Should Zevo work ok with Mavericks?

Moderators: jhartley, MSR734, nola

Re: Should Zevo work ok with Mavericks?

Post by ilovezfs » Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:36 am

dirkZevo wrote:I just checked my backup disk against zfs on fedora running in virtualbox, and the files show up ok. ( not in latest openindiana )
So I am planning a solution that way. I currently boot from ssd, then mount my user data from a 1tb zfs disk.
So I will somehow share this data from fedora to mavericks. ( netatalk ? nfs ? )
Anyone thinking about doing this ? ( I don't need performance )

Your pool should import fine in the latest OpenIndiana. This sounds like a problem with the disk not being seen by the VM at all, perhaps? You should probably try VMware Fusion 6 or Parallels 9.

Have you considered using the new version of MacZFS? https://github.com/zfs-osx/zfs
That's my plan.

Also, Mac OS X (Snow Leopard Server, Lion, Mountain Lion, and Mavericks) can run in a virtual machine (VMware, Parallels, and VirtualBox). So you could use a Mountain Lion VM with ZEVO, together with https://github.com/joshado/liberate-applefileserver and share your files back to the host using Apple's built-in AFP.

Mavericks default networking protocol is SMB2, though Time Machine still uses only AFP. So if you're using Linux or Illumos (e.g., OpenIndiana), then I'd be looking at using an SMB2 share from a VM, and if not SMB2, then use Netatalk for AFP. Mountain Lion does not use SMB2, so if you go the OS X VM + ZEVO route, in that case you would be using Apple's AFP.
ilovezfs Online


 
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 9:02 am

Re: Should Zevo work ok with Mavericks?

Post by dirkZevo » Sun Sep 08, 2013 3:11 pm

The import was ok. the pools were mounted at there normal mountpoints, but the directories showed up as files. I didn't investigate any further. I use virtualbox. I just had updated openindiana to the latest.


"Your pool should import fine in the latest OpenIndiana. This sounds like a problem with the disk not being seen by the VM at all, perhaps?"
dirkZevo Offline


 
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 10:33 am

Re: Should Zevo work ok with Mavericks?

Post by ilovezfs » Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:32 am

dirkZevo wrote:The import was ok. the pools were mounted at there normal mountpoints, but the directories showed up as files. I didn't investigate any further. I use virtualbox. I just had updated openindiana to the latest.


"Your pool should import fine in the latest OpenIndiana. This sounds like a problem with the disk not being seen by the VM at all, perhaps?"

VirtualBox tends to have terrible performance depending on OS.

Anyway, that sounds like a permissions issue. Did you try to cd into the directories from the terminal, as root.

sudo su -
cd /mydirectory
ls
ilovezfs Online


 
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 9:02 am

OT, VirtualBoxVM performance

Post by grahamperrin » Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:24 pm

ilovezfs wrote:… VirtualBox tends to have terrible performance depending on OS. …


OpenIndiana

Guest seems OK to me on a Mac host.

I never worked with an OpenIndiana host so I can't draw a performance comparison.

OS X

Guest performance of Lion or Mountain Lion, on a Mac host, may be increased by:

  1. selective use of software that is normally associated with OSx86 (not with Mac); and/or
  2. not running the dynamic_pager(8) daemon in the guest, although this can be risky.

For (a) I recall various discussions – probably in https://forums.virtualbox.org or http://www.tonymacx86.com/forum.php but I don't have bookmarks handy (and performance of VirtualBox is off-topic from ZEVO). If you'd like to know more but can't find the relevant discussions, I'm sometimes in irc://chat.freenode.net/#vbox … or ask in Ask Different.
grahamperrin Offline

User avatar
 
Posts: 1596
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 10:21 pm
Location: Brighton and Hove, United Kingdom

Re: OT, VirtualBoxVM performance

Post by ilovezfs » Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:41 pm

The point is that VMware and Parallels are screaming fast out of the box. It just works.
ilovezfs Online


 
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 9:02 am

Re: Should Zevo work ok with Mavericks?

Post by ylluminate » Tue Sep 10, 2013 10:51 pm

dirkZevo wrote:I just checked my backup disk against zfs on fedora running in virtualbox, and the files show up ok. ( not in latest openindiana )
So I am planning a solution that way. I currently boot from ssd, then mount my user data from a 1tb zfs disk.
So I will somehow share this data from fedora to mavericks. ( netatalk ? nfs ? )
Anyone thinking about doing this ? ( I don't need performance )


I used to do this. I had some nice experiences with FreeBSD proper and then http://www.freenas.org, however I found Don's project, connected with him and had not looked back until this absolute disaster with GreenBytes. I am probably going to shift to A) move my drives over to a new FreeNAS server soon and then B) install SoftRAID once they get RAID-5 in place and use it at least for my Users volume. I abhor HFS+ with all of my experiences pulling it from death over the past decade+, but I have to live with this ugly little monster child of Apple until someone get's their head out of their proverbial butt hole over in the management side and let the Core OS team get back to real work vs babysitting their mobile star child requirements. <sigh>
ylluminate Offline


 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 1:37 am

Re: Should Zevo work ok with Mavericks?

