Scrub faster!

[Jan Ploski]

Ok, this is sort of embarassing, but I have to share how I reduced my
estimated scrub time from 40h to 6h in 5 minutes ;-) simply by copying
zfsrc from contrib to /etc/zfs/zfsrc (and commenting out the fuse-
mount-options line because the daemon refused to start with it).
Previously, without zfsrc, zpool iostat was reporting 8 MB read
bandwidth, now it's giving me 20-30 MB and more! The disk is much
quieter now as well.

I'm ccing the Debian maintainer (Bryan Donlan) in hope that /etc/zfs/
zfsrc can be included in the next version of the package in order to
improve performance for new users of zfs-fuse.

[Emmanuel Anne]

Is it this line which was rejected :
fuse-mount-options = default_permissions
?
Weird it's not something experimental at all, it's been in fuse for ages...

Anyway glad you find it useful, maybe it should be installed by default, but I don't want to accidentally overwrite a system zfsrc and I didn't take the time to do all that cleanly until now...

2010/6/14 Jan Ploski <jpl...@gmx.de>

--
To post to this group, send email to zfs-...@googlegroups.com
To visit our Web site, click on http://zfs-fuse.net/

--
zfs-fuse git repository : http://rainemu.swishparty.co.uk/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=zfs;a=summary

[sgheeren]

On 06/14/2010 10:33 PM, Jan Ploski wrote:

I'm ccing the Debian maintainer (Bryan Donlan) in hope that /etc/zfs/
zfsrc can be included in the next version of the package in order to
improve performance for new users of zfs-fuse.
  

No need, it is already there (being published). On ubuntu / debian squeeze, you might grab the pacakges from zfs-fuse.net homepage if you're in a hurry. That is from my PPA

[sgheeren]

On 06/14/2010 10:33 PM, Jan Ploski wrote:

> (and commenting out the fuse-
> mount-options line because the daemon refused to start with it)

Check the lineends (in vim :se ff=unix|w!, tofrodos and some standard
sed hacks apply). Especially, check that a LF follows the 'last' line in
the file. I have experienced parse errors without that

[L0cutus]

the same here, if i leave the option :
fuse-mount-options = default_permissions

it doesn't work.

> > To visit our Web site, click onhttp://zfs-fuse.net/

[sgheeren]

On 06/15/2010 09:12 AM, L0cutus wrote:
> the same here, if i leave the option :
> fuse-mount-options = default_permissions
>
> it doesn't work.
>

Can either of you file a bug with your system details

Distro name
uname -a
lsmod|grep fuse
lsb_release -a
fusermount -V

fusermount is generally in a package like fuse-utils

[L0cutus]

> > fuse-mount-options = default_permissions
> > it doesn't work.
> Can either of you file a bug with your system details
> Distro name

Archlinux

> uname -a
Linux l0cmobi 2.6.33-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Thu May 13 12:06:25 CEST 2010
i686 Genuine Intel(R) CPU U2300 @ 1.20GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux

> lsmod|grep fuse
fuse 51814 8

> lsb_release -a
command not present ;-)

> fusermount -V
fusermount version: 2.8.4

thanks !

[Jack Sparrow]

Please put that all in the bug when you report it here:
http://zfs-fuse.net/issues. It's likely to get lost on the mailing
list.

[Stefano Z.]

done

[sgheeren]

See my request for help here

http://zfs-fuse.net/issues/61/2

[sgheeren]

http://zfs-fuse.net/issues/61/2 --

To post to this group, send email to zfs-...@googlegroups.com
To visit our Web site, click on http://zfs-fuse.net/

And this



I had already managed ssh, keys, vim, screen git and scons

> and obviously fuse, scons etc...
Now _this_ is the interesting part, because it will be the most time consuming. I know the dependencies, but don't know all the package names for Arch (yet). If you can list them for me, I will put them up at zfs-fuse.net for everyone's use as well.

Apart from that, I'm going to build from git my self

http://zfs-fuse.net/issues/61

[sgheeren]

http://zfs-fuse.net/issues/61/9 be sure to check up on what others have been reporting. We are talking debian as well as Arch now.

I just remembered, scons installing in /usr/local/sbin, PATH settings, initscripts...
Any other ideas on how to move further, guys?

[exabyte]

I'm interested to know which option causes the improvement.

[Emmanuel Anne]

Could you post the faulty zfsrc to the list, packed so that we can retrieve it exactly as it is, with cr included. (run md5sum on it, then post the result and pack it inside a .7z file for example to keep the format).

2010/6/17 exabyte <som...@gmail.com>

--

To post to this group, send email to zfs-...@googlegroups.com
To visit our Web site, click on http://zfs-fuse.net/

[sgheeren]

--
To post to this group, send email to zfs-...@googlegroups.com
To visit our Web site, click on http://zfs-fuse.net/

Any news guys? I'm ready to close this bug, but I'd like it if you could spare the time to confirm that you cannot reproduce this bug anymore :)

Now of course this is rather tongue in cheek, but I cannot reproduce this [1] and that makes the reported issue rather useless.
 

Seth

[1] I can, however, if I use the wrong version of zfs-fuse with a newer version of zfsrc
[2] Also note my own new issue #64 http://zfs-fuse.net/issues/64

[sgheeren]

[2] Also note my own new issue #64 http://zfs-fuse.net/issues/64 --

To post to this group, send email to zfs-...@googlegroups.com
To visit our Web site, click on http://zfs-fuse.net/

Ok, Jan Ploski came up with the missing clue.

The issue is that some options are being passed at the command line, while also in the zfsrc. Options like '-o' may not be repeated,
resulting in the failure to parse the command line, after reading zfsrc.

I have resolved the issue because DAEMON_OPTS as being used in the init scripts will be deprecated and the manpage for zfs-fuse [1] already contains a preliminary section warning against confusing config locations for daemon parameters.

[1] Emmanuel, found it?