Am 2007-04-03 23:12:34, schrieb Douglas Allan Tutty:
New project:
Install Etch onto a ST138.
Hmmm, the normal base has 186 MByte
If you are fast enough, you can delete the /usr/doc/package of
the already installed package while the installer tries to unpack
the next one. In this case,
Am 2007-04-02 08:47:13, schrieb Roberto C. Sánchez:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 04:35:03PM +0530, Siju George wrote:
But it seems ext3 has to be unmounted to increase and decrease in size
right?
That would mean downtime for server.
There is currently an experimental online resizing
Daniel B. wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
... If power fails during a write, and the drive
scribbles on the disc in a spiral pattern as the head moves
toward the parking area, that particular disc is hosed.
But the disks almost surely don't scribble on the disk in a spiral
pattern. (They'd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/03/07 20:17, Mike McCarty wrote:
Daniel B. wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
... If power fails during a write, and the drive
scribbles on the disc in a spiral pattern as the head moves
toward the parking area, that particular disc is hosed.
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:02:49PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
The ST138
Christ on a stick, man, that's *ANCIENT*!
Seagate has had a lot of improvements since they released the
*half-height* 32*MB* (that's correct: megabyte, not gigabyte) drive.
Heck, at work I had a 40MB drive
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 22:02 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 04/03/07 20:17, Mike McCarty wrote:
Daniel B. wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
... If power fails during a write, and the drive
scribbles on the disc in a spiral pattern as the head moves
toward the parking area, that particular disc
On 2/20/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So this is where my suggestion for a filesystem comes into play. I
used XFS in the beginning of my experiments with LVM but am migrating
to ext3 now, since XFS can only be grown but not shrunk. But growing
*and* shrinking are both natively
On 4/2/07, Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/20/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So this is where my suggestion for a filesystem comes into play. I
used XFS in the beginning of my experiments with LVM but am migrating
to ext3 now, since XFS can only be grown but not
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 04:35:03PM +0530, Siju George wrote:
But it seems ext3 has to be unmounted to increase and decrease in size
right?
That would mean downtime for server.
There is currently an experimental online resizing patch for ext3. I am
not sure if it is already in the kernel,
Mike McCarty wrote:
... If power fails during a write, and the drive
scribbles on the disc in a spiral pattern as the head moves
toward the parking area, that particular disc is hosed.
But the disks almost surely don't scribble on the disk in a spiral
pattern. (They'd detect that power is
Hello Eduard and *,
Am 2007-03-13 12:58:31, schrieb Eduard Bloch:
I would certainly trust XFS. Of course, if you don't have your machine
on an UPS, it can cause problems on a crash or power outage. How are
Great, that is the usual propaganda from XFS users with the same lame
excuse
Am 2007-03-13 09:02:10, schrieb Douglas Allan Tutty:
running ASAP with data intact after a crash or power failure. When I
made the switch, I didn't have a UPS and I did have unreliable power (I
eventually put the whole house on a big UPS). JFS has been perfect.
ROTFL!
This why I have
Am 2007-03-15 04:46:53, schrieb Paul Johnson:
No kidding. Microsoft hires how many H1Bs while Washington's unemployment
rate is how astronomical again?
Same in France since Orange/FranceTelecom is going
to Bejing and created there a Development FooBar.
In France 6.8 million unemployed and
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Mike McCarty wrote:
This is a device issue, no filesystem may fix it. Not that I expect even
the crap we buy today for desktops and servers to be THIS dumb.
Yes, a file system can fix that. But it has to be a file system
which understands redundant hardware.
I think I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/27/07 13:56, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Mike McCarty wrote:
This is a device issue, no filesystem may fix it. Not that I expect even
the crap we buy today for desktops and servers to be THIS dumb.
Yes, a file
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 11:59:18AM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[snip]
FYI, *any* filesystem has the potential to lose data on a sudden power
outage.
Umm, no. I suppose you haven't worked in telecomm. I've supported
file systems which
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Mike McCarty wrote:
This is untrue. If power fails during a write, and the drive
scribbles on the disc in a spiral pattern as the head moves
toward the parking area, that particular disc is hosed.
This is a device issue, no filesystem may fix it. Not that I expect even
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/26/07 21:04, Mike McCarty wrote:
[snip]
This is untrue. If power fails during a write, and the drive
scribbles on the disc in a spiral pattern as the head moves
toward the parking area, that particular disc is hosed.
Does that happen
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Mike McCarty wrote:
This is untrue. If power fails during a write, and the drive
scribbles on the disc in a spiral pattern as the head moves
toward the parking area, that particular disc is hosed.
