# bsdlabel /dev/da0s1
says
bsdlabel: unable to get correct path for /dev/da0s1: No such file or
directory.
How do I make a fresh label if I have only 'c' and 'd' partitions?
How do I dd the first 126 sectors to a file?
Thanks,
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Ian Smith wrote:
In freebsd-questions Di
I'm a little confused by your using two different names, so you might
get two copies of this ..
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Zhengtao Cui wrote:
> # bsdlabel /dev/da0s1
>
> says
>
> bsdlabel: unable to get correct path for /dev/da0s1: No such file or
> directory.
Ok, there's no label on da0s1,
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 12:06:18PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]@mgEDV.net wrote:
> the problem:
> the count of files is exactly the same
> cpio/syslog/dmesg logged absolutely no errors (not even warnings)
> the files contain almost the same data, but at the beginning and
> at the end of the files ther
Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0xa5
BSD Partition num: 'e', Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0xa5
BSD Partition num: 'f', Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0xa5
grub> quit
# mount
/dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local, soft-updates)
devfs on /dev (dev
BSD Partition num: 'b', Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0xa5
> > BSD Partition num: 'd', Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0xa5
> > BSD Partition num: 'e', Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0xa5
> > BSD Partiti
On Wednesday 14 December 2005 16:36, Micah wrote:
> Some of the grubs that ship with Linux distros
> do not support ufs.
I'm curious as to why people care about this so much. There are numerous
threads about whether or not particular bootloaders support UFS.
A bootloader needs to
RW wrote:
On Wednesday 14 December 2005 16:36, Micah wrote:
Some of the grubs that ship with Linux distros
do not support ufs.
I'm curious as to why people care about this so much. There are numerous
threads about whether or not particular bootloaders support UFS.
A bootloader
same grub boot floppy and the results are ok on the
newly installed freebsd boxes, while on the two that
are already installed the results are bad..
test 1:
===
- made a grub floppy
- boot the existing FreeBSD boxes (2 boxes) from grub floppy
result --> grub doesn't know the ufs files
0xa5
BSD Partition num: 'e', Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0xa5
BSD Partition num: 'f', Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0xa5
grub> quit
# mount
/dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local, soft-updates)
devfs on /dev (devfs, local)
/dev/ad0s1e on /tmp (ufs, loc
m type unknown, partition type
0xa5
BSD Partition num: 'e', Filesystem type unknown, partition type
0xa5
BSD Partition num: 'f', Filesystem type unknown, partition type
0xa5
grub> quit
# mount
/dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local, soft-updates)
devfs on /dev (devfs, loca
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 03:52:33PM +0100, Roberto Nunnari wrote:
> grub reported:
>
> Filesystem type unknown, partition type 0xa5
>
> and thus cannot mount /boot/loader
You are correct. Old versions of grub don't know about UFS2 filesystem.
___
freebs
re
> convenient to have those files stored on UFS rather than FAT or EXT.
> ...
> In that case, if you use grub (rather than FreeBSD's manager), you'd
> have to make a partition solely for grub.
But is it a good idea for a bootloader to require external files at boot-ti
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:51:31PM +0200, Albert Shih wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Anyone known what's the futur of ufs2 ? Is there any plan to make a ufs3
> for very large FS (> 2TB) . Or the plan is to use classic ufs for / & /usr
> and lets
> use ZFS for /home
On 6/15/07, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:51:31PM +0200, Albert Shih wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Anyone known what's the futur of ufs2 ? Is there any plan to make a ufs3
> for very large FS (> 2TB) . Or the plan is to use classic ufs for
UFS and future derivatives are here to stay.
Yeah, but you know because of how nice ZFS is, a concept of using ZFS
for /home and UFS for everything else will probably turn into a
if ZFS will really be so nice i will be making small (50MB) partition for
/boot files, ZFS on rest
Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> UFS and future derivatives are here to stay.
>>>
>> Yeah, but you know because of how nice ZFS is, a concept of using
>> ZFS for /home and UFS for everything else will probably turn into a
>
> if ZFS wil
Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> UFS and future derivatives are here to stay.
