a problem with zfs send/receive. Command line is like this : pfexec zfs send -Rp tank/tsm@snapshot | ssh remotehost pfexec zfs recv -v -F -d tank This works like a charm as long as the snapshot is small enough. When it gets too big (meaning somewhere between 17G and 900G), I get ssh errors (can''t read from remote host). I tried

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 hi, i have two systems, A (Solaris 10 update 5) and B (Solaris 10 update 6). i''m using ''zfs send -i'' to replicate changes on A to B. however, the ''zfs recv'' on B is running extremely slowly. if i run the zfs send on A and redirect output to a file, it sends at 2MB/sec. but when i use ''zfs send

I have a backup system using zfs send/receive (I know there are pros and cons to that, but it''s suitable for what I need). What I have now is a script which runs daily, do zfs send, compress and write it to a file, then transfer it with ftp to a remote host. It does full backup every 1st, and do incremental (with 1st as reference) after that. It works, but not quite resource-effective

On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Stephan Budach <stephan.budach at jvm.de> wrote: > Brent, > > I had known about that bug a couple of weeks ago, but that bug has been files against v111 and we''re at v130. I have also seached the ZFS part of this forum and really couldn''t find much about this issue. > > The other issue I noticed is that, as opposed to the

>> 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.

Hello, I was doing performance testing, validating zvol performance in particularly, and found that zvol write performance to be slow ~35-44MB/s at 1MB blocksize writes. I then tested the underlying zfs file system with the same test and got 121MB/s. Is there any way to fix this? I really would like to have compatible performance between the zfs filesystem and the zfs zvols. # first test is a

In August last year I posted this bug, a brief summary of which would be that ZFS still accepts writes to a faulted pool, causing data loss, and potentially silent data loss: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6735932 There have been no updates to the bug since September, and nobody seems to be assigned to it. Can somebody let me know what''s happening with this

On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Brent Jones<brent at servuhome.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:00 AM, James Lever<j at jamver.id.au> wrote: >> >> On 25/06/2009, at 4:38 PM, John Ryan wrote: >> >>> Can I ask the same question - does anyone know when the 113 build will >>> show up on pkg.opensolaris.org/dev ? >> >> On

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

After looking through the archives I haven''t been able to assess the reliability of a backup procedure which employs zfs send and recv. Currently I''m attempting to create a script that will allow me to write a zfs stream to a tape via tar like below. # zfs send -R pool at something | tar -c > /dev/tape I''m primarily concerned with in the possibility

On Wed, January 7, 2009 04:29, Peter Korn wrote: > Decision #4: file system layout > I''d like to have ZFS root mirrored. Do we simply use a portion of the existing disks for this, or add two disks just for root? Use USB-2 flash as those 2 disks? And where does swap go? The default install in Osol 0811 (which is what I just upgraded my home NAS to) gives you a zfs root pool that

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

Hi, I am soliciting input from the ZFS engineers and/or ZFS users on an extension to "zfs list". Thanks in advance for your feedback. Quick Background: The pNFS project (http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nfsv41/) is adding a new DMU object set type which is used on the pNFS data server to store pNFS stripe DMU objects. A pNFS dataset gets created with the "zfs

Assuming in a secure and trusted env, we want to get the maximum transfer speed without the overhead from ssh. Thanks. Fred -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20121213/654f543f/attachment-0001.html>

It was rumored that Nevada build 105 would have ZFS encrypted file systems integrated into the main source. In reviewing the Change logs (URL''s below) I did not see anything mentioned that this had come to pass. Its going to be another week before I have a chance to play with b105. Does anyone know specifically if b105 has ZFS encryption? Thanks, Jerry -------- Original Message

Hi, I updated my installation to snv_105 from pkg.opensolaris.org/dev. Booting xvm kernel doesn''t work. The last working xvm version that I tested was on snv_98. I filed a bug report earlier on http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=5905 Is anyone using xmv on opensolaris 2008.11 (stable or dev)? Is it suppose to work, or is it one of those

It was rumored that Nevada build 105 would have ZFS encrypted file systems integrated into the main source. In reviewing the Change logs (URL''s below) I did not see anything mentioned that this had come to pass. Its going to be another week before I have a chance to play with b105. Does anyone know specifically if b105 has ZFS encryption? Thanks, Jerry -------- Original Message

Hi, I''m trying to BFU my own build of ON onto a snv_104 installation and I''m hitting problems with bnx driver; which is coming from a set of snv_105 closed bins: WARNING: bnx0: Failed to allocate GLD MAC memory. I believe bnx is a closed source GLDv3 driver. Were there any incompatible changes due to the crossbow integration that went in after snv_105?