This is a device issue, no filesystem
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/26/07 21:04, Mike McCarty wrote:
[snip]
This is untrue. If power fails during a write, and the drive
scribbles on the disc in a spiral pattern as the head moves
toward the parking area, that particular disc is hosed.
Does that happen anymore? Drive manufacturers
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
posted to gmane.linux.debian.user:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to gmane.linux.debian.user:
ssl'ed telnet can't forward tcp/x11 connections, which is an advantage
for some networks) but it does not
On 15.03.07 04:36, Paul Johnson wrote:
If telnet-ssl is just telnet wrapped in SSL, then it sure can forward X11
connections (as can telnet). It just doesn't make you explicitly pass a
-Y or -X to make it so like SSH tends to.
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
Tell me about it. I mean heck, with 4.6% unemployment [0] (being at
0.1% below the national average), I can see how Washington's
unemployment rates can be considered astronomical in every way.
I meant
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
posted to gmane.linux.debian.user:
On 15.03.07 04:36, Paul Johnson wrote:
If telnet-ssl is just telnet wrapped in SSL, then it sure can forward
X11
connections (as can telnet). It just doesn't make you explicitly pass
a -Y or -X
On 15.03.07 04:36, Paul Johnson wrote:
If telnet-ssl is just telnet wrapped in SSL, then it sure can forward
X11
connections (as can telnet). It just doesn't make you explicitly pass
a -Y or -X to make it so like SSH tends to.
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote in Article
[EMAIL
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:43:03 -0400
Greg Folkert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and RIP TelnetD (IOW the telnet Daemon) right out of the machine.
OpenSSH (as done by OpenBSD devs) is what should be defacto standard.
On 13.03.07 19:37, Celejar wrote:
I'm curious about telnet(d)-ssl. I don't know
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
posted to gmane.linux.debian.user:
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:43:03 -0400
Greg Folkert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and RIP TelnetD (IOW the telnet Daemon) right out of the machine.
OpenSSH (as done by OpenBSD devs) is what should be defacto
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
But for crying out loud, even your
below average Joe knows enough to lock his car when he walks away from
it.
So that's why when you look in any Ford owner's manual (that's the only make
I've noticed this
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 06:54:22PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
I wish it could really be that way everywhere. I
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 04:46:53AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
I know about it. But (and you might want to sit down for this) I was
once at a place where I suggested PuTTY and they said no, citing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/15/07 08:06, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 04:46:53AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
[snip]
No kidding. Microsoft hires how many H1Bs while Washington's unemployment
rate is how astronomical again?
Tell me about it. I mean
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:14:22 +0100
Matus UHLAR - fantomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:43:03 -0400
Greg Folkert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and RIP TelnetD (IOW the telnet Daemon) right out of the machine.
OpenSSH (as done by OpenBSD devs) is what should be defacto
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
posted to gmane.linux.debian.user:
ssl'ed telnet can't forward tcp/x11 connections, which is an advantage for
some networks) but it does not have native check gfor host keys. I hope
this answers both questions.
On 15.03.07 04:36,
If you want to install Oracle on Linux (and *lots* of companies do,
so don't bleat about not infecting your system with closed-source),
you need X.
No, you only need a few libraries. The Display can be a local
workstation.
I know this, I've done it, as far back as 1998 when the
WTF, I see Windows mentality has become the norm.
and RIP TelnetD (IOW the telnet Daemon) right out of the machine.
OpenSSH (as done by OpenBSD devs) is what should be defacto standard.
I wish it could really be that way everywhere. I have been places where
they run telnetd on all
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 07:11:06AM -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
Is there any compatibility issues as far as versions of X, the server
being non-linux (or even not the same distro as the workstation), etc?
Nope. X is a protocol, much the same as FTP or HTTP. If your client
(or server in the
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 06:54:22PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
I wish it could really be that way everywhere. I have been places where
they run telnetd on all the Solaris and Linux servers because
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 07:17:40AM -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
The place I talk about has legacy stuff (long forgotten cron jobs on
random servers) that used to telnet and FTP stuff around)
Eeek!
I was trying to tell the admins to switch and they said that they were
told not to, because
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 08:33:19AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 07:11:06AM -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
Is there any compatibility issues as far as versions of X, the server
being non-linux (or even not the same distro as the workstation), etc?
Nope. X is a
I wish it could really be that way everywhere. I have been places where
they run telnetd on all the Solaris and Linux servers because (get this)
windows only comes with a telnet client and not an ssh client.