>
> if ZFS will really be so nice i will be making small (50MB)
> partition for /boot files, ZFS on rest.
http://blogs.sun.com/ontherecord/entry/now_available_three_new_solaris
ere any plan to make a ufs3
> >> for very large FS (> 2TB) . Or the plan is to use classic ufs for / &
> >/usr and lets
> >> use ZFS for /home
> >
> >ZFS will remain an optional alternative because of the licensing, so
> >UFS and future derivativ
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 21:49 +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >> UFS and future derivatives are here to stay.
> >>
> > Yeah, but you know because of how nice ZFS is, a concept of using ZFS
> > for /home and UFS for everything else will probably turn into a
>
>
Tom Evans wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 21:49 +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
UFS and future derivatives are here to stay.
Yeah, but you know because of how nice ZFS is, a concept of using ZFS
for /home and UFS for everything else will probably turn into a
if ZFS will really
; >> Anyone known what's the futur of ufs2 ? Is there any plan to make a ufs3
> >> for very large FS (> 2TB) . Or the plan is to use classic ufs for / &
> >/usr and lets
> >> use ZFS for /home
> >
> >ZFS will remain an optional alternative becau
It could be done. At the present time ZFS is not really suitable on
systems without a lot of memory (I'd recommend at least 1GB). It is
also very hard to tune it to perform well on i386 because of VM and
address space issues. It might be possible to address these over
time.
1GB for disk and
On 24/06/07, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> It could be done. At the present time ZFS is not really suitable on
>> systems without a lot of memory (I'd recommend at least 1GB). It is
>> also very hard to tune it to perform well on i386 because of VM and
>> address space issues
Can I, on a system running FreeBSD 6.2 or -current, safely mount a
UFS filesystem created (and used) on Mac OS 10.4.10? These filesystems
are UFS1 (at fslevel 3) with big-endian datastructures in the metadata,
4k blocks and 1k fragments, and a few minor oddities in their layout;
they are pretty
dir goes to SATA.
The secondary task for this server is to be an IMAP and mail server. We will
be using dovecot, and shared maildir folders with ten thousands of messages.
I'm not sure where to put the maildir folders, and what options to use for
unless you have tens of thousands of mail user
#1 maildir stores each message in a separate file. I think I need to
dedicate a separate disk slice for maildirs and decrease block size
on it. How big should the blocksize be?
i have everything (/) on single partition on most of my servers,
including those having lots of mail.
I don't thi
i have everything (/) on single partition on most of my servers, including
those having lots of mail.
I don't think that is clever. sysinstall creates different partitions for /
but i do. sysinstall and most people and manuals just copy "traditions".
it's nonsense.
Except when my users search
lking about
UFS, only ext3, reiserfs and xfs:
http://wiki.dovecot.org/MailboxFormat/Maildir
You can treat UFS as ext2/3 with dir_index enabled by default (not
exactly but that's what dirhash translates to in practice). You will
probably want to increase vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem sysctl
Dear Wojciech,
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 09:53:26 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> i have everything (/) on single partition on most of my servers,
> including
>>> those having lots of mail.
>> I don't think that is clever. sysinstall creates different partitions
> for /
>
You can treat UFS as ext2/3 with dir_index enabled by default (not
exactly but that's what dirhash translates to in practice).
UFS by default creates 2k fragments ("sub-blocks"), so in practice any
tuning in this direction won't do much.
More drives=better in this c
Laszlo Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Wojciech Puchar said:
>> i have everything (/) on single partition on most of my servers,
>> including those having lots of mail.
> I don't think that is clever. sysinstall creates different partitions
> for / /usr /var and /tmp by default. There must be
2) keeping problems on one partition from raising trouble on another
partition. e.g., filesystem corruption in a home directory keeping
the root from being able to boot, or filling up a mail directory
keeping people from logging in.
today we have live CDs.
and - UFS doesn't get to
On Wednesday 24 September 2008 19:49:54 Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> i said tradition - because very old unix filesystems (25 years ago.. or
> more) was different and sometimes got totally corrupted.
10 years ago (not 25), news:// was hawt. And created tons on small files, by
default on /var/news, w
and only have 10GB for /usr and the rest of the
disk for ZFS. It is posible to have ZFS and UFS on the same disk.
freebsd-questions@ might be a better place to ask.
