Re: List Spam Filtering
On Thu, 16 May 2013 23:05:33 +0100 Bruce Cran articulated: There have been some discussions about this in the past. freebsd-questions doesn't require subscribing to avoid people who may be unfamiliar with mailing lists being put off posting to it. Seriously? If some potential poster were so brain dead that he/she could not comprehend how to subscribe to the mailing list then I would seriously doubt that they would possess the necessary skills to install and run FreeBSD to begin with. Lets be honest here. All that the present system does is act as an enabler for Spam merchants and Trolls. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:18:18PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: I'm a big fan of _not_ having to subscribe to a list to get a quick hand with a one off problem (obviously not this one!)- otherwise too many lists get subscribed to, oodles of messages come in which you can't do anything about and so forth (so its not simply just a matter of subscribe, unsubscribe as noted). I concur with you, which is why point #2 in my message (which I've elided for brevity here) comes into play: if the list-owners set the subscribers only flag in Mailman, then messages from nonsubscribers will be held for their attention. I don't think it's unreasonable or particularly burdensome to request that they check that queue once a day or so, and decide how to dispose of those messages. I should also expand on that to mention that Mailman offers a number of choices on how that disposition is handled: list-owners can choose, for example, to add the address in question to a list of non-subscribers permitted to post, so that subsequent traffic from the same person won't be held up and require attention. I've found this quite useful for cases where interested individuals send traffic sporadically. I've also found it quite useful to note the email addresses of obvious spammers and block them at the MTA, because they'll often step through *all* the mailing lists sequentially and it becomes tedious to discard the same spam over and over. Blocking at the MTA alleviates this problem. Another way to put it is that while using this method involves a small initial effort, it has the significant advantage of not requiring any action on the part of legitimate message senders, and the effort required by list-owners diminishes over time. It also doesn't require any coding effort or external plumbing. Aside from all that, the last suggestion (4) should be possible using some simple filtering without the need to change the subscription parameters. It could be possible to even do it automatically saving further work on a list-owner. I urge caution on that: oh, it's a fine idea, but introducing automation into that process has its issues/risks. In practice, I've found (having run many mailing lists over many years) that the manual workload is so small that it's not worth automating. Since I've now opened my big mouth on this topic twice: if the list-owners are paying attention and wish assistance with this, I'm certainly willing to help out. ---rsk ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On 17/05/2013 11:42, Jerry wrote: Seriously? If some potential poster were so brain dead that he/she could not comprehend how to subscribe to the mailing list then I would seriously doubt that they would possess the necessary skills to install and run FreeBSD to begin with. Lets be honest here. All that the present system does is act as an enabler for Spam merchants and Trolls. Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:54:29 +0100 Bruce Cran wrote: On 17/05/2013 11:42, Jerry wrote: Seriously? If some potential poster were so brain dead that he/she could not comprehend how to subscribe to the mailing list then I would seriously doubt that they would possess the necessary skills to install and run FreeBSD to begin with. Lets be honest here. All that the present system does is act as an enabler for Spam merchants and Trolls. Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? There's also the likelyhood that reluctant subscribers are less likely to take care about avoiding various types of backscatter. It seems to me that the level of spam in list is pretty much negligible. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:19:32 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:54:29 +0100 Bruce Cran wrote: On 17/05/2013 11:42, Jerry wrote: Seriously? If some potential poster were so brain dead that he/she could not comprehend how to subscribe to the mailing list then I would seriously doubt that they would possess the necessary skills to install and run FreeBSD to begin with. Lets be honest here. All that the present system does is act as an enabler for Spam merchants and Trolls. Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? There's also the likelyhood that reluctant subscribers are less likely to take care about avoiding various types of backscatter. Well, unless the reluctant subscriber is running an incorrectly configured MTA, I don't see a problem with backscatter. Now, if they do have a maladjusted MTA, they have more problems then just subscribing to a list. It seems to me that the level of spam in list is pretty much negligible. That would be a subjective statement. It is like asking how many times you have to slap your wife before you are considered a wife beater. Interestingly enough, the FBI won't classify you as a serial killer until you have killed a minimum of three people. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 17 May 2013 08:45:29 -0400 Jerry wrote: On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:19:32 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:54:29 +0100 Bruce Cran wrote: Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? There's also the likelyhood that reluctant subscribers are less likely to take care about avoiding various types of backscatter. Well, unless the reluctant subscriber is running an incorrectly configured MTA, I don't see a problem with backscatter. Now, if they do have a maladjusted MTA, they have more problems then just subscribing to a list. Out of Office replies, sieve rejects, anti-spam challenges etc ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:03:01 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 08:45:29 -0400 Jerry wrote: On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:19:32 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:54:29 +0100 Bruce Cran wrote: Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? There's also the likelyhood that reluctant subscribers are less likely to take care about avoiding various types of backscatter. Well, unless the reluctant subscriber is running an incorrectly configured MTA, I don't see a problem with backscatter. Now, if they do have a maladjusted MTA, they have more problems then just subscribing to a list. Out of Office replies, sieve rejects, anti-spam challenges etc Yes, an incorrectly configured MTA or one of its milters. There are ways to deal with these assholes. Allowing a blanket open-door policy is like setting file permissions on everything to 0777 just because you are to lazy to find a correct solution to a problem. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On 05/17/2013 05:45, Jerry wrote: On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:19:32 +0100 It seems to me that the level of spam in list is pretty much negligible. That would be a subjective statement. It is like asking how many times you have to slap your wife before you are considered a wife beater. Interestingly enough, the FBI won't classify you as a serial killer until you have killed a minimum of three people. This has gotten to the point of the ridiculous now. Comparing a few spam to wife beating and serial killers? That's just patently offensive, quite frankly. All this bike shedding and crosstalk has produced far more pointless email than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the last month. Capitalism: we brought you the pop-up ad. -- Dave Robison Sales Solution Architect II FIS Banking Solutions 510/621-2089 (w) 530/518-5194 (c) 510/621-2020 (f) da...@vicor.com david.robi...@fisglobal.com _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 10:53 -0700, Robison, Dave wrote: All this bike shedding and crosstalk has produced far more pointless email than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the last month. I don't know if those mails where pointless, but there were much mails and I only read two or three mails including this, IOW there was at least much traffic caused by this discussion, that has less to do with questions about FreeBSD, IMO this is ok, I like OT talk myself, even if I wasn't interested in this discussion. I'm subscribed to trillions of mailing lists, perhaps a few less than trillions and several open mailing lists, including this one. I don't get much spam and it's easy to filter the few junk mails I receive. The few spam I get can't be eliminated by any method. The internet is the Wilde West, it makes me wonder that I get that less spam. It's said, that for all long discussions in the Internet, soon or later somebody will mention the Nazis and if somebody mentions the Nazis, an Internet discussion has reached it's end. The Nazis where some kind of serial killers, so perhaps this is the reason to stop this discussion. I hope there wasn't a flame war, I really didn't read this thread. Please stay peacefully folks ;). We can't get rid of all junk mail and seriously, we can't get rid of all evil on this planet. Some people really do very bad crimes, so we shouldn't waste much time in thinking about spam. Polemical comparison does hurt some people, but I guess it should be ok, if somebody makes an inappropriate comparison. We should be allowed to write without keeping political correctness 24/7 in mind. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
ZFS install on a partition
Hi, I have a question regarding ZFS install on a system setup using an Intel Modular. This system runs various flavor of FreeBSD and Linux using a shared pool (LUNs). These LUNs have been configured in RAID 6 using the internal controller (LSI logic). So from the OS point of view there is just a volume available. I know I should install a system using HBA and JBOD configuration - but unfortunately this is not an option for this server. What would you advise ? 1. Can I use an existing partition and setup ZFS on this partition using a standard Zpool (no RAID). 2. Should I use any other solution in order to setup this (like full ZFS install on disk using the entire pool with ZFS). 3. Should I avoid using ZFS since my system is not well tuned and It would be asking for trouble to use ZFS in these conditions. P.S. Stability is a must for this system - so I won't die if you answer 3 and tell me to keep on using UFS. Thanks. «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ PGP ID -- 0x1BA3C2FD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS install on a partition
