Re: how to use cfs (cryptographic file system) ?

(Sorry for the double email, i made a mistake) I tried again launching nfsd, here is what I did (killing all these process before) : rpcbind nfsd -u -t -n 6 mountd -r and then : /usr/local/etc/rc.d/cfsd onestart But i still got the same error : [tcp] localhost:/usr/local/cfsd-bootstrap: nfsd: RC

Re: how to use cfs (cryptographic file system) ?

ALANO CONRAZ wrote: And I always get the same error : [tcp] localhost:/usr/local/cfsd-bootstrap: nfsd: RCPROG_NFS: RPC: Remote system error - Connection refused and the same with [tcp6] You need to start nfsd? - Mark ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.or

how to use cfs (cryptographic file system) ?

Hello, In order to test cfs, i tried to set up a ciphered directory. Unfortunatelly, i failed... Documentation doesn't seem to be up-to-date, so it does not help much. Here is what I did : pkg_add "cfs package address" echo "/usr/local/cfs-bootstrap localhost" >> /etc/exports mkdir /crypt rcpbind

how to use cfs (cryptographic file system) ?

Hello, In order to test cfs, i tried to set up a ciphered directory. Unfortunatelly, i failed... Documentation doesn't seem to be up-to-date, so it does not help much. Here is what I did : pkg_add "cfs package address" echo "/usr/local/cfs-bootstrap localhost" >> /etc/exports mkdir /crypt rcpbind

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

2011/2/28 Robert Bonomi : >> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org  Mon Feb 28 05:31:46 2011 >> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:24:30 +0300 >> From: c0re >> To: Matthew Seaman >> Cc: FreeBSD >> Subject: Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it&

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

On 02/28/11 12:47, Polytropon wrote: On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:29:59 +0100, Damien Fleuriot wrote: Slice a (as in: da0s1a) is very likely his / /var is usually slice f Terminology: Slices are with numbers, partitions are with letters. :-) E. g. da0s1 is the FreeBSD slice, its partition a = da0

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:29:59 +0100, Damien Fleuriot wrote: > Slice a (as in: da0s1a) is very likely his / > > /var is usually slice f Terminology: Slices are with numbers, partitions are with letters. :-) E. g. da0s1 is the FreeBSD slice, its partition a = da0s1a is /, while /var corresponds to

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

On 28 February 2011 12:29, Damien Fleuriot wrote: > On 2/28/11 1:27 PM, Chris Rees wrote: >> On 28 February 2011 12:26, Chris Rees wrote: > > # mount /dev/da0s1a /mnt/root/ > mount: /dev/da0s1a : Operation not permitted > > So only single user mode or live cd could solve it. >

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

On 2/28/11 1:27 PM, Chris Rees wrote: > On 28 February 2011 12:26, Chris Rees wrote: # mount /dev/da0s1a /mnt/root/ mount: /dev/da0s1a : Operation not permitted So only single user mode or live cd could solve it. >>> >>> *NOT* true. Stopping any daemons that were using "/

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

On 28 February 2011 12:26, Chris Rees wrote: >> > >> > # mount /dev/da0s1a /mnt/root/ >> > mount: /dev/da0s1a : Operation not permitted >> > >> > So only single user mode or live cd could solve it. >> >> *NOT* true.  Stopping any daemons that were using "/var/spooll", and then >> umount(1)-ing it

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

On 2/28/11 12:24 PM, c0re wrote: > 2011/1/6 Matthew Seaman : >> On 06/01/2011 11:26, c0re wrote: >>> # df -h >>> Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on >>> /dev/ad0s1a496M466M -9.8M 102%/ >>> >>> So it's full. >>> >>> But by du it's not appeared to be full >>> >>

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

On 28 Feb 2011 12:12, "Robert Bonomi" wrote: > > > From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Mon Feb 28 05:31:46 2011 > > Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:24:30 +0300 > > From: c0re > > To: Matthew Seaman > > Cc: FreeBSD > > Subject: Re: / file sy