Reply-To: set
/bz
--
Bjoern A. Zeeb Stop bit received. Insert coin for new game
Hi,
I'm getting ready to move forward on enabling gmirror on my churches website
server (FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE p4). I used defaults during the install (most
importantly for this, the file system defaults). I've read in the manual
pages that the data for the mirror is contained in the last secto
Hi All,
In the December 2003, Sys Admin magazine (www.sysadminmag.com), there was an
article (pg 17), about doing Oracle DB Backups using UFS Snapshots. This
was implemented using a facility built into Solaris.
I have read about other snapshot products for MS Windows NTFS etc.
Is there a way
Peter Leftwich wrote:
Can someone recommend software that lets you mount TO freebsd (ufs)
partition FROM WITHIN Windows XP Pro SP1 (transparently)?
I am not familiar with any such software, regrettably. You'd need a Windows
developer experienced with their kernel and filesystem management
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004, Chuck Swiger clacked the keyboard to produce:
> Peter Leftwich wrote:
> >Can someone recommend software that lets you mount TO freebsd (ufs)
> >partition FROM WITHIN Windows XP Pro SP1 (transparently)?
>
> I am not familiar with any such software, regre
Quoting Bob Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004, Chuck Swiger clacked the keyboard to produce:
Peter Leftwich wrote:
>Can someone recommend software that lets you mount TO freebsd (ufs)
>partition FROM WITHIN Windows XP Pro SP1 (transparently)?
I am not familiar w
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004, Kenneth Culver clacked the keyboard to produce:
> Quoting Bob Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >On Fri, Feb 13, 2004, Chuck Swiger clacked the keyboard to produce:
> >>Peter Leftwich wrote:
> >>>Can someone recommend softw
Well
On Friday, February 13, 2004, at 11:32 AM, Bob Collins wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004, Chuck Swiger clacked the keyboard to produce:
Peter Leftwich wrote:
Can someone recommend software that lets you mount TO freebsd (ufs)
partition FROM WITHIN Windows XP Pro SP1 (transparently)?
I am not
On Feb 13, 2004, at 1:45 PM, Matthew Marino wrote:
Samba works but the configuration can be a cuss. It's the NetBEUI name
server that takes a deeper understanding of Microsoft Networking than
the average Joe has. If your really up for a challenge try sharing the
same ufs volume with Window
I look into this issue an average of once a year, because it's always
been my dream to have a dual boot machine in which XP can read/write my
UFS/ext2/etc. partitions and FreeBSD/Linux/etc. can read/write my NTFS
partitions.
I've seen a handful of 3rd party software out there that see
ystem that my 4.x UFS clients won't be able to mount a share from
the 5.x box.
Or does the NFS layer allow this? Will my 5.x box be backwards
compatible for 4.x boxen and still work?
Thanks in advance :)
--
Jamie Heckford
Network Manager
Trident Microsystems Ltd.
t: +44(0)1737-780790
f:
Where're utils to optimize UFS/FFS storage (a.k.a. "defragmentation")?
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello !
How it is possible to connect a disk with FreeBSD ufs file system to a
computer with OS MS Windows?
Is it special driver?
I think, it can be made using a Vmware...
How to make easier? What variants exist?
If you're talking about getting windows to actually
Sergei Vyshenski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it possible to upgrade ufs filesystem to
> ufs2 without data loss?
It's not possible to upgrade at all. You need to build a whole new
filesystem from scratch.
This *does* mean you will need to backup first, and restore after
On Wednesday, 25 December 2002 at 11:22:56 -0600, Hari Bhaskaran wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am looking for a method to dump my 'current' installation
> (which includes couple of vinum volumes + some other normal
> UFS partitions) to another machine where I have access to
> a C
On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 01:40:58PM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> >
> > I am looking for a method to dump my 'current' installation
> > (which includes couple of vinum volumes + some other normal
> > UFS partitions) to another machine where I have
On Wednesday, 25 December 2002 at 22:07:48 -0600, Hari Bhaskaran wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 01:40:58PM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>>>
>>> I am looking for a method to dump my 'current' installation
>>> (which includes couple of vinum
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Ryan Dooley wrote:
> Has anybody done work on Tree-based quotas for UFS/UFS2? As an
> administrator I'm finding more and more reasons that such a thing
> would be a good thing.