Your hardware raid should be faster than ZFS raid. Don't use zfs raid because there will be no benefit. You'll get the performance of software raid using CPU time, along with lost space for already backed up data. ZFS should work fine. A lot of the tuning on the wiki page isn't needed anymore, so it's not too bad. The biggest thing to be careful with is upgrading your zpool, every so often your boot blocks may need updated and if you forget, you can't boot. You won't upgrade your pool often of course. Reliability shouldn't be an issue, it's FreeBSD. ZFS will make it easier to play around with jails, have fun and create a 1000 node beowulf on one system. On 5/17/2013 5:24 PM, b...@todoo.biz wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding ZFS install on a system setup using an Intel Modular. This system runs various flavor of FreeBSD and Linux using a shared pool (LUNs). These LUNs have been configured in RAID 6 using the internal controller (LSI logic). So from the OS point of view there is just a volume available. I know I should install a system using HBA and JBOD configuration - but unfortunately this is not an option for this server. What would you advise ? 1. Can I use an existing partition and setup ZFS on this partition using a standard Zpool (no RAID). 2. Should I use any other solution in order to setup this (like full ZFS install on disk using the entire pool with ZFS). 3. Should I avoid using ZFS since my system is not well tuned and It would be asking for trouble to use ZFS in these conditions. P.S. Stability is a must for this system - so I won't die if you answer 3 and tell me to keep on using UFS. Thanks. «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ PGP ID -- 0x1BA3C2FD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
License on the original BSD diff
Looking at the original code for diff: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/csrg/usr.bin/diff/ The licensing that applies to it seems to be simply that of the standard BSD license: http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/license.html Is that correct? If so, what's the relationship between that code and the diff code currently in openbsd: http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/diff/ The original commit in the openbsd tree by deraadt seems to indicate that the Caldera license is what made the code usable, but if the diffreg.c file was in the original BSD 4.4 lite release (diffing the original openBSD diffreg.c upload with the copy in csrg shows only the BSD header and one other line as differences) wouldn't the code already have been usable from the get-go without Caldera's say-so? The diffreg.c file in csrg shows a copyright of the Regents of the University of California, and doesn't mention Caldera at all. The issue is of some interest because the wiki page documenting candidates to replace GPL software in base list the OpenBSD copies of the diff tools: https://wiki.freebsd.org/GPLinBase The 4 clause BSD license that comes with the Caldera copyright is a problem when it comes to mixing and matching with (L)GPL code, which is one of my possible use cases, so I'm interested in whether the original diff in csrg can be regarded as licensed with the standard 3 clause license? If that is the case, is there a possibility that the changes made to OpenBSD's version could be re-applied starting with the 4.4BSD-lite copy as a base rather than the Caldera version to create a modern 3-clause BSD licensed diff? Apologies if this has been covered before in the process of the SoC projects, but if it was I haven't turned it up yet - any help appreciated. Thanks, CY ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS install on a partition
On May 17, 2013, at 6:24 PM, b...@todoo.biz b...@todoo.biz wrote: I know I should install a system using HBA and JBOD configuration - but unfortunately this is not an option for this server. I ran many ZFS pools on top of hardware raid units, because that is what we had. It works fine and the NVRAM write cache of the better hardware raid systems give you a performance boost. What would you advise ? 1. Can I use an existing partition and setup ZFS on this partition using a standard Zpool (no RAID). Sure. Be careful when you say RAID… I assume you mean RAIDzn configured top level vdevs. Remember, a mirror is RAID-1 and the base ZFS striping is considered RAID-0. So set it up as plain stripe of one vdev :-) 2. Should I use any other solution in order to setup this (like full ZFS install on disk using the entire pool with ZFS). If the system is configured with existing LUNS use them. 3. Should I avoid using ZFS since my system is not well tuned and It would be asking for trouble to use ZFS in these conditions. No. One of the biggest benefits of ZFS is the end to end data integrity. IF there is a silent fault in the HW RAID (it happens), ZFS will detect the corrupt data and note it. If you had a mirror or other redundant device, ZFS would then read the data from the *other* copy and rewrite the bad block (or mark that physical block bad and use another). P.S. Stability is a must for this system - so I won't die if you answer 3 and tell me to keep on using UFS. ZFS is stable, it is NOT as tuned as UFS just due to age. UFS in all of it's various incarnations has been tuned far more than any filesystem has any right to be. I spent many years managing Solaris system and I was truly amazed at how tuned the Solaris version of UFS was. I have been running a number of 9.0 and 9.1 servers in production, all running ZFS for both OS and data, with no FS related issues. Thanks. «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ PGP ID -- 0x1BA3C2FD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Paul Kraus Deputy Technical Director, LoneStarCon 3 Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 10:53:39AM -0700, Robison, Dave wrote: This has gotten to the point of the ridiculous now. Comparing a few spam to wife beating and serial killers? That's just patently offensive, quite frankly. All this bike shedding and crosstalk has produced far more pointless email than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the last month. What he said, +infinity. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS install on a partition
