SUN wants to sue back against NetApp

Posted by Doomshammer on Thursday, October 25. 2007 at 11:00 in Computer, English only, Linux/Unix, Thoughts, Web

As you might have read in blogs or on newssites, NetApp sued SUN, as they are infringing patents of NetApp (at least, this is what NetApp is saying). Now NetApp pushed SUN to unfree the ZFS filesystem and to only sell it with some properitary storages. This is of course a big slap into the face of the open source community and against all users of ZFS (including the whole FreeBSD community, who ported ZFS to their OS).

Now Jonathan writes in this blog (as usual his blog entry has a sassy URL again ;-) ), that SUN is not going to agree with NetApps allowances and that they'll use their patents to defend and protect their innovations and the open source community. From my sight, a very nice move of SUN as it's good to know, that the open source community has a big player in their rows.

I personally hope that this battle can be fought without lawsuits and that both sides can find a solution that it good for either.

[Update] Solaris 10 on a Dell PowerEdge 1950

Posted by Doomshammer on Sunday, September 9. 2007 at 23:32 in Arbeit, Computer, English only, Linux/Unix, Thoughts, Web

This weekend I had to build a server for a customer. The hardware was given by the customer- I only had to set it up. Unfortunately I ran into a bunch of troubles, as Dell shipped the wrong hardware (sadly I noticed this much to late).

Given hardware was a Dell PowerEdge 1950 with Quad Core CPU and 4 GiB RAM. The server has 2 x73 GiB internal hard disks (SAS) and (currently) 4 x 500 GiB disks in a Dell PowerVault MD1000 (SAS) storage array. So far, so good... When I booted the machine the first time, I wondered why the systems disks were connected to a RAID controller (a PERC 5/i) - but I simply went on. The Solaris installer started and everything worked fine - at least until the installer reached the point where it wanted to partition the disks... "No disks found" was the message, the installer showed.

I rebooted and tried to disable the RAID-support of the controller, so that it only acts as SAS controller and passes the single drives through, but the PERC 5/i doesn't have a option for JBOD. So I looked up the chipset on the controller (LSISAS1068), downloaded the Solaris x86 driver from the LSI homepage and burned it on CD. Again the Solaris installer started and I chose "5" for "apply driver update", followed by "c" for CD. The installer recognized the driver on the CD, installed it, but when I executed "format", the disks still weren't found.

After some research in the internet I figured out, that the LSI 1068 controllers, that are shipped with Dell hardware, are confiugred with another firmware - which isn't supported by the LSI driver ... and of course Dell doesn't provide and Solaris driver.

Luckily, after some further research in tons of internet forums, I found an thread about Dell 2950 in the SUN forum. In this discussion, someone announced that he has written a driver for the LSI MegaRaid and Dell Perc 5 controllers for Solaris 10. The driver can be found here. I first tried to update the driver directly in the Solaris 10 installation DVD (or more specificly within the x86.miniroot) but this very annoying if you only have a VMWare with the correct Solaris version, so that you can build the driver. Additionally the driver would be only available during the installation - I would have needed to install it manually after the installation as well. What a luck that someone built an ITU image, which can be used for the Solaris 10 installer. I made a mirror of the package with the driver and the ITU images (as I don't know, how long the site will life).

Finally - with the ITU image - I was able to install solaris on the RAID-1 that I built on the 2 system disks. The installation worked w/o any problems... business as usual. But the next shock came quickly. The next task I wanted to do, was installing the MD1000 disks as one RAID-Z ZFS pool. But guess what... Dell again shipped the wrong hardware. The ordered SAS controller wasn't installed... therefor a PERC 5/E was installed - and of course this RAID controller isn't able to pass the disks through as JBOD neither. Well, what should I do? I set up a RAID-5 on the PERC controller, so that Solaris at least sees the disk(s).