By tree-based you mean the ability to define "this directory and
everyth
> By tree-based you mean the ability to define "this directory and
> everything under it gets X amount of storage, regardless of owner"?
> If so, I also wish this ability existed, and I've talked with several
> administrators of ISPs that sorely need that ability as well. If it
> is a monumental
Chris Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Ryan Dooley wrote:
>
> > Has anybody done work on Tree-based quotas for UFS/UFS2? As an
> > administrator I'm finding more and more reasons that such a thing
> > would be a good thing.
>
The
Hi all,
This many have already been answered but I can't find the answer, so here goes!!
I have been tracking 5-CURRENT since before ufs2 partitions were the standard. Is
there a way to convert my file system to ufs2 or is a reinstall necessary?
Thanks in advance.
Gordon
_
has ANY logical explanation???
Thanks,
--
Alejandro Imass
> This is FreeBSD 8.2 updated, patched etc. The volume was UFS + Journal
>
> Any help is GREATLY appreciated!
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Alejandro Imass
___
freebsd-questions
Hi,
On Saturday 28 April 2012 09:33:47 Alejandro Imass wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
> >
> > We had a server crash and required a hard reboot. The system is on one
> > disk and another disc mounts /usr/jails and everything runs in jails,
> > pristine base system
al explanation???
>
> Journaling is new to me. Could this be the cause?
>
Maybe so, I have no idea.
Maybe it's because EzJail mount volumes with each jail or some other
wild explanation. I honestly have never seen this before. I am just
glad that UFS was nice enough
something. I unmounted the drive and ran fsck and reported no
problems. df shows the data being use so where is the data??
your data is here as df shown usage and fsck see no errors. most probably
root directory of that volume got corrupted and subdirs were found and put
in lost+found
___
All the jails wound up in the /usr/local/etc/apache22 of the only
surviving jail which is the http proxy to all the other jails.
Right before the server crashed I noticed MySQL at 100% o several CPUs
and the server was on it's knees, so I'm wondering was this an
attack? is it possible that A
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
>>
>> All the jails wound up in the /usr/local/etc/apache22 of the only
>> surviving jail which is the http proxy to all the other jails.
>>
>> Right before the server crashed I noticed MySQL at 100% o several CPUs
>> and the server was on it
I somewhat agree, but it wasn't a person. I am the only administrator,
the only one with root access. The jails were effectively moved to the
/usr/local/etc/apache22 of the single that survived at the top level.
I'm thinking something between mount, EzJail, the journal and the way
MySQL created a
After a little more research, ___it it NOT unlikely at all___ that
under high distress and a hard boot, UFS could have somehow corrupted
the directory structure, whilst maintaining the data intact. From what
I've learned so far, UFS is actually divided into 2 layers: one that
controls the directo
didn't move it yourself then it must be machine hardware problem
> > but still unlikely.
>
> After a little more research, ___it it NOT unlikely at all___ that
> under high distress and a hard boot, UFS could have somehow corrupted
> the directory structure, whilst maintaining th
gt;
>> > no matter what you do FreeBSD DOES NOT ramdomly move directories. if you
>> > are
>> > sure you didn't move it yourself then it must be machine hardware problem
>> > but still unlikely.
>>
>> After a little more research, ___it it NOT unl
e to
>>> >> physically archive the jails, move them to the correct directory and
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > no matter what you do FreeBSD DOES NOT ramdomly move directories. if you
>>> > are
>>> > sure you didn't move it yourself th
Alejandro Imass wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Robert Bonomi
> wrote:
> > Alejandro Imass wrote:
> >> After a little more research, ___it it NOT unlikely at all___ that
> >> under high distress and a hard boot, UFS could have somehow corrupted
> &
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
> Alejandro Imass wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Robert Bonomi
>> wrote:
>> > Alejandro Imass wrote:
>> >> After a little more research, ___it it NOT unlikely at all___ that
>>
:
> >> >> After a little more research, ___it it NOT unlikely at all___ that
> >> >> under high distress and a hard boot, UFS could have somehow corrupted
> >> >> the directory structure, whilst maintaining the data intact.
> >> >
> >&g
obert Bonomi
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Alejandro Imass wrote:
>> >> >> After a little more research, ___it it NOT unlikely at all___ that
>> >> >> under high distress and a hard boot, UFS could have somehow corrupted
>> >>
and a hard boot, UFS could have somehow corrupted
the directory structure, whilst maintaining the data intact.