On 18 May 2013, at 01:15, Joshua Isom jri...@gmail.com wrote: Your hardware raid should be faster than ZFS raid. Don't use zfs raid because there will be no benefit. Self healing much ? I wouldn't dream of dropping it for a 20mb/s performance increase from a HW controller. What if the controller derps and writes bad data ? You'll get the performance of software raid using CPU time, along with lost space for already backed up data. ZFS should work fine. A lot of the tuning on the wiki page isn't needed anymore, so it's not too bad. The biggest thing to be careful with is upgrading your zpool, every so often your boot blocks may need updated and if you forget, you can't boot. You won't upgrade your pool often of course. Reliability shouldn't be an issue, it's FreeBSD. ZFS will make it easier to play around with jails, have fun and create a 1000 node beowulf on one system. On 5/17/2013 5:24 PM, b...@todoo.biz wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding ZFS install on a system setup using an Intel Modular. This system runs various flavor of FreeBSD and Linux using a shared pool (LUNs). These LUNs have been configured in RAID 6 using the internal controller (LSI logic). So from the OS point of view there is just a volume available. I know I should install a system using HBA and JBOD configuration - but unfortunately this is not an option for this server. What would you advise ? 1. Can I use an existing partition and setup ZFS on this partition using a standard Zpool (no RAID). 2. Should I use any other solution in order to setup this (like full ZFS install on disk using the entire pool with ZFS). 3. Should I avoid using ZFS since my system is not well tuned and It would be asking for trouble to use ZFS in these conditions. P.S. Stability is a must for this system - so I won't die if you answer 3 and tell me to keep on using UFS. Thanks. «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ PGP ID -- 0x1BA3C2FD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS install on a partition
Thanks for this documented answer. Couple of comments though… Le 18 mai 2013 à 02:03, Paul Kraus p...@kraus-haus.org a écrit : On May 17, 2013, at 6:24 PM, b...@todoo.biz b...@todoo.biz wrote: I know I should install a system using HBA and JBOD configuration - but unfortunately this is not an option for this server. I ran many ZFS pools on top of hardware raid units, because that is what we had. It works fine and the NVRAM write cache of the better hardware raid systems give you a performance boost. What would you advise ? 1. Can I use an existing partition and setup ZFS on this partition using a standard Zpool (no RAID). Sure. Be careful when you say RAID… I assume you mean RAIDzn configured top level vdevs. Remember, a mirror is RAID-1 and the base ZFS striping is considered RAID-0. So set it up as plain stripe of one vdev :-) Ok so I'll use a dedicated volume (LUN) and install it as a RAID-0 vdev. 2. Should I use any other solution in order to setup this (like full ZFS install on disk using the entire pool with ZFS). If the system is configured with existing LUNS use them. 3. Should I avoid using ZFS since my system is not well tuned and It would be asking for trouble to use ZFS in these conditions. No. One of the biggest benefits of ZFS is the end to end data integrity. IF there is a silent fault in the HW RAID (it happens), ZFS will detect the corrupt data and note it. If you had a mirror or other redundant device, ZFS would then read the data from the *other* copy and rewrite the bad block (or mark that physical block bad and use another). P.S. Stability is a must for this system - so I won't die if you answer 3 and tell me to keep on using UFS. ZFS is stable, it is NOT as tuned as UFS just due to age. UFS in all of it's various incarnations has been tuned far more than any filesystem has any right to be. I spent many years managing Solaris system and I was truly amazed at how tuned the Solaris version of UFS was. I have been running a number of 9.0 and 9.1 servers in production, all running ZFS for both OS and data, with no FS related issues. Ok - great answer. I have setup a FreeNAS ZFS appliance (running native HBAs + JBOD) and used it as a backup solution using snapshots. This is why I wanted to have ZFS at first. If you have any other advise - they are welcome. Thanks a lot. GB. Thanks. «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ PGP ID -- 0x1BA3C2FD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Paul Kraus Deputy Technical Director, LoneStarCon 3 Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ PGP ID -- 0x1BA3C2FD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS install on a partition
Le 18 mai 2013 à 06:49, kpn...@pobox.com a écrit : On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 08:03:30PM -0400, Paul Kraus wrote: On May 17, 2013, at 6:24 PM, b...@todoo.biz b...@todoo.biz wrote: 3. Should I avoid using ZFS since my system is not well tuned and It would be asking for trouble to use ZFS in these conditions. No. One of the biggest benefits of ZFS is the end to end data integrity. IF there is a silent fault in the HW RAID (it happens), ZFS will detect the corrupt data and note it. If you had a mirror or other redundant device, ZFS would then read the data from the *other* copy and rewrite the bad block (or mark that physical block bad and use another). I believe the copies=2 and copies=3 option exists to enable ZFS to self heal despite ZFS not being in charge of RAID. If ZFS only has a single LUN to work with, but the copies=2 or more option is set, then if ZFS detects an error it can still correct it. This option is a dataset option, is inheritable by child datasets, and can be changed at any time affecting data written after the change. To get the full benefit you'll therefore want to set the option before putting data into the relevant dataset. Ok, good to know. I planned to setup a consistent Snapshot policy and remote backup using zfs send / receive That should be enough for me… Is the overhead of this setup equal to double size used on disk ? -- Kevin P. Nealhttp://www.pobox.com/~kpn/ Nonbelievers found it difficult to defend their position in \ the presense of a working computer. -- a DEC Jensen paper «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - BSD - «?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§«?»¥«?»§ PGP ID -- 0x1BA3C2FD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