Post by ilovezfs » Tue Sep 10, 2013 10:56 pm

ylluminate wrote:
dirkZevo wrote:I just checked my backup disk against zfs on fedora running in virtualbox, and the files show up ok. ( not in latest openindiana )
So I am planning a solution that way. I currently boot from ssd, then mount my user data from a 1tb zfs disk.
So I will somehow share this data from fedora to mavericks. ( netatalk ? nfs ? )
Anyone thinking about doing this ? ( I don't need performance )


I used to do this. I had some nice experiences with FreeBSD proper and then http://www.freenas.org, however I found Don's project, connected with him and had not looked back until this absolute disaster with GreenBytes. I am probably going to shift to A) move my drives over to a new FreeNAS server soon and then B) install SoftRAID once they get RAID-5 in place and use it at least for my Users volume. I abhor HFS+ with all of my experiences pulling it from death over the past decade+, but I have to live with this ugly little monster child of Apple until someone get's their head out of their proverbial butt hole over in the management side and let the Core OS team get back to real work vs babysitting their mobile star child requirements. <sigh>


ylluminate: even in light of GreenBytes's announcement that Mavericks support is forthcoming?
ilovezfs Online


 
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 9:02 am

Performance of FreeNAS with FreeBSD 9.1-STABLE

Post by grahamperrin » Tue Sep 10, 2013 11:17 pm

ylluminate wrote:… to a new FreeNAS server …


Yesterday since a friend donated a spare computer I began testing FreeBSD 9.1-STABLE (FREENAS.amd64) #0 r+1a51513 (planned by me long before Mavericks was announced).

Performance of the hardware is ample (scrubs around 50M/s) but over the wired LAN with AFP3.3 I'm getting much less than I'd like. For example:

Code: Select all
[root@freenas] ~# zpool iostat 10
               capacity     operations    bandwidth
pool        alloc   free   read  write   read  write
----------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----
bingo       12.4G   448G     11     19  1.29M  1.14M
^C


I'm in irc://chat.freenode.net/#freenas for advice.

Postscripts

I have a better idea of where, but not why, performance with FreeNAS is initially disappointing.

At https://www.wuala.com/grahamperrin/public/2013/09/11/a in screenshot 2013-09-11 07-10 CopyHFSMeta.png

  • to the left, broad blue bars of reasonable height were tests with AFP and SMB, a large file, different types of network connections (some wired direct to the router)
  • from around halfway, narrow blue bars were Time Machine preparing (resuming) then progressing
  • at the tail, the green chunk was whilst the Mac ran CopyHFSMeta before an fsck_hfs of that metadata.

Key points within the partial backup:

Code: Select all
2013-09-11 06:39:04.916 com.apple.backupd[1221]: Starting manual backup
2013-09-11 06:39:04.935 com.apple.backupd[1221]: Attempting to mount network destination URL: afp://Graham%20Perrin@freenas.local/ear
2013-09-11 06:39:10.343 com.apple.backupd[1221]: Mounted network destination at mount point: /Volumes/ear using URL: afp://Graham%20Perrin@freenas.local/ear
2013-09-11 06:39:35.194 com.apple.backupd[1221]: Resizing backup disk image from 486.44 GB to 486.1 GB
2013-09-11 06:40:15.887 com.apple.backupd[1221]: Disk image /Volumes/ear/gpes3e-gjp4.sparsebundle mounted at: /Volumes/Time Machine Backups
2013-09-11 06:40:22.585 com.apple.backupd[1221]: 82.97 GB required (including padding), 471.89 GB available
2013-09-11 07:04:03.653 com.apple.backupd[1221]: Copied 10437 files (585.6 MB) from volume OS.
2013-09-11 07:04:05.280 com.apple.backupd[1221]: Backup canceled.


Cross reference:

Last edited by grahamperrin on Mon Sep 16, 2013 1:46 am, edited 2 times in total.
grahamperrin Offline

User avatar
 
Posts: 1596
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 10:21 pm
Location: Brighton and Hove, United Kingdom

Re: Should Zevo work ok with Mavericks?

Post by ylluminate » Tue Sep 10, 2013 11:18 pm

ilovezfs wrote:
ylluminate: even in light of GreenBytes's announcement that Mavericks support is forthcoming?


What? What?! LOL! They replied to my twitter msg! Thanks for letting me know. The last several days have been so hectic that I didn't even hop back on to check after a couple of days of checking! Well that makes me happy-er. Did you see this announcement elsewhere or are you referring to their reply to me?
ylluminate Offline


 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 1:37 am

Re: Performance of FreeNAS with FreeBSD 9.1-STABLE

Post by ylluminate » Tue Sep 10, 2013 11:21 pm

grahamperrin wrote:
ylluminate wrote:… to a new FreeNAS server …


Yesterday since a friend donated a spare computer I began testing FreeBSD 9.1-STABLE (FREENAS.amd64) #0 r+1a51513 (planned by me long before Mavericks was announced).

Performance of the hardware is ample (scrubs around 50M/s) but over the wired LAN with AFP3.3 I'm getting much less than I'd like. For example:

Code: Select all
[root@freenas] ~# zpool iostat 10
               capacity     operations    bandwidth
pool        alloc   free   read  write   read  write
----------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----
bingo       12.4G   448G     11     19  1.29M  1.14M
^C


I'm in irc://chat.freenode.net/#freenas for advice.


Just a note Graham, I have had some very mixed results with Netatalk. You probably want to stick with SMB/CIFS. I think the problem was primarily resolved by Don about a year ago, but we had a heck of a time with some file naming issues for a while due to the way they were being stored, which included a bit of duplication headaches.
ylluminate Offline


 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 1:37 am

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ilovezfs and 0 guests

cron