This is techically accurate, *BUT* the specifics of the quote "corruption"
unquote in the case under discussion make it *EXTREMELY* unlikely that this
is what happened.
99.99+
On 04/28/2012 11:16 AM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
That is what worries me, is that it wasn't just some random bit or
cosmic ray, but the potential of happening again. I am not so sure
that it is*impossible* that a jail could affect other jails with
EzJail.
Sorry I'm late to the party. How about
es. if you are
> > sure you didn't move it yourself then it must be machine hardware problem
> > but still unlikely.
>
> After a little more research, ___it it NOT unlikely at all___ that
> under high distress and a hard boot, UFS could have somehow corrupted
> the di
Alejandro Imass wrote:
> 3) the directories were moved at reboot by journal recovery,
> fsck or something else
I think it's *extremely* unlikely that fsck was involved, because
it just doesn't do things like that. It might move an orphaned
directory (or file) to lost+found, but nowhere else. T
rrect directory and
>> >
>> >
>> > no matter what you do FreeBSD DOES NOT ramdomly move directories. if you
>> > are
>> > sure you didn't move it yourself then it must be machine hardware problem
>> > but still unlikely.
>>
>&g
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 3:26 AM, wrote:
> Alejandro Imass wrote:
>
[...]
>
> Any chance that your base system -- rather than one of the jails --
> has somehow been cracked; maybe even that the cracker precipitated
> the crash? It might be wise to restore the whole system from backup,
> the ba
; > sure you didn't move it yourself then it must be machine hardware problem
> >> > but still unlikely.
> >>
> >> After a little more research, ___it it NOT unlikely at all___ that
> >> under high distress and a hard boot, UFS could have somehow corrupted
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Erich Dollansky
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sunday 29 April 2012 08:58:17 Alejandro Imass wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Erich Dollansky
>> wrote:
[...]
>>
>> Hi Erich, thanks for your reply.
>>
>> I don't know what links you are referring to, but please po
On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:26:50 -0700, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
> Alejandro Imass wrote:
>
> > 3) the directories were moved at reboot by journal recovery,
> > fsck or something else
>
> I think it's *extremely* unlikely that fsck was involved, because
> it just doesn't do things like that.
T
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Polytropon wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:26:50 -0700, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
>> Alejandro Imass wrote:
>>
>> > 3) the directories were moved at reboot by journal recovery,
>> > fsck or something else
>>
>> I think it's *extremely* unlikely that fsck was in
Alejandro Imass p2ee.org> writes:
> ...
> And there was a log of a couple of ftp connections the same day this
> happened, the ONLY 3 messages before the reboot at about 6 pm and they
> were NOT from any of our customers. Here are the log entries:
>
> Apr 27 05:54:37 nune ftp.proxy[2726]: conne
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 1:15 PM, jb wrote:
> Alejandro Imass p2ee.org> writes:
>
>> ...
>> And there was a log of a couple of ftp connections the same day this
>> happened, the ONLY 3 messages before the reboot at about 6 pm and they
>> were NOT from any of our customers. Here are the log entries
Alejandro Imass p2ee.org> writes:
> ...
> > What you should do right now is to get some recent general or security
> > cd/dvd
> > with chkrootkit and rkhunter and run them from that external read-only
> > media.
> > I would also suggest that you look over config files of all packages
> > invo
Hi,
On Monday 30 April 2012 02:02:41 jb wrote:
> Alejandro Imass p2ee.org> writes:
>
> > ...
> > > What you should do right now is to get some recent general or security
> > > cd/dvd
> > > with chkrootkit and rkhunter and run them from that external read-only
> > > media.
> > > I would also s
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Erich Dollansky
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Monday 30 April 2012 02:02:41 jb wrote:
>> Alejandro Imass p2ee.org> writes:
>>
>> > ...
>> > > What you should do right now is to get some recent general or security
>> > > cd/dvd
>> > > with chkrootkit and rkhunter and run t
s is, how
it works, or that it is totally -irrelevant- to fsck and/or journaling.
Hint: nullfs is merely a 'path translation' mechanism -- it affects _only_
'file open' syscalls. fsck doesn't _touch_ nullfs.
