similar to: ZFS Large scale deployment model

Hi, I was discussing the common practice of disk eradication used by many firms for security. I was thinking this may be a useful feature of ZFS to have an option to eradicate data as its removed, meaning after the last reference/snapshot is done and a block is freed, then write the eradication patterns back to the removed blocks. By any chance, has this been discussed or considered before?

Hi All, Its been a while since I touched zfs. Is the below still the case with zfs and hardware raid array? Do we still need to provide two luns from the hardware raid then zfs mirror those two luns? http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/faq/#hardwareraid Thanks, Shawn -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

[Cross-posting to ldoms-discuss] We are occasionally seeing massive time-to-completions for I/O requests on ZFS file systems on a Sun T5220 attached to a Sun StorageTek 2540 and a Sun J4200, and using a SSD drive as a ZIL device. Primary access to this system is via NFS, and with NFS COMMITs blocking until the request has been sent to disk, performance has been deplorable. The NFS server is a

Under Solaris 10 on a 4 core Sun Ultra 40 with 20GB RAM, I am setting up a Sun StorageTek 2540 with 12 300GB 15K RPM SAS drives and connected via load-shared 4Gbit FC links. This week I have tried many different configurations, using firmware managed RAID, ZFS managed RAID, and with the controller cache enabled or disabled. My objective is to obtain the best single-file write performance.

I have a Solaris 10 U5 system massively patched so that it supports ZFS pool version 15 (similar to U8, kernel Generic_141445-09), live upgrade components have been updated to Solaris 10 U8 versions from the DVD, and GRUB has been updated to support redundant menus across the UFS boot environments. I have studied the Solaris 10 Live Upgrade manual (821-0438) and am unable to find any

I''ve got a server that freezes when I run a zpool scrub from cron. Zpool scrub runs fine from the command line, no errors. The freeze happens within 30 seconds of the zpool scrub happening. The one core dump I succeeded in taking showed an arccache eating up all the ram. The server''s running Solaris 10 u3, kernel patch 127727-11 but it''s been patched and seems to have

I''ve tried using S10 U6 to reinstall the boot file (instead of U5) over jumpstart as its a ldom, noticed a another error. Boot device: /virtual-devices at 100/channel-devices at 200/network at 0 File and args: -s Requesting Internet Address for 0:14:4f:f9:84:f3 boot: cannot open kernel/sparcv9/unix Enter filename [kernel/sparcv9/unix]: Has anyone seen this error on U6 jumpstart or is

While thinking about ZFS as the next generation filesystem without limits I am wondering if the real world is ready for this kind of incredible technology ... I''m actually speaking of hardware :) ZFS can handle a lot of devices. Once in the import bug (http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6761786) is fixed it should be able to handle a lot of disks. I want to

Hello, We have a new Thor here with 24TB of disk in (first of many, hopefully). We are trying to determine the bext practices with respect to file system management and sizing. Previously, we have tried to keep each file system to a max size of 500GB to make sure we could fit it all on a single tape, and to minimise restore times and impact should we experience some kind of volume

Hi all I have a test system with snv134 and 8x2TB drives in RAIDz2 and currently no Zil or L2ARC. I noticed the I/O speed to NFS shares on the testpool drops to something hardly usable while scrubbing the pool. How can I address this? Will adding Zil or L2ARC help? Is it possible to tune down scrub''s priority somehow? Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 roy at

We have a zpool made of 4 512g iscsi luns located on a network appliance. We are seeing poor read performance from the zfs pool. The release of solaris we are using is: Solaris 10 10/09 s10s_u8wos_08a SPARC The server itself is a T2000 I was wondering how we can tell if the zfs_vdev_max_pending setting is impeding read performance of the zfs pool? (The pool consists of lots of small files).

I''m new so opensolaris and very new to ZFS. In the past we have always used linux for our database backends. So now we are looking for a new database server to give us a big performance boost, and also the possibility for scalability. Our current database consists mainly of a huge table containing about 230 million records and a few (relatively) smaller tables (something like 13 million

I currently have a 7x1.5tb raidz1. I want to add "phase 2" which is another 7x1.5tb raidz1 Can I add the second phase to the first phase and basically have two raid5''s striped (in raid terms?) Yes, I probably should upgrade the zpool format too. Currently running snv_104. Also should upgrade to 110. If that is possible, would anyone happen to have the simple command lines to

I have a filer running Opensolaris (snv_111b) and I am presenting a iSCSI share from a RAIDZ pool. I want to run ZFS on the share at the client. Is it necessary to create a mirror or use ditto blocks at the client to ensure ZFS can recover if it detects a failure at the client? Thanks, Bruin

Hi All, I am looking at ZFS and I get that they call it RAIDZ which is similar to RAID 5, but what about RAID 10? Isn''t a RAID 10 setup better for data protection? So if I have 8 x 1.5tb drives, wouldn''t I: - mirror drive 1 and 5 - mirror drive 2 and 6 - mirror drive 3 and 7 - mirror drive 4 and 8 Then stripe 1,2,3,4 Then stripe 5,6,7,8 How does one do this with ZFS?

Hello all, I understand that relatively high fragmentation is inherent to ZFS due to its COW and possible intermixing of metadata and data blocks (of which metadata path blocks are likely to expire and get freed relatively quickly). I believe it was sometimes implied on this list that such fragmentation for "static" data can be currently combatted only by zfs send-ing existing

hi there, since i am really new to zfs, i got 2 important questions for starting. i got a nas up and running zfs in stripe mode with 2x 1,5tb hdd. my question for future proof would be, if i could add just another drive to the pool and zfs can integrate it flawlessly? and second if this hdd could also be another size than 1,5tb? so could i put in 2tb also and integrate it? thanks in advance

http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/06/09/2336223/Apple-Removes-Nearly-All-Reference-To-ZFS

I encountered an issue that people using OS-X systems as NFS clients need to be aware of. While not strictly a ZFS issue, it may be encounted most often by ZFS users since ZFS makes it easy to support and export per-user filesystems. The problem I encountered was when using ZFS to create exported per-user filesystems and the OS-X automounter to perform the necessary mount magic. OS-X

I''m building another 24-bay rackmount storage server, and I''m considering what drives to put in the bays. My chassis is a Supermicro SC846A, so the backplane supports SAS or SATA; my controllers are LSI3081E, again supporting SAS or SATA. Looking at drives, Seagate offers an enterprise (Constellation) 2TB 7200RPM drive in both SAS and SATA configurations; the SAS model offers