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Mon Feb 28 05:31:46 2011 > Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:24:30 +0300 > From: c0re > To: Matthew Seaman > Cc: FreeBSD > Subject: Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full > > 2011/1/6 Matthew Seaman :

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

2011/1/6 Matthew Seaman : > On 06/01/2011 11:26, c0re wrote: >> # df -h >> Filesystem     Size    Used   Avail Capacity  Mounted on >> /dev/ad0s1a    496M    466M   -9.8M   102%    / >> >> So it's full. >> >> But by du it's not appeared to be full >> >> >> # du -hxd 1 / >> 2.0K    /.snap >> 512B  

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

/.snap - nothing there. snapshot is represented as a file of a special type that can be located anywhere oin a file system, not only the /.snap/. Try snainfo -a. 73! Peter pgp: A0E26627 (4A42 6841 2871 5EA7 52AB 12F8 0CE1 4AAC A0E2 6627) -- http://vereshagin.org

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

On 06.01.2011 15:19, c0re wrote: >> why not to restart your httpd and mysqld? >> This may release your unused filehandles. > As I said I've restarted whole server, so nothing there to release at all. > >> Another place to look for wasted space is filesystem snapshots, if any. They >> can be create

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

> why not to restart your httpd and mysqld? > This may release your unused filehandles. As I said I've restarted whole server, so nothing there to release at all. > Another place to look for wasted space is filesystem snapshots, if any. They > can be created implicitly, e. g., by fsck. Yeah, I che

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

Server has been rebooted before to try this. Chris Sorry for top-posting, Android won't let me quote, but K-9 can't yet do threading. On 6 Jan 2011 14:06, "Peter Vereshagin" wrote: > Concrete jungle, oh freebsd-questions, you've got to do your best... > 2011/01/06 16:57:34 +0300 Peter

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

Concrete jungle, oh freebsd-questions, you've got to do your best... 2011/01/06 16:57:34 +0300 Peter Vereshagin => To freebsd-questions@freebsd.org : PV> This may release your unused filehandles. used but unlinked, really, oops. 73! Peter pgp: A0E26627 (4A42 6841 2871 5EA7 52AB 12F8 0CE1 4AAC

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

Concrete jungle, oh freebsd-questions, you've got to do your best... 2011/01/06 15:06:18 +0300 c0re => To FreeBSD : cr> # lsof / why not to restart your httpd and mysqld? This may release your unused filehandles. Another place to look for wasted space is filesystem snapshots, if any. They can be

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

2011/1/6 Matthew Seaman : > On 06/01/2011 11:26, c0re wrote: >> # df -h >> Filesystem     Size    Used   Avail Capacity  Mounted on >> /dev/ad0s1a    496M    466M   -9.8M   102%    / >> >> So it's full. >> >> But by du it's not appeared to be full >> >> >> # du -hxd 1 / >> 2.0K    /.snap >> 512B  

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

(like running process) can hold file so it's >> actually are not deleted. I rebooted server. But this not helped, so >> it's not a process holding file. >> >> Checked with fsck >> >> # fsck / >> ** /dev/ad0s1a (NO WRITE) >> ** Last Mount

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

On 06/01/2011 11:26, c0re wrote: > # df -h > Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on > /dev/ad0s1a496M466M -9.8M 102%/ > > So it's full. > > But by du it's not appeared to be full > > > # du -hxd 1 / > 2.0K/.snap > 512B/dev > 2.0K/tmp > 2.0K/usr

Re: / file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

/proc > 7.2M/rescue > 296K/root > 4.7M/sbin > 4.0K/lost+found > 157M/ > > > I know that something (like running process) can hold file so it's > actually are not deleted. I rebooted server. But this not helped, so > it's not a process holding fil

/ file system is full, but du does not show that it's full

r. But this not helped, so it's not a process holding file. Checked with fsck # fsck / ** /dev/ad0s1a (NO WRITE) ** Last Mounted on / ** Root file system ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes ** Phase 2 - Check Pathnames ** Phase 3 - Check Connectivity ** Phase 4 - Check Reference Counts ** Phase

Weird file system corruption or something else?

access the files from Windows as usual. I can issue a 'tree' command to automate the listing of directories on FreeBSD, thus changing their link number... so that I can access them from windows, but this all seems very strange. I don't want to have to open every file, before I can open any f

Re: FreeBSD8.1 AMD64 UFS2 file system size issues.