The system is now up and running in the DC but it is really annoying that:
- Dell isn't able to ship the ordered hardware
- Dell needs it's fucking own firmware on standard LSI hardware
- Dell doesn't provide Solaris drivers for their own hardware
- The crappy PERC controllers don't provide JBOD-support

Conclusion: Solaris on a Dell 1950 with a MD1000 works, but it's really hard to get it working when a PERC controller is installed. I recommend to either not order a PERC controller but a standard SAS controller or to buy your own controllers.

Update: Yesterday the re-ordered SAS 5/E controller (original LSI SAS1068 chipset) arrived and I mounted it into the Dell 1950. The 4 x 500GB disks in the MD1000 were directly recognized by the controller and the controller was automatically initialized by Solaris 10's mpt driver. All 4 disks were found by "devfsadm" and I could quickly rebuild my ZFS pool. Now I'm happy with the box. So here again my advise- be very accurate with the hardware that you order in your Dell 1950. If you want to add a MD1000 and want ZFS to take care of the RAID, then be careful not to order a PERC 5/i or PERC 5/E controller but to take the SAS version (SAS 5/i and SAS 5/E) which passes the MD1000 through as JBOD to the Solaris operating system and which works out-of-the-box with Solaris' mpt driver.

Upgrading Solaris 10 to Nevada

Posted by Doomshammer on Sunday, September 2. 2007 at 23:21 in Anwendungen, Computer, English only, Linux/Unix, Privat, Thoughts

As I am still running a very old version of Solaris 10 on one of my boxes, I wanted to verify if an upgrade to one of the current builds works w/o issues. So I downloaded Solaris Nevada build 64 and burned on DVD.

As expected the installer directly noticed that there is already Solaris installed on my disk, so it asked if I wanna upgrade. I selected "Upgrade" and the installer started working. It took about 2.5 hours, but no problem occured. The system rebooted and finally snv b64 started booting. I was very surprised that even the RAID-1 on the two root disks was still intact and that the system bootet from it - awesome :-)

After logging in, I noticed that the zpool (where my home directory lifes) was broken. All drives were unavailable and so I wasn't able to take it online again - probably as the ZFS pool was legacy version 3 and the current version of b64 is v6. Anyhow, as ZFS is pretty smart it was very easy to recover it...

QUOTE:
        NAME         STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
        pool1        UNAVAIL      0     0     0  insufficient replicas
          raidz1     UNAVAIL      0     0     0  insufficient replicas
            c1t2d0   UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot open
            c1t3d0   UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot open
            c1t4d0   UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot open
            c1t5d0   UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot open
            c1t6d0   UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot open
            c1t8d0   UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot open
            c1t9d0   UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot open
            c1t10d0  UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot open
            c1t11d0  UNAVAIL      0     0     0  cannot open


I booted into single user mode (-m milestone=single) and removed the ZFS cache file (/etc/zfs/zfs.cache). Then I continued the boot sequence by running svcadm milestone all, to get into the multi-user milestone. A 'zpool status' confirmed that there was no zpool available anymore. Now I simply executed 'zpool import pool1' and my pool was online and healthy again - followed by 'zpool upgrade pool1' my pool was upgraded to v6 and that's it! :-)

QUOTE:
        NAME         STATE     READ WRITE CKSUM
        pool1        ONLINE       0     0     0
          raidz1     ONLINE       0     0     0
            c1t2d0   ONLINE       0     0     0
            c1t3d0   ONLINE       0     0     0
            c1t4d0   ONLINE       0     0     0
            c1t5d0   ONLINE       0     0     0
            c1t6d0   ONLINE       0     0     0
            c1t8d0   ONLINE       0     0     0
            c1t9d0   ONLINE       0     0     0
            c1t10d0  ONLINE       0     0     0
            c1t11d0  ONLINE       0     0     0


Love it! :-) Now i'm safe to upgrade my old system, as my test-system upgrade worked better than expected :-)

Raid-Z in VMWare

Posted by Doomshammer on Saturday, September 1. 2007 at 16:27 in Anwendungen, Computer, English only, Privat

I finally had some time for playing with Solaris again - especially with ZFS. As I don't want to have another box standing in my living room and making noise, I decided to use a VMWare for playing instead. So I set up a VMWare with 11 hard drives and installed Solaris 10 11/06. Installation went smooth as usual.

