Offtopic but since when is it ok the behave like this in the freebsd
mailing list. Really no need to get personal...
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 8:50 AM, krad wrote:
> If you cant cope with multiple operating systems and their differences you
> are probably in the wrong job.
>
>
> On 10 September 2
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 01:52:04AM -0500, Anonymous wrote:
> > We, the users of FreeBSD, *do hereby challenge* the FreeBSD project
> > to meet its future release dates.
>
> I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for 9.1-RELEASE to be finalized. I
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> Needing fsck because the drive is failing and not able to store and
>> retrieve data reliably any more is a whole different thing.
>>
>
> or bad data stored because of non-disk errors.
>
>
> in this case an
On 21 jun. 2012, at 18:07, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
>>> stupid answer to stupid question.
>>> You never seen - but they do happens.
>>
>> In other topic you hammerd on fact and if someone ask you to deliver them
>> its a stupid question.
> just a proof it is a waste of time to explain things
On 21 jun. 2012, at 17:15, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
>>
>> I do understand your setup but I dont have too agree that it is a good
>
> so i would repeat my question.
> Assume you have 48 disks, in mirrored configuration (24 mirrors) and 480
> users with their data on them.
>
> Your solution wi
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> interesting idea but the options ZFS would give you are superior to this
>> setup.
>>
>
> Were you just unable to understand my setup or a reasons to do this?
>
> please reread former post and poss
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
>
>> answer yourself.
>>
>>
>> Sorry but I don;t follow you right there. with 48 disks you would not
>> mirror 24vs24.
>>
>
> if i wasn't clear enough then i would it like that (with UFS), and
> assuming disk
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> I really want to see your face when you fsck 48TB w/o ffs+j (since that is
>> so young must be immature :S ) of data with the phone ring non stop with
>>
>
> Even if ZFS would be the only filesystem in exis
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> For my various OpenSource projects, I have deployed a 36TB file system
>> which is fine and stable running 24/7. Additionally at home I use 4TB
>> (2x 2TB) + 8TB (2x 4TB) on a machine with 4GB RAM this
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Hooman Fazaeli wrote:
> Dear community
>
> In the past, I built a 8TB ZFS log server on freebsd 7.4.
> However, the system experienced instablility after long up times.
> My main motive to use ZFS was UFS inability to support large
> file systems.
>
> Now, I want
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
> And it works fast.
>
>
The correct answer would be. I depends on the work load
___
freebsd-questions@freebs
On 21 jun. 2012, at 05:28, Waitman Gobble wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Matthias Gamsjager
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Lynn Steven Killingsworth <
>> blue.seahorse.syndic...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Lynn Steven Killingsworth <
blue.seahorse.syndic...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't seem to have generated much comment.
>
> I suspect you are thinking as I do that if your servers don't immediately
> download then their is a bandit on my Internet line??
>
>
>
>
>
New
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> Nothing wrong with productive flaming for me,
>>> but it's just not typical code of conduct in FreeBSD
>>> mailing list at all.
>>>
>> Actually I can't remember any flame-war about system compilers - this i
> Don't know why they do that. But be careful because HTX/HNC
> (Hypertransport) connections are the same as PCIe but reversed
> and incompatible, check it before plugin anything.
>
> HTX is used to connect 2 motherboards via hypertransport (up to 51.2
> GB/sec for now), connect expansion cards, et
>
> FYI, I bought one for my Supermicro X7SB3 motherboard and it didn't work.
> I had to end up buying an Intel SASUC8I which is just an OEM LSI
> SAS3081E-
hmm strange because I have one running right here with the MPT driver.
even mptutils works with it.
And if you google it then you will find c
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Matthias Gamsjager
wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately, these cards fit just in supermicro motherboards, since
>> they have they are reversed/mirrored compared to normal PCIe cards.
>>
>> (I have a Tyan S8005.)
>>
>> --
>>
>
> Unfortunately, these cards fit just in supermicro motherboards, since
> they have they are reversed/mirrored compared to normal PCIe cards.
>
> (I have a Tyan S8005.)
>
> --
> Torbjörn
Well it's just the bracket. You can unmount it and replace it with
another bracket. The card is up side down
>
> The Supermicro controllers listed by FreeBSD as supported seem to be
> rebranded Adaptec controllers, and they are therefore also disqualified.
>
The supermicro usas-l8i
http://www.supermicro.com/products/accessories/addon/AOC-USAS-L8i.cfm
uses a LSI chip (LSISAS 1068E SAS controller ) and wor
Have you changed the cable?
___
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"
Hey Nick
Have you read the handbook which is a good starting point for most questions:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:32 AM, Nick Mackowski wrote:
> Hi I have a Hp Pavillion dv8 with dual sata drives. What program do I need
21 matches
Mail list logo