Thanks Matthew. I had to do a manual install using gpart in the fixit live cd to partition the filesystem. Everything looks to be running great. -Troy Sent from my iPhone On Sep 5, 2010, at 12:53 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 04/09/2010 20:35:02, t...@i2bnetworks.com wrote: > >> I am havi

Re: FreeBSD8.1 AMD64 UFS2 file system size issues.

On 04/09/2010 20:35:02, t...@i2bnetworks.com wrote: > I am having a problem with a fresh install onto athat is 9TB in > size. during the initial install, the syste the correct disk size > and partition sizes, but after it has complete d and rebooted it > shows the the large partition as on

FreeBSD8.1 AMD64 UFS2 file system size issues.

Hello. I am having a problem with a fresh install onto a = raid5 file system that is 9TB in size. during the initial install, the syste= m shows the correct disk size and partition sizes, but after it has complete d and rebooted it shows the the large partition as only 1TB. I am

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

I see two more possibilities for such a lingua franca file system: xfs and zfs. I noticed, on http://distrowatch.com/ , that there was an update to xfsprogs package. xfsprogs is included in Linux (Slackware 13.0), and I see xfsprogs packages in NetBSD pkgsrc and freebsd ports. I saw an

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

n for >> formatting magnetic disk based filesystems as it probably should be >> though. It's mostly used for DVDs. > > I've heard of UDF, recognized it as a file system for DVDs, can't find it > specifically on my system but find two DVD-related packages. > &g

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 10:55:21 + Thomas Mueller articulated: > > If there are no Windows clients involved, I'd use NFS or AFS; with > > Windows in the mix, CIFS/Samba may be a better choice as Windows NFS > > clients are dodgy at best. That is not necessarily true anymore. I found this link:

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

long > file names); the only downside is that extraction in DOS will > result in 8.3 filenames again (there's TAR.EXE for DOS). > Know that tar is the "most universal file system". :-) I did use > this approach in the past when having to fransfer files between >

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

ontent will keep intact (case sensitive long > > file names); the only downside is that extraction in DOS will > > result in 8.3 filenames again (there's TAR.EXE for DOS). > > > Know that tar is the "most universal file system". :-) I did use > > this appro

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

On 24 August 2010 20:48, Gustavo De Nardin wrote: > On 24 August 2010 06:53, Thomas Mueller wrote: >> What is the best choice for a file system that can be read, and safely >> written to, by Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD? > > I've been trying NTFS(-3g). It's been g

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

On 24 August 2010 06:53, Thomas Mueller wrote: > What is the best choice for a file system that can be read, and safely > written to, by Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD? I've been trying NTFS(-3g). It's been going well, with even occasional Windows thrown in the mix. But it is very

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:53:09 + "Thomas Mueller" wrote: > What is the best choice for a file system that can be read, and > safely written to, by Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD? I've not tried it recently, but I think UFS (both UFS1 and UFS2 seem to be supported) should wo

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

On 8/24/2010 4:53 AM, Thomas Mueller wrote: What is the best choice for a file system that can be read, and safely written to, by Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD? With NetBSD through 5.1_RC3, I got "unsupported inode size" when trying to mount Linux ext2fs partition from NetBSD. Wi

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 06:29:31PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 08:09:04 -0400, Christer Solstrand Johannessen > wrote: > > If there are no Windows clients involved, I'd use NFS or AFS; > > Yes, I forgot to mention NFS. Of course it works, as the support > for it in UNIX, Lin

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 08:09:04 -0400, Christer Solstrand Johannessen wrote: > If there are no Windows clients involved, I'd use NFS or AFS; Yes, I forgot to mention NFS. Of course it works, as the support for it in UNIX, Linux, BSD and Mac OS X is sufficiently good. But it may not be a solution i