First task was to set up a two-way UFS mirror between the first two disks, so that I have a failover when the first disk breaks (of cours, in a vmware this is stupid, as these are only vritual devices - but who cares... it's just for fun :-) ). While creating the mirror, I ran into slight troubles caused by the virtual drives of VMWare. As I didn't choose to allocate the whole disk space during the setup, the disks weren't really touched when I mirrored the partition table with prtvtoc/fmthard. So the created metadb was lost after reboot and caused a OS panic. Deleting the metadb on the 2nd (not yet allocated disk) solved the panic. So I created a filesystem on the 2nd disk, so that disc space got allocated. This finally helped to resolve the metadb/metainit problem.

After that I created a Raid-Z to see how it performs within a VMWare - and though these are virtual drives, it performs like hell. All disk access is nicely striped over all 9 discs in the pool. Putting full I/O on the pool gave me this performance results:

QUOTE:

                capacity     operations    bandwidth
pool          used  avail   read  write   read  write
-----------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----
pool1         483M  35.3G      0  1.77K      0   219M
  raidz1      483M  35.3G      0  1.77K      0   219M
    c1t2d0       -      -      0    385      0  27.4M
    c1t3d0       -      -      0    387      0  27.4M
    c1t4d0       -      -      0    388      0  27.4M
    c1t5d0       -      -      0    389      0  27.4M
    c1t6d0       -      -      0    388      0  27.4M
    c1t8d0       -      -      0    386      0  27.4M
    c1t9d0       -      -      0    387      0  27.4M
    c1t10d0      -      -      0    386      0  27.4M
    c1t11d0      -      -      0    387      0  27.4M
-----------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----


I think these are very good results. Going to play a bit more now :-)

ZFS and "Poor Man's Thumper"

Posted by Doomshammer on Friday, February 2. 2007 at 21:15 in Computer, English only, Fun, Linux/Unix
Whatever these guys smoked... I want the same! ;-)




(via EDV)

I love ZFS :)

Posted by Doomshammer on Tuesday, January 9. 2007 at 19:31 in Anwendungen, Computer, English only, Linux/Unix, Privat, Thoughts
Today I got two new hard discs for my local file server (thanks to my mate Tommy for the discs :-) ). So I quickly mounted them into the case of my server and booted the box.

As expected the discs were dected as well by the BIOS as by SunOS. So all I had to do, was adding them to my current ZFS data pool- which was done in less than two minutes.

Verify the OS detected the discs:
QUOTE:
AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS:
0. c1d0 <DEFAULT cyl 15014 alt 2 hd 255 sec 63>
/pci@0,0/pci-ide@1f,1/ide@0/cmdk@0,0
1. c1d1 <drive type unknown>
/pci@0,0/pci-ide@1f,1/ide@0/cmdk@1,0
2. c2d0 <DEFAULT cyl 15014 alt 2 hd 255 sec 63>
/pci@0,0/pci-ide@1f,1/ide@1/cmdk@0,0
3. c2d1 <drive type unknown>
/pci@0,0/pci-ide@1f,1/ide@1/cmdk@1,0

There we are... c1d1 and c2d1 are the new discs (currently w/o label, that's why the drive type is unknow)

Check the pool status:
QUOTE:
# zpool status
pool: data
state: ONLINE
scrub: none requested
config:

NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
data ONLINE 0 0 0
mirror ONLINE 0 0 0
c1d0s5 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2d0s5 ONLINE 0 0 0
mirror ONLINE 0 0 0
c1d0s4 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2d0s4 ONLINE 0 0 0

errors: No known data errors

# zpool list
NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT
data 76.8G 26.3G 50.5G 34% ONLINE -

Everything's fine- as expected :-)