Hint; journaling is an add-on to the UFS filesystem. nullfs do
Hi,
On Monday 30 April 2012 18:36:08 Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
> Alejandro Imass wrote:
> That simply *ISN'T* going to happen -- not without a -lot- more evidence
> than any individual can provide from a single =unrepeadable= incident.
>
ok, I am not the original poster but let me tell me of an e
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
> Alejandro Imass wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Erich Dollansky wrote:
>> > On Monday 30 April 2012 02:02:41 jb wrote:
>> >> Alejandro Imass p2ee.org> writes:
>> >> > ...
>>
[...]
> A competennt, "not stupid", sysadmin would
On 04/30/2012 08:38 AM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
just not very helpful or fun. This attitude will get
He is helping,you need to learn how UFS, jails, nullfs,
journaling, disk I/O and other stuff work.
I have been following this thread and i must admit I also need to
learn more on
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Erich Dollansky
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Monday 30 April 2012 18:36:08 Robert Bonomi wrote:
>>
>> Alejandro Imass wrote:
>> That simply *ISN'T* going to happen -- not without a -lot- more evidence
>> than any individual can provide from a single =unrepeadable= incident
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Edward M wrote:
> On 04/30/2012 08:38 AM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
>>
>> just not very helpful or fun. This attitude will get
>
>
> He is helping,you need to learn how UFS, jails, nullfs, journaling, disk
> I/O and other stuff work.
On 30 April 2012 07:36, Robert Bonomi wrote:
> A competennt, "not stupid", sysadmin would know these things. And not
> 'remove all doubt' (in the words of Abraham Lincoln), by raising such
> nonsense questions.
A competent sysadmin would ask questions when they don't know the
answer bringing up
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 30 April 2012 07:36, Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> A competennt, "not stupid", sysadmin would know these things. And not
>> 'remove all doubt' (in the words of Abraham Lincoln), by raising such
>> nonsense questions.
>
> A competent sysadmin wou
On 04/30/2012 10:22 AM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
Oh, please! He's not helping anyone. He's just being an obnoxious
prick that thinks that by pointing out a lot of technical blabber and
some cheap philosophical posé
I guess i was going according to the fact that i have followed his
suggestions
for many many
years.
Nullfs does not seem to be stable.
Anyway, I found one PR
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/147420
that is about troubles with jails, nullfs, UFS, and NFS.
Synopsis: [ufs] [panic] ufs_dirbad, nullfs, jail panic (corrupt inode)
Take a look at this paragr
Quoth Eitan Adler on Monday, 30 April 2012:
> On 30 April 2012 07:36, Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > A competennt, "not stupid", sysadmin would know these things. And not
> > 'remove all doubt' (in the words of Abraham Lincoln), by raising such
> > nonsense questions.
>
> A competent sysadmin would as
ed for many many
> years.
> Nullfs does not seem to be stable.
>
Dirk Engling guessed that somehow nullfs was involved.
> Anyway, I found one PR
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/147420
>
> that is about troubles with jails, nullfs, UFS, and NFS.
> Synopsis:
Alejandro Imass p2ee.org> writes:
> ...
> Thanks for pointing a plausible cause. What I have done so far is
> limit the offending jail to a specific cpuset and I wanted to add
> another disk to avoid contention with other jails. MySQL not only
> consumes the whole CPUs but also limits the whole d
thing substantial by the following
statement, but allow me to post it anyway in addition to
your statement:
There is no problem in mentioning thoughts, possibilities
and options. It's also not a problem to admit a lack of
knowledge in certain fields (e. g. how UFS, journaling,
nullfs and fs
at fsck would find nothing already magnitude of order above
the chances of winning the national lottery. But all of them ? Not a
chance. He finally admitted that he had very little knowledge about UFS
and fsck, but still managed to do it in a quite offensive way.
That was basically the point wer
Hi,
On Monday 30 April 2012 22:38:13 Alejandro Imass wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Robert Bonomi
> wrote:
>
> > A competennt, "not stupid", sysadmin would know these things. And not
> > 'remove all doubt' (in the words of Abraham Lincoln), by raising such
> > nonsense questions.
>
201 - 300 of 473 matches
Mail list logo
