similar to: x4500/x4540 does the internal controllers have a bbu?

I am bumping this thread because I too have the same question ... can I put modern 3TB disks (hitachi deskstars) into an old x4500 ? If not, would the x4540 accept them ? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

While I understand everything at Oracle is "top secret" these days. Does anyone have any insight into a next-gen X4500 / X4540? Does some other Oracle / Sun partner make a comparable system that is fully supported by Oracle / Sun? http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/previous-products/index.html What do X4500 / X4540 owners use if they''d like more

Hello all, I found this dialog on the zfs-devel at zfsonlinux.org list, and I''d like someone to confirm-or-reject the discussed statement. Paraphrasing in my words and understanding: "Labels, including Uberblock rings, are fixed 256KB in size each, of which 128KB is the UB ring. Normally there is 1KB of data in one UB, which gives 128 TXGs to rollback to. When ashift=12 is

A customer is looking to replace or augment their Sun Thumper with a ZFS appliance like 7320. However, the Thumper was used not only as a protocol storage server (home dirs, files, backups over NFS/CIFS/Rsync), but also as a general-purpose server with unpredictably-big-data programs running directly on it (such as corporate databases, Alfresco for intellectual document storage, etc.) in order to

OK, I am a butt-head and accidentally destroyed my last snapshot of a replicated ZFS dataset. The dataset is NOT mounted and other than a resilver going on, there is no I/O going on to this dataset. Is there any way to roll back and get my latest snapshot back? from zpool history -i: 2012-06-18.10:34:00 zfs destroy xxx at 1339668001 2012-06-18.10:34:00 [internal destroy txg:2213852] dataset =

Sorry for the off-topic question. I''m needing to replace a disk in a x4540 zfs file system. I have replacement ST31000NSSUN disks, but it''s not obvious to me how to separate the original disk from its drive sled, it seems to be attached by more than the usual 4 screws. Is it meant to be separated? I''ve looked the x4540 user guide but it does not say anything about it.

The vendor wanted to come in and replace an HDD in the 2nd X4500, as it was "constantly busy", and since our x4500 has always died miserably in the past when a HDD dies, they wanted to replace it before the HDD actually died. The usual was done, HDD replaced, resilvering started and ran for about 50 minutes. Then the system hung, same as always, all ZFS related commands would just

I''m using Solaris 10u6 updated to u7 via patches, and I have a pool with a mirrored pair and a (shared) hot spare. We reconfigured disks a while ago and now the controller is c4 instead of c2. The hot spare was originally on c2, and apparently on rebooting it didn''t get found. So, I looked up what the new name for the hot spare was, then added it to the pool with "zpool

We''re using some X4540s, with OpenSolaris 2008.11. According to my testing, to optimize our systems for our specific workload, I''ve determined that we get the best performance with the write cache disabled on every disk, and with zfs:zfs_nocacheflush=1 set in /etc/system. The only issue is setting the write cache permanently, or at least quickly. Right now, as it is,

Hi, I''m looking to build a virtualized web hosting server environment accessing files on a hybrid storage SAN. I was looking at using the Sun X-Fire x4540 with the following configuration: - 6 RAID-Z vdevs with one hot spare each (all 500GB 7200RPM SATA drives) - 2 Intel X-25 32GB SSD''s as a mirrored ZIL - 4 Intel X-25 64GB SSD''s as the L2ARC. -

Hello, I''m working with someone who replaced a failed 1TB drive (50% utilized), on an X4540 running OS build 134, and I think something must be wrong. Last Tuesday afternoon, zpool status reported: scrub: resilver in progress for 306h0m, 63.87% done, 173h7m to go and a week being 168 hours, that put completion at sometime tomorrow night. However, he just reported zpool status shows:

Hello everyone, This is not directly related to CentOS but still: we are trying to set up some storage servers to run under Linux - most likely CentOS. The storage volume would be in the range specified: 8-15 TB. Any recommendations as far as hardware? Thanks. Boris. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

My google-fu is coming up short on this one... I didn''t see that it had been discussed in a while ... What is the status of ZFS support for TRIM? For the pool in general... and... Specifically for the slog and/or cache??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Greetings, on this matter, Sunfire x4150 a 1U machine with 2xcpu sockets, "eight" drive bays, 64 GB expandability, 4 NIC packs quite a punch for its size. I don't think I've ever seen such power in such a small package Regards Rajagopal

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

Oracle have deleted the best ZFS platform I know, the X4540. Does anyone know of an equivalent system? None of the current Oracle/Sun offerings come close. -- Ian.

-----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

This was previously posed to the sun-managers mailing list but the only reply I received recommended I post here at well. We have a production Solaris 10u5 / ZFS X4500 file server which is reporting NLM_DENIED_NOLOCKS immediately for any nfs locking request. The lockd does not appear to be busy so is it possible we have hit some sort of limit on the number of files that can be locked? Are there

We are looking at adding to our storage. We would like ~20TB-30 TB. we have ~ 200 nodes (1100 cores) to feed data to using nfs, and we are looking for high reliability, good performance (up to at least 350 MBytes /second over 10 GigE connection) and large capacity. For the X45xx (aka thumper) capacity and performanance seem to be there (we have 3 now) However, for system upgrades , maintenance

Hey Guys, Have any of y''all seen a condition where the ILOM considers a disk faulted (status is 3 instead of 1), but ZFS keeps writing to the disk and doesn''t report any errors? I''m going to do a scrub tomorrow and see what comes back. I''m curious what caused the ILOM to fault the disk. Any advice is greatly appreciated. Best Regards, Jason P.S. The system is