RE: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

> -Original Message- > From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- > questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Polytropon > Sent: 24. august 2010 12:55 > To: Thomas Mueller > Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Lingua franca file system

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

(case sensitive long file names); the only downside is that extraction in DOS will result in 8.3 filenames again (there's TAR.EXE for DOS). Know that tar is the "most universal file system". :-) I did use this approach in the past when having to fransfer files between non-networke

Re: Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

ECH.} tek4 CamTrace S.A.S (+033) 1 41 38 37 60 1 Allée de la Venelle 92150 Suresnes FRANCE "Nobody wants to say how this works. Maybe nobody knows ..." Xorg.conf(5) On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Thomas Mueller wrote: > What is the best choice for a fi

Lingua franca file system Linux-NetBSD-FreeBSD?

What is the best choice for a file system that can be read, and safely written to, by Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD? With NetBSD through 5.1_RC3, I got "unsupported inode size" when trying to mount Linux ext2fs partition from NetBSD. With FreeBSD through 7.2, I could mount, but got

Re: meory file system

gahn writes: > I am running 8.1. under /dev, I don't see /dev/md0, /dev/md0 won't show up until you actually run mdconfig. > so i am trying to add following lines in kernel file and got error > messages: > > options MFS #Memory Filesystem The correct line is "device md",

Re: meory file system

2010/8/21 Steve Kargl : > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 03:08:30PM -0700, gahn wrote: >> Hi, All: >> >> I am running 8.1. under /dev, I don't see /dev/md0, so i am trying to add >> following lines in kernel file and got error messages: >> >> options         MFS                 #Memory Filesystem >> >> /

Re: meory file system

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 03:08:30PM -0700, gahn wrote: > Hi, All: > > I am running 8.1. under /dev, I don't see /dev/md0, so i am trying to add > following lines in kernel file and got error messages: > > options MFS #Memory Filesystem > > /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/bn39_1: u

meory file system

Hi, All: I am running 8.1. under /dev, I don't see /dev/md0, so i am trying to add following lines in kernel file and got error messages: options MFS #Memory Filesystem /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/bn39_1: unknown option "MFS" *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src. *** Error cod

Re: File System Performance on FreeBSD

On Sunday 08 August 2010 20:55:40 Antonio Vieiro wrote: > I don't mind if a filesystem is very fast: I want it to be reliable > first. I wonder if that Phoronix test suite checks for reliability first > or not. https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Ext4_Howto#Barriers_on_by_default Since it has

Re: File System Performance on FreeBSD

Hi, I heard that Linux filesystems were not reliable because of some bad way of doing caching or something like that. For a study on Linux FS reliability see [1] by Toshiba guys. It seems Linux was upset on this about one year ago [2]. Quoting: "Torvalds, for one, didn't seem too excited ab

Re: File System Performance on FreeBSD

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Bill Moran wrote: > On 8/8/10 10:03:59 AM, Kiswono Prayogo wrote: > >> Is there any justification for this benchmark? >> >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=zfs_ext4_btrfs&num=2 >>

Re: File System Performance on FreeBSD

On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:13:46 -0400 Bill Moran wrote: > To someone technical who might be looking to investigate the results > with an eye toward fixing them, it's useless. Anyone can download the Phoronix Test Suite though, so it should be fairly easy to check if the results are valid at least.

Re: File System Performance on FreeBSD

On 8/8/10 10:03:59 AM, Kiswono Prayogo wrote: Is there any justification for this benchmark? http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=zfs_ext4_btrfs&num=2 Kind of hard to do much with that "benchmark" First of

File System Performance on FreeBSD

Is there any justification for this benchmark? http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=zfs_ext4_btrfs&num=2 Regards, GB ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing lis

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

krad wrote: [snip] >> >> If you have hardware controller with RAID capabilities, using native RAID >> is better, otherwise look towards gvinum or maybe ccd; see also: >> >> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/handbook/raid.html >> [snip] > > I dont agree that hardware raid is necessarily better.

