06.10.2013 08:54, Teske, Devin wrote:
On Sep 30, 2013, at 6:20 AM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
29.09.2013 00:30, Teske, Devin wrote:
Interested in feedback, but moreover I would like to see who is
interested in tackling this with me? I can't do it alone... I at least
need testers whom will prov
On Sep 30, 2013, at 6:20 AM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
> 29.09.2013 00:30, Teske, Devin wrote:
>> Interested in feedback, but moreover I would like to see who is
>> interested in tackling this with me? I can't do it alone... I at least
>> need testers whom will provide feedback and edge-case test
29.09.2013 00:30, Teske, Devin wrote:
Interested in feedback, but moreover I would like to see who is
interested in tackling this with me? I can't do it alone... I at least
need testers whom will provide feedback and edge-case testing.
Sign me in, I'm not fluent with forth but testing something
uld like to see who is
interested in tackling this with me? I can't do it alone... I at least
need testers whom will provide feedback and edge-case testing.
Woohoo! Great! I am using ZFS boot environments with beadm, so I can
test a bit.
___
In my recent interview on bsdnow.tv, I was pinged on BEs in Forth.
I'd like to revisit this.
Back on Sept 20th, 2012, I posted some pics demonstrating what
exactly code that was in HEAD (at the time) was/is capable of.
These three pictures (posted the same day) tell a story:
1. You boot to the m
> > It seems a bit much to reserve 1 G of memory solely for the use of the
> > kernel, expecially in my case when that's all I have :) But on amd64,
> > it's welcome to have terabytes of address space if it will help.
>
> ZFS is a memory hog, period. That's just the nature of the beast.
> You
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 04:21:55PM -0700, Nate Eldredge wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2008, Pegasus Mc Cleaft wrote:
>
>>> FWIW, my system is amd64 with 1 G of memory, which the page implies is
>>> insufficient. Is it really?
>>
>> This may be purely subjective, as I have never bench marked the spe
On 11 Oct 2008, at 14:28, Danny Braniss wrote:
To Doug:
> ZFS boot is coming.
great! any time estimate?, just curious, no preasure :-)
Its part of pjd's current big ZFS patch which brings us more or less
up-to-date with Solaris. I'm not the best person to ask when t
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 20:37:10 +
"Freddie Cash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Most linux dists don't bother with multiple partitions any more.
> > They just have '/' and maybe a small boot partition, and that's it.
>
> Heh, that's more proof of the difficulties inherent with old-school
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008, Pegasus Mc Cleaft wrote:
FWIW, my system is amd64 with 1 G of memory, which the page implies is
insufficient. Is it really?
This may be purely subjective, as I have never bench marked the speeds,
but
when I was first testing zfs on a i386 machine with 1gig ram, I
On Saturday 11 October 2008 21:53:35 Nate Eldredge wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2008, Freddie Cash wrote:
> > On 10/11/08, Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> With regards to the traditional BSD partitioning scheme, having a
> >> separate /usr, /home, /tmp, etc... there's no reason to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi, Matt,
Matthew Dillon wrote:
[...]
> /boot can be as complex as boot2 allows. There's nothing preventing
> it from being RAIDed if boot2 supported that, and there's nothing
> preventing it (once you had ZFS boot
On 10/11/08, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I'm asking, because I want to deploy some zfs fileservers soon, and so
>> > far the solution is either PXE boot, or keep one disk UFS (or boot off a
>> > USB)
For the servers we're deploying FreeBSD+ZFS on, mainly large backup
systems with
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008, Freddie Cash wrote:
On 10/11/08, Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
With regards to the traditional BSD partitioning scheme, having a
separate /usr, /home, /tmp, etc... there's no reason to do that stuff
any more with ZFS (or HAMMER).
As separate partit
On 10/11/08, Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With regards to the traditional BSD partitioning scheme, having a
> separate /usr, /home, /tmp, etc... there's no reason to do that stuff
> any more with ZFS (or HAMMER).
As separate partitions, no. As separate filesystems, defi
went
with a directly-bootable ZFS root.
/boot can be as complex as boot2 allows. There's nothing preventing
it from being RAIDed if boot2 supported that, and there's nothing
preventing it (once you had ZFS boot capabilities) from being ZFS
using a topology supported by
kup solution for FreeBSD']
To Matt:
since 'small' nowadays is big enough to hold /, what advantages are
there
in having root split up?
also, having this split personality, what if the disk goes? the hammer/zfs
is probably raided ...
[btw, having a small-boot-partition brings
17 matches
Mail list logo