They do know about putty, right? It's only a few kB...
I know about
On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 07:11 -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
If you want to install Oracle on Linux (and *lots* of companies do,
so don't bleat about not infecting your system with closed-source),
you need X.
No, you only need a few libraries. The Display can be a local
workstation.
On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 07:39 -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 08:33:19AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 07:11:06AM -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
Is there any compatibility issues as far as versions of X, the server
being non-linux (or even not
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:43:03 -0400
Greg Folkert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
and RIP TelnetD (IOW the telnet Daemon) right out of the machine.
OpenSSH (as done by OpenBSD devs) is what should be defacto standard.
I'm curious about telnet(d)-ssl. I don't know any reason to use it over
ssh,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/13/07 01:56, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 03:01:00PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Ever worked with RHEL or Fedora (or Red Hat before that)? They have
I don't run Debian.
Mike McCarty wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I personally am a fan of XFS. However, it is also possible to use ext3
on large partitions, as you point out. At work, I have a production
server (running RHEL, unfortunately)
#include hallo.h
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Mon, Mar 12 2007, 07:06:43PM]:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:34:48PM +0100, Mathias Brodala wrote:
Hi Roberto.
I see. I was asking since I have a whole drive full of videos and such
which are
usually between 100MB and 300MB per file. So I guess
I would certainly trust XFS. Of course, if you don't have your machine
on an UPS, it can cause problems on a crash or power outage.
Great, that is the usual propaganda from XFS users with the same lame
excuse written with small letters. It has this bad tendency to shred the
file
Eduard Bloch wrote:
#include hallo.h
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Mon, Mar 12 2007, 07:06:43PM]:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:34:48PM +0100, Mathias Brodala wrote:
Hi Roberto.
I see. I was asking since I have a whole drive full of videos and such which are
usually between 100MB and 300MB per
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 12:58:31PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
#include hallo.h
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Mon, Mar 12 2007, 07:06:43PM]:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:34:48PM +0100, Mathias Brodala wrote:
I see. I was asking since I have a whole drive full of videos and such
which are
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 12:58:31PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
Great, that is the usual propaganda from XFS users with the same lame
excuse written with small letters.
How is it propaganda? It was a statement of fact.
It has this bad tendency to shred the
file contents after powerouts or
Well, as an anecdote of my own, I have used both XFS and ext3 quite
extensively and found that they are equally as good, given *quality*
hardware.
I assume quality hardware is mutually exclusive with a home PC
Is that correct?
--
Tarek
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 09:34 -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
Well, as an anecdote of my own, I have used both XFS and ext3 quite
extensively and found that they are equally as good, given *quality*
hardware.
I assume quality hardware is mutually exclusive with a home PC
Is that correct?
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 09:34:45AM -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
Well, as an anecdote of my own, I have used both XFS and ext3 quite
extensively and found that they are equally as good, given *quality*
hardware.
I assume quality hardware is mutually exclusive with a home PC
Is that
Now as far as video, who cares about that... servers don't need GUI
stuff.
Tell that to our admins who run redhat and suse. Want to disable these
guys? Remove some X libraries. (The one guy who uses CLI uses telnet)
Yes they really have X on ALL of the servers.
--
Tarek
--
To
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 10:33:38AM -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
Now as far as video, who cares about that... servers don't need GUI
stuff.
Tell that to our admins who run redhat and suse. Want to disable these
guys? Remove some X libraries. (The one guy who uses CLI uses telnet)
Yes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/13/07 10:33, Tarek Soliman wrote:
Now as far as video, who cares about that... servers don't need GUI
stuff.
Tell that to our admins who run redhat and suse. Want to disable these
guys? Remove some X libraries. (The one guy who uses CLI
Ron Johnson wrote:
[snip]
All of those should work, with (depending on the card/chip) the
possible exception of sound.
If you can't make Debian work, install Ubuntu. That's what it's for.
And don't feel yourself a failure. I couldn't get RH5.2 installed,
and, when it was time to buy a new
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[snip]
FYI, *any* filesystem has the potential to lose data on a sudden power
outage.
Umm, no. I suppose you haven't worked in telecomm. I've supported
file systems which never, ever, lost anything. If the system call
came back, and said it was on disc, then it was.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/13/07 12:53, Mike McCarty wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
[snip]
All of those should work, with (depending on the card/chip) the
possible exception of sound.
If you can't make Debian work, install Ubuntu. That's what it's for.
And don't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/13/07 12:59, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[snip]
FYI, *any* filesystem has the potential to lose data on a sudden power
outage.
Umm, no. I suppose you haven't worked in telecomm. I've supported
file systems which
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 10:33 -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
Now as far as video, who cares about that... servers don't need GUI
stuff.
Tell that to our admins who run redhat and suse. Want to disable these
guys? Remove some X libraries. (The one guy who uses CLI uses telnet)
Yes they
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 11:59:18AM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[snip]
FYI, *any* filesystem has the potential to lose data on a sudden power
outage.
Umm, no. I suppose you haven't worked in telecomm. I've supported
file systems which never, ever, lost anything.
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 02:07:23PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
OpenVMS used to be more popular with geeks than Unix was. But
businesses and Universities decided that it was worth it to trade 2
slow-but-reliable VAXen for 10 fast-but-flaky Suns.
Hmmm. Then they went from 10 fast-but-flaky
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 03:43:03PM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote:
WTF, I see Windows mentality has become the norm.
and RIP TelnetD (IOW the telnet Daemon) right out of the machine.
OpenSSH (as done by OpenBSD devs) is what should be defacto standard.
I wish it could really be that way
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 07:40:03PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Hmmm. Then they went from 10 fast-but-flaky Suns to 100
slow-and-disease-ridden generic PCs with Windows. I'd hate to think
what is coming next :-)
Vista.
Word Processing online via Google.
Disposable printers in a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/13/07 18:38, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 11:59:18AM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[snip]
[snip]
A good FS should not suffer corruption regardless of what the
hardware does, if we're talking
Ron Johnson wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/13/07 12:53, Mike McCarty wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
[snip]
All of those should work, with (depending on the card/chip) the
possible exception of
Tarek Soliman wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
to gmane.linux.debian.user:
Now as far as video, who cares about that... servers don't need GUI
stuff.
Tell that to our admins who run redhat and suse. Want to disable these
guys? Remove some X libraries. (The one guy who uses CLI
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 03:43:03PM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote:
WTF, I see Windows mentality has become the norm.
and RIP TelnetD (IOW the telnet Daemon) right out of the machine.
OpenSSH (as done by
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 02:07:23PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
OpenVMS used to be more popular with geeks than Unix was. But
businesses and Universities decided that it was worth it to trade 2
Greg Folkert wrote in Article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted to
gmane.linux.debian.user:
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 10:33 -0500, Tarek Soliman wrote:
Now as far as video, who cares about that... servers don't need GUI
stuff.
Tell that to our admins who run redhat and suse. Want to disable these
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/13/07 20:52, Paul Johnson wrote:
Tarek Soliman wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
to gmane.linux.debian.user:
Now as far as video, who cares about that... servers don't need GUI
stuff.
Tell that to our admins who run redhat and
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 23:48 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/13/07 20:52, Paul Johnson wrote:
Tarek Soliman wrote in Article [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
to gmane.linux.debian.user:
Now as far as video, who cares about that... servers don't need GUI
stuff.
Tell that to our admins who
On 2/15/07, Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above 600GB?
I am considering XFS. The System is Debian Sarge for amd64.
Hope there are no issues with this setup. please let me know if i
should be careful in any area.
Also
Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 12:21:38AM +0530, Siju George wrote:
Hi,
Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above
600GB?
I am considering XFS. The System is Debian Sarge for amd64.
Hope there are no issues with this setup. please let me
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 21:58:29 -0400
Douglas Allan Tutty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
possible but there could be some data corruption. ext3 journals data as
well as metadata but takes forever to regenerate after a crash and there
can still be errors.
From man mount(8):
Mount options
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I personally am a fan of XFS. However, it is also possible to use ext3
on large partitions, as you point out. At work, I have a production
server (running RHEL, unfortunately) which is serving up a 6 TB
Why unfortunately? Do Linux fans have to hate other distros as
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/12/07 12:43, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I personally am a fan of XFS. However, it is also possible to use ext3
on large partitions, as you point out. At work, I have a production
server (running RHEL, unfortunately)
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
At work, I have a production
server (running RHEL, unfortunately)...
Mike McCarty wrote:
Why unfortunately?
Perhaps because he feels unfortunate in having to maintain multiple
distributions.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:43:16AM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I personally am a fan of XFS. However, it is also possible to use ext3
on large partitions, as you point out. At work, I have a production
server (running RHEL, unfortunately) which is serving up a 6 TB
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:43:16AM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I personally am a fan of XFS. However, it is also possible to use ext3
on large partitions, as you point out. At work, I have a production
server (running RHEL, unfortunately)
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 03:01:00PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:43:16AM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I personally am a fan of XFS. However, it is also possible to use ext3
on large partitions, as you point out.
Hi Roberto.
Roberto C. Sanchez, 12.03.2007 21:07:
There is a ton of information about JFS and XFS on the net. All you
need to do is check the Wikipedia filesystem comparison page or Google
search for filesystem comparisons. The short of it is:
ext3 - good general purpose FS (not the best
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 10:42:45PM +0100, Mathias Brodala wrote:
Hi Roberto.
Roberto C. Sanchez, 12.03.2007 21:07:
There is a ton of information about JFS and XFS on the net. All you
need to do is check the Wikipedia filesystem comparison page or Google
search for filesystem
Hi Roberto.
Roberto C. Sanchez, 12.03.2007 23:15:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 10:42:45PM +0100, Mathias Brodala wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez, 12.03.2007 21:07:
There is a ton of information about JFS and XFS on the net. All you
need to do is check the Wikipedia filesystem comparison page or Google
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/12/07 17:15, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[snip]
At work we deal with files of size 1 GB to 100 GB on a regular
basis. I would classify those as large. XFS supports files up
to a size of 8 exabytes and filesystems also of size 8 exabytes.
I
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:34:48PM +0100, Mathias Brodala wrote:
Hi Roberto.
I see. I was asking since I have a whole drive full of videos and such which
are
usually between 100MB and 300MB per file. So I guess XFS would not really be
the
best choice for them. I got ext3 everywhere at
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 05:49:55PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/12/07 17:15, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[snip]
At work we deal with files of size 1 GB to 100 GB on a regular
basis. I would classify those as large. XFS supports files up
to a size of 8 exabytes and filesystems also of
Hello Roberto.
Roberto C. Sanchez, 13.03.2007 00:06:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:34:48PM +0100, Mathias Brodala wrote:
I would certainly trust XFS. Of course, if you don't have your machine
on an UPS, it can cause problems on a crash or power outage. How are
your video files being used?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/12/07 18:12, Mathias Brodala wrote:
Hello Roberto.
Roberto C. Sanchez, 13.03.2007 00:06:
[snip]
I read on Slashdot a while back that Seagate announced 37.5 TB
drives will be available in a few years.
Ouch. I?m thinking about getting a
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 03:01:00PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Ever worked with RHEL or Fedora (or Red Hat before that)? They have
I don't run Debian.
$ uname -a
Linux Presario-1 2.6.10-1.771_FC2 #1 Mon Mar 28 00:50:14 EST 2005 i686
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 12:21:38AM +0530, Siju George wrote:
Hi,
Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above
600GB?
I am considering XFS. The System is Debian Sarge for amd64.
Hope there are no issues with this setup. please let me know if i
should be careful
On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 09:58:29PM -0400, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 12:21:38AM +0530, Siju George wrote:
Hi,
Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above
600GB?
I am considering XFS. The System is Debian Sarge for amd64.
Hope there
Am 2007-02-16 00:21:38, schrieb Siju George:
Hi,
Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above
600GB?
I am considering XFS. The System is Debian Sarge for amd64.
Hope there are no issues with this setup. please let me know if i
should be careful in any area.
Michelle Konzack wrote:
I can not recommend ReiserFS
I second that advisory. I've found problems with data corruption on my
system using reiser.
and with XFS I have no experience.
I am looking forward to the new ext4 which could give a
performance plus for databases
I tried XFS, but I
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 07:27:22PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
[...]
maybe you should read about LVM [1]. It is not about file systems, but
it can help you :)
I'd rather deal with a case of the Clap.
LVM is worse than useless for most installations. It makes
the entire file system
2007/2/15, Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above
600GB?
I am considering XFS. The System is Debian Sarge for amd64.
Hope there are no issues with this setup. please let me know if i
should be careful in any area.
Also if a
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 12:21:38AM +0530, Siju George wrote:
Hi,
Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above
600GB?
I am considering XFS. The System is Debian Sarge for amd64.
Hope there are no issues with this setup. please let me know if i
should be careful
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 07:27:22PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
I'd rather deal with a case of the Clap.
LVM is worse than useless for most installations. It makes
Because it is not designed for reliability, but for flexibility. This
is wy it is best to have it ride over a reliability, like
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Siju George wrote:
Could some one recommend which File System is best for partitions above
600GB?
Depends on the use profile.
Hope there are no issues with this setup. please let me know if i
should be careful in any area.
XFS does not take well to non-clean unmounts
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