Add the new discs to the data pool:
QUOTE:
# zpool add data mirror c1d1 c2d1


Done! Now have a quick look, if everything has been added and that's it!
QUOTE:
# zpool status
pool: data
state: ONLINE
scrub: none requested
config:

NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
data ONLINE 0 0 0
mirror ONLINE 0 0 0
c1d0s5 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2d0s5 ONLINE 0 0 0
mirror ONLINE 0 0 0
c1d0s4 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2d0s4 ONLINE 0 0 0
mirror ONLINE 0 0 0
c1d1 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2d1 ONLINE 0 0 0

errors: No known data errors

# zpool list
NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT
data 153G 26.3G 126G 17% ONLINE -


Great! Isn't it?!

ZFS vs. VxFS

Posted by Doomshammer on Thursday, January 4. 2007 at 17:59 in Anwendungen, Computer, English only, Linux/Unix

In his blog, Joerg Moellenkamp points to an interessting Benchmark. ZFS vs. Veritas' VxFS. Have a look at it- it's worth reading.

ZFS as kinda "version control system"

Posted by Doomshammer on Friday, December 22. 2006 at 23:26 in Anwendungen, Computer, English only, Linux/Unix, Thoughts
Here Joerg Moellenkamp developed an idea for using ZFS as kind of "version control system" e. g. for a website. IMHO a pretty neat idea!

ZFS compression and filesystem cache

Posted by Doomshammer on Tuesday, December 19. 2006 at 19:12 in Anwendungen, Computer, English only, Linux/Unix, Privat, Thoughts
Even if the data I used in this example isn't reasonable, the result is pretty impressive though:
Creation of a 1 GiB file w/o zfs compression/filesystem cache:

QUOTE:
[root@exitus ~pgsql]# time mkfile 1g foo.1g
mkfile 1g foo.1g 0.07s user 7.81s system 8% cpu 1:27.90 total


After doing a "zfs set compression=on data/postgresql":

QUOTE:
[root@exitus ~pgsql]# time mkfile 1g foo.1g
mkfile 1g foo.1g 0.07s user 7.27s system 58% cpu 12.632 total


More CPU usage (by the filesystem cache) but the write operation was 6 times faster as it was performed in memory before the physical write operation has been performed.

Playing around with zfs

Posted by Doomshammer on Tuesday, December 19. 2006 at 11:26 in Anwendungen, Computer, English only, Linux/Unix, Privat, Thoughts
I am currently playing around with ZFS on my SunOS File Server. ZFS is a new developed file system (initially called: Zettabyte File System). ZFS is an easy to administer but mighty file system. Find the basic administration guide here.

I just created a ZFS for my /data directory. It is pretty easy, as the zfs commands do everything needed by theirselfs. Just do s. th. like this to create a pool: "zpool create <name> mirror c1d0s5 c2d0s5" (I created the zfs on a slice, as I don't have two additional disks in that server to accomplish the recommended creation over a entire disk). And there you are. Zpool checks the disks, creates a filesystem and mounts the newly created file system. No I created a sub-filesystem for my user with a quota of 35GiB which is pretty simple as well. "zfs create <name>/doomy; zfs set quota=35G <name>/doomy" and you are ready to go. Impressive! I'm going to play around a bit more with it and will let you know about my experiences (if I'll get some ;-) ).

Calendar

Back May '13
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    

Quicksearch

Not for Sale!

This blog is not for sale!

Latest twitter

Latest Photos

ERROR: The HTTP server returned the error or the warning(result:403).

Getaggte Artikel

Buttons

Ich bin ein Dokuleser
Get OpenSolaris
Gimme a Smile
neessen.net - Webhosting
I'm a blogger!
Lebst Du noch oder oarks Du schon?
last.fm
trnd - be trendy
I hear Metal
Visit GeoURL
Powered by Linux
Zsh lover
VIM! The Editor
Get Firefox
Ihr, nicht ich!
My amazon wishlist

BLOGROLL