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

econd drive to 'expand' the /videos file > system? So it would miraculously look like a single 400G drive? > > The canonical way of doing this is to either create a RAID-0 concat or > stripe volume. Using RAID-0 striping is preferred due to performance, but > you'd

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

On 27/07/2010 6:54 AM, John Almberg wrote: John Almberg wrote: If you have hardware controller with RAID capabilities, using native RAID is better, otherwise look towards gvinum or maybe ccd; see also: I've just been reading up on RAID in my Absolute FreeBSD book, and it occurs to me that my

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

l 26 19:57:28 2010 Subject: Re: 1 file system, 2 drives? From: Gary Gatten Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" Sent: Mon, July 26, 2010 1:41:19 PM Subject: RE: 1 file system, 2 drives? >From my experience (YMMV), most RAID controllers will NOT redi

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

From: Gary Gatten Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" Sent: Mon, July 26, 2010 1:41:19 PM Subject: RE: 1 file system, 2 drives? >From my experience (YMMV), most RAID controllers will NOT redistribute the >existing data/files onto the ne

RE: 1 file system, 2 drives?

uesti...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of John Almberg Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 3:31 PM To: Chuck Swiger Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 1 file system, 2 drives? > If you have hardware controller with RAID capabilities, using native RAID is > better, otherwise look towards gvinum

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

John Almberg wrote: If you have hardware controller with RAID capabilities, using native RAID is better, otherwise look towards gvinum or maybe ccd; see also: I've just been reading up on RAID in my Absolute FreeBSD book, and it occurs to me that my client has a SCSI RAID drive chassis that he

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:30 PM, John Almberg wrote: > > If you have hardware controller with RAID capabilities, using native RAID >> is better, otherwise look towards gvinum or maybe ccd; see also: >> >> > I've just been reading up on RAID in my Absolute FreeBSD book, and it > occurs to me that

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

If you have hardware controller with RAID capabilities, using native RAID is better, otherwise look towards gvinum or maybe ccd; see also: I've just been reading up on RAID in my Absolute FreeBSD book, and it occurs to me that my client has a SCSI RAID drive chassis that he is using stupi

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

to use the second drive to 'expand' the /videos file > system? So it would miraculously look like a single 400G drive? > > The canonical way of doing this is to either create a RAID-0 concat or > stripe volume. Using RAID-0 striping is preferred due to performance, but > yo

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

Volodymyr/Chuck, Is it possible to use the second drive to 'expand' the /videos file system? So it would miraculously look like a single 400G drive? The canonical way of doing this is to either create a RAID-0 concat or stripe volume. Wow, of course... I should have

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

Hi, John-- On Jul 26, 2010, at 11:55 AM, John Almberg wrote: > I know this is probably impossible, but FreeBSD can do so many miraculous > things, that I can't help asking... > > Is it possible to use the second drive to 'expand' the /videos file system? > So it

Re: 1 file system, 2 drives?

t now I'm thinking of what to do with it... I know this is probably impossible, but FreeBSD can do so many miraculous things, that I can't help asking... Is it possible to use the second drive to 'expand' the /videos file system? So it would miraculously look like a singl

1 file system, 2 drives?

o with it... I know this is probably impossible, but FreeBSD can do so many miraculous things, that I can't help asking... Is it possible to use the second drive to 'expand' the /videos file system? So it would miraculously look like a single 400G drive? I ask this, because lo

Re: File system

Eitan Adler wrote: gjournal will replay all write attempts (metadata and data) before the failure, so you should be relatively sure that all writes are done correctly. As I understand it journals work by writing to disk a log of all the changes that have to be made - waits for confirmation tha

Re: File system

gjournal will replay all write attempts > (metadata and data) before the failure, so you should be relatively > sure that all writes are done correctly. As I understand it journals work by writing to disk a log of all the changes that have to be made - waits for confirmation that it wrote the data

Re: File system

On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote: > 2) You could try using a 'journaling' filesystem, *BUT* you'd have to build/ >   implement it yourself.  Journaling filesystems are deliberately _not_ >   provided with FreeBSD, due to security issues/implications with them. >   _You_ will ha

Re: File system

Craig Whipp wrote: On Mon, May 10, 2010 10:53 am, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: Ansar Mohammed wrote: Hello All, I have a FreeBSD VM running. Whenever I reboot the VM without a clean shutdown it boots into single user mode and I have to run fsck. When I run fsck, the file system clearly has issues

Re: File system

On Mon, May 10, 2010 10:53 am, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: > Ansar Mohammed wrote: >> Hello All, >> I have a FreeBSD VM running. Whenever I reboot the VM without a clean >> shutdown it boots into single user mode and I have to run fsck. >> >> When I run fsck, t

Re: File system

formed; where > the provider makes all the decisions for you, and allows only what they > think is reasonable. BUT, such an OS isn't going to look like Unix, nor > feel like it, nor act like it. I think IBM would disagree with you: JFS (the Journaled File System) is available on AIX,

Re: File system

Ansar Mohammed wrote: Hello All, I have a FreeBSD VM running. Whenever I reboot the VM without a clean shutdown it boots into single user mode and I have to run fsck. When I run fsck, the file system clearly has issues. Is there any way to have FreeBSD run on a better file system that wont

Re: File system

P > From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Sat May 8 21:04:45 2010 > Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 21:36:17 -0400 > From: Ansar Mohammed > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: File system > > Hello All, > I have a FreeBSD VM running. Whenever I reboot the VM witho

Re: File system

On Sunday 09 May 2010 12:54:59 Ansar Mohammed wrote: > Thank you Bruce and Matthew, > for your very informed and insightful comments. > I read online that this may be fixed in FreeBSD 9 with jeff's UFS > Journaling patch. Have you guys tried this yet? > http://jeffr-tech.livejournal.com/ My test

Re: File system

year 2010, most modern operating systems and > > databases and able to survive an unclean shutdown without booting into > > single user mode and file system/data corruption. > > Even with SoftUpdates and journaling you'll find UFS doesn't cope well with > unclean

Re: File system

odern operating systems and > databases and able to survive an unclean shutdown without booting into > single user mode and file system/data corruption. Even with SoftUpdates and journaling you'll find UFS doesn't cope well with unclean shutdowns: to test it, a couple of weeks ago I sta

Re: File system

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/05/2010 06:16:13, Adam Vande More wrote: >> The background to this problem is because the FreeBSD root filesystem (UFS) >> > is not journaled and for some reason I cannot set my root partition to be >> > UFS+SoftUpdates. >> > > Well I'd say that'

Re: File system

x27;t have > your issues. SU is disabled on / for a reason. I highly doubt you actually > want to enable this, but you can if you adjust the FS when it isn't mounted > eg boot from fixit cd. > >> >> At any rate, we are in the year 2010, most modern operating syste

Re: File system

t modern operating systems and > databases and able to survive an unclean shutdown without booting into > single user mode and file system/data corruption. > FreeBSD has defaulted to background checking on SU FS's for the better part of 10 years. What version are you running? What data

Re: File system

ear 2010, most modern operating systems and > databases and able to survive an unclean shutdown without booting into > single user mode and file system/data corruption. > > I love FreeBSD, and have been a user since 2.x but its a bit frustrating > that whenever power fails I have to do

Re: File system

single user mode and file system/data corruption. I love FreeBSD, and have been a user since 2.x but its a bit frustrating that whenever power fails I have to do this.. On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Bobby Walker wrote: > On May 8, 2010, at 8:36 PM, Ansar Mohammed wrote: > > > Hell

Re: File system

On May 8, 2010, at 8:36 PM, Ansar Mohammed wrote: > Hello All, > I have a FreeBSD VM running. Whenever I reboot the VM without a clean > shutdown it boots into single user mode and I have to run fsck. > > When I run fsck, the file system clearly has issues. > > Is there an

File system

Hello All, I have a FreeBSD VM running. Whenever I reboot the VM without a clean shutdown it boots into single user mode and I have to run fsck. When I run fsck, the file system clearly has issues. Is there any way to have FreeBSD run on a better file system that wont crap out on me everytime I

Re: GBDE encryped File system

On 3/20/10 6:29 AM, Aiza wrote: In release 8.0 is GBDE now part of the base system? If not what is the /boot/loader.conf command to add to enable it? You don't have to enable it. Nothing to add to the loader.conf. But if you want to mount the partitions during the boot: 18.16.1.2.1 Automatica

GBDE encryped File system

In release 8.0 is GBDE now part of the base system? If not what is the /boot/loader.conf command to add to enable it? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail

Re: What sort of file system is this and how to mount it?

Warren Block wrote: On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Chris Whitehouse wrote: ... That makes me think ad4p2 is HFS or HFS+ so I installed hfsexplorer (http://hem.bredband.net/catacombae/hfsx.html) and it tells me ad4p2 is an invalid HFS type. So try a few other things eco# mount /dev/ad4p2 /mnt mount: /d

Re: What sort of file system is this and how to mount it?

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Chris Whitehouse wrote: ... That makes me think ad4p2 is HFS or HFS+ so I installed hfsexplorer (http://hem.bredband.net/catacombae/hfsx.html) and it tells me ad4p2 is an invalid HFS type. So try a few other things eco# mount /dev/ad4p2 /mnt mount: /dev/ad4p2 : Invalid ar

What sort of file system is this and how to mount it?

Hi I have a 120gb SATA disk with the following> eco# fdisk ad4 *** Working on device /dev/ad4 *** parameters extracted from in-core disklabel are: cylinders=232581 heads=16 sectors/track=63 (1008 blks/cyl) Figures below won't work with BIOS for partitions not in cyl 1 parameters to be u

Re: immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues

On 01/19/10 10:09, krad wrote: 2010/1/18 Morgan Wesstr�m O. Hartmann wrote: I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes. All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores (Dell

Re: immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues

On 01/18/10 21:34, � wrote: O. Hartmann wrote: I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes. All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores (Dell Poweredge III). Symptome: All

Re: immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues

Emil Mikulic wrote: > (off-list) > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 04:32:34PM +0100, Morgan Wesstr?m wrote: >> Emil Mikulic wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 09:16:41AM +0100, Gerrit K?hn wrote: Thanks for bringing up this topic here. I have drives showing up close to 80 load cycle counts

Re: immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues

2010/1/18 Morgan Wesström > O. Hartmann wrote: > > I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes. > > All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two > > others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores > > (Dell Poweredge III).

Re: immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, Morgan Wesström wrote: > The disks involved don't happen to be Western Digital Green Power > disks, do they? The Intelli-Park function in these disks are wrecking > havoc with I/O in Linux-land at least, causing massive stalls and > iowait through the roof during the 25-30 seco

Re: immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues

O. Hartmann wrote: > I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes. > All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two > others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores > (Dell Poweredge III). > > Symptome: All boxes have ZFS and

immense delayed write to file system (ZFS and UFS2), performance issues

I realise a strange behaviour of several FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64 boxes. All boxes have the most recent STABLE. One box is a UP system, two others SMP boxes, one with a Q6600 4-core, another XEON with 2x 4-cores (Dell Poweredge III). Symptome: All boxes have ZFS and UFS2 filesystems. Since two

Re: Restricting tar or pax to a single file system

On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 08:01:07 -0800 (PST), jaymax wrote: > I think my reply went to the previous post, but here is > > The syntax here is confusing, should it be > > [ignoring other options] > > tar -c -W one-file-system -f tarfile2Becreated.tar / > > { > From th

Re: Restricting tar or pax to a single file system

I think my reply went to the previous post, but here is The syntax here is confusing, should it be > [ignoring other options] tar -c -W one-file-system -f tarfile2Becreated.tar / { >From the man pages -W longopt=value Long options (preceded by --) are only supported directly on system

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >