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 systems that
have the getopt_long(3) function. The -W option
In the last episode (Nov 21), jaymax said:
> How does one restrict tar or fax to a single file system when tarring or
> paxing from root (/) ?
For tar:
--one-file-system (-W one-file-system)
(c, r, and u modes) Do not cross mount points.
--
Dan Nelson
How does one restrict tar or fax to a single file system when tarring or
paxing from root (/) ?
Thanks!
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Restricting-tar-or-pax-to-a-single-file-system-tp26463168p26463168.html
Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at
per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
> Gardner Bell wrote:
>
>>> The stench from Denmark is getting to me... ;-)
>>>
>> Insulting much with your remark about Denmark?
>>
>
> Methinks it be an oblique reference to
> a line from Shakespeare's play about the Dane
> with no insult intended, the
Gardner Bell wrote:
> Gardner Bell
>
>
> --- On Fri, 7/31/09, PJ wrote:
>
>
>> From: PJ
>> Subject: Re: how to boot or access problem file system
>> To: "Roland Smith"
>> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>> Received: Friday, July 31,
Gardner Bell wrote:
> > The stench from Denmark is getting to me... ;-)
> Insulting much with your remark about Denmark?
Methinks it be an oblique reference to
a line from Shakespeare's play about the Dane
with no insult intended, then or now.
___
freeb
Gardner Bell
--- On Fri, 7/31/09, PJ wrote:
> From: PJ
> Subject: Re: how to boot or access problem file system
> To: "Roland Smith"
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Received: Friday, July 31, 2009, 8:44 PM
> PJ wrote:
> > Roland Smith wrote:
>
PJ wrote:
> Roland Smith wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 03:42:43PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>>
>>> Basically, the news is not good.
>>> The directories & files are not what I had to begin with.
>>> ls /dev/ad0s1 or any disk/slice merely gets: Permission denied.
>>>
>> Now that is certainly weird. :-) I'
Roland Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 03:42:43PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>
>> Basically, the news is not good.
>> The directories & files are not what I had to begin with.
>> ls /dev/ad0s1 or any disk/slice merely gets: Permission denied.
>>
>
> Now that is certainly weird. :-) I've never
gt;>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 01:40:58PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
>>>>>
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 03:42:43PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> Basically, the news is not good.
> The directories & files are not what I had to begin with.
> ls /dev/ad0s1 or any disk/slice merely gets: Permission denied.
Now that is certainly weird. :-) I've never come across something like that.
What do
n't get to the boot prompt.
> >
> > Since the boot code cannot locate your kernel, there are several things
> > that could have gone wrong. See below.
> >
> >
> >
> >>>> The /usr files should be ok but how to access?
> >>>&
Roland Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 02:36:23PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>
>> Thanks for replying Roland,
>> I've been struggling with upgrading 7.0 to 7.2... it has taken a lot of
>> my time and I am still not happy.
>>
>
>
>> Anyway... back to the messed up 7.1 installation.
>> I ran
Roland Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 03:20:55PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>
>> Roland Smith wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 01:40:58PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> What can be done to access a file
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 02:36:23PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> Thanks for replying Roland,
> I've been struggling with upgrading 7.0 to 7.2... it has taken a lot of
> my time and I am still not happy.
> Anyway... back to the messed up 7.1 installation.
> I ran livefs 7.1 and chose option 6 (I think; it was
Roland Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 03:20:55PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>
>> Roland Smith wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 01:40:58PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> What can be done to access a file
On 7/26/09, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 3:56 AM, b. f. wrote:
>>>The file system in question will not have a common file size (which is
>>>what, as I understand, bytes per inode should be tuned for). There
>>>will be many small files (< 10 KB)
On Thursday 30 July 2009 23:14:39 PJ wrote:
>
> But isn't it strange that it used to be pretty simple to upgrade and
> update. But recently, I notice that communication between the developers
> and users (or is it the manual page writers) are getting far away from
> the realities of user/operationa
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 03:20:55PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> Roland Smith wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 01:40:58PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> >
> >> What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
> >> sector screwed up?
I forgot to mention that you
On 7/30/09, PJ wrote:
> Tim Judd wrote:
>> On 7/30/09, PJ wrote:
>>
>>> What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
>>> sector screwed up?
>>> The /usr files should be ok but how to access?
>>> I get errors that t
Paul Schmehl wrote:
> --On Thursday, July 30, 2009 14:45:46 -0500 PJ
> wrote:
>>
>> Mike,
>> I am not particularly interested in becoming a guru on FreeBSD. I just
>> want to be able to use it productively... by that I do not mean make
>> money, but get something achieved in the way of programming
--On Thursday, July 30, 2009 14:45:46 -0500 PJ wrote:
Mike,
I am not particularly interested in becoming a guru on FreeBSD. I just
want to be able to use it productively... by that I do not mean make
money, but get something achieved in the way of programming stuff for my
own website etc. Havin
Michael Powell wrote:
> PJ wrote:
>
>
>> What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
>> sector screwed up?
>>
>
> Usually there are more than 1 file system present. The MBR will have no
> bearing on any other than the one you ne
PJ wrote:
> What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
> sector screwed up?
Usually there are more than 1 file system present. The MBR will have no
bearing on any other than the one you need to boot from, and this is usually
the "/" - aka "root&
Tim Judd wrote:
> On 7/30/09, PJ wrote:
>
>> What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
>> sector screwed up?
>> The /usr files should be ok but how to access?
>> I get errors that the file system is full and I have no idea of how to
Roland Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 01:40:58PM -0400, PJ wrote:
>
>> What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
>> sector screwed up?
>>
>
> Do you mean the filesystem's superblock? Or the slice table (partitio
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 01:40:58PM -0400, PJ wrote:
> What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
> sector screwed up?
Do you mean the filesystem's superblock? Or the slice table (partitions
in PC parlance) or the freebsd partitions (disk labels)? Because the
On 7/30/09, PJ wrote:
> What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
> sector screwed up?
> The /usr files should be ok but how to access?
> I get errors that the file system is full and I have no idea of how to
> deal with the boot up - the help message is
What can be done to access a file system that seems to have the boot
sector screwed up?
The /usr files should be ok but how to access?
I get errors that the file system is full and I have no idea of how to
deal with the boot up - the help message is no help!
Boot says it cannot find a kernel
(*stripe*) from that a set of mirrors in which one of the mirrors
> contains
> > the live file system does not work, obviously.
> >
> > I was thinking, very generally, of creating the fstab file that I'll need
> > to point to the stripe instead of ad4 for example, rsy
riped set
> of mirrors to be my entire fs? I can create both mirrors and have the
> entire fs on one of the mirrors (*mirror0*), but then I need to stripe it
> with the other mirrors (*mirror1*), and trying to create a stripe
> (*stripe*) from that a set of mirrors in which one of the mirror
ntire fs
on one of the mirrors (*mirror0*), but then I need to stripe it with the
other mirrors (*mirror1*), and trying to create a stripe (*stripe*) from
that a set of mirrors in which one of the mirrors contains the live file
system does not work, obviously.
I was thinking, very generally, of cre
On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 3:56 AM, b. f. wrote:
>>The file system in question will not have a common file size (which is
>>what, as I understand, bytes per inode should be tuned for). There
>>will be many small files (< 10 KB) and many large ones (> 500 MB). A
>>sim
>The file system in question will not have a common file size (which is
>what, as I understand, bytes per inode should be tuned for). There
>will be many small files (< 10 KB) and many large ones (> 500 MB). A
>similar, in terms of content, 2TB ntfs file system on another serv
hings
difficult for me in figuring out what to use in my situation.
The file system in question will not have a common file size (which is
what, as I understand, bytes per inode should be tuned for). There
will be many small files (< 10 KB) and many large ones (> 500 MB). A
similar, in terms
well), until
I find a better solution.
> > And there's another problem here: what if two processes concurrently
> > save (commit?) the same file, and there's a merging conflict?
>
> I'd say that two processes should _never_ open the same file for writing
> at t
eems. In fact, it opens a whole can of worms.
> >
> > If the versioned file system isn't also POSIX compatible (where
> > everything happens in HEAD unless specified otherwise), it's
> > practically useless.
>
> The question is: Do you want to take versioni
commit?) the same file, and there's a merging conflict?
I'd say that two processes should _never_ open the same file for writing
at the same time. Since the contents of the file are opaque to the file
system but not to the programs, it is impossible for the filesystem to
fix merge confli
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:57:34 +0200, cpghost wrote:
> Yep, you're right. I thought about a way to extend the API in a
> backwards compatible way, but that's not as easy or straight
> forward as it seems. In fact, it opens a whole can of worms.
>
> If the versioned fil
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:26:50PM +0200, Morten Grunnet Buhl wrote:
> * cpghost [2009-06-24 17:04 +0200]:
> > Hi,
> >
> > is there anybody working on a versioning file system for FreeBSD
> > right now?
>
> - I don't know how fare along hammerfs is in being
Yep, you're right. I thought about a way to extend the API in a
backwards compatible way, but that's not as easy or straight
forward as it seems. In fact, it opens a whole can of worms.
If the versioned file system isn't also POSIX compatible (where
everything happens in HEAD unless sp
* cpghost [2009-06-24 17:04 +0200]:
> Hi,
>
> is there anybody working on a versioning file system for FreeBSD
> right now?
- I don't know how fare along hammerfs is in being ported to FreeBSD.
But from what I have heard, feature-wise, it might be something that
meets
"had", it's "has", because VMS and its file system
does still exist.
--
Polytropon
>From Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.fr
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 07:59:18PM +0200, cpghost wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 06:37:55PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 05:04:22PM +0200, cpghost wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > is there anybody working on a versioning fil
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 07:59:18PM +0200, cpghost wrote:
> open(2) could open a file at an earlier revision:
>
> FILE *filep;
s/FILE */int /;
-cpghost.
--
Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lis
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 06:37:55PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 05:04:22PM +0200, cpghost wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > is there anybody working on a versioning file system for FreeBSD
> > right now?
>
> > I don't care if it is native o
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 05:04:22PM +0200, cpghost wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there anybody working on a versioning file system for FreeBSD
> right now?
> I don't care if it is native or a layer, geom-ified, fuse-based,
> or even if it uses subversion as its backend, as long as
Hi,
is there anybody working on a versioning file system for FreeBSD
right now?
Maybe something like what's discussed here?
http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/PDL-FTP/Secure/FAST03_abs.html
I don't care if it is native or a layer, geom-ified, fuse-based,
or even if it uses subversion as its b
I have a zfs pool of about 700GB, on it, i have a file system, home, mounted
on /home and its 200GB. The file system has reached 100% capacity and im in
zfs doesn't have static allocation of space for subfilesystems at all!
you just have set a quota
RTFM - to be exact
ma
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Mike Barnard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a zfs pool of about 700GB, on it, i have a file system, home,
> mounted
> on /home and its 200GB. The file system has reached 100% capacity and im in
> need of growing it... Unfortunately i cannot find any do
Hi,
I have a zfs pool of about 700GB, on it, i have a file system, home, mounted
on /home and its 200GB. The file system has reached 100% capacity and im in
need of growing it... Unfortunately i cannot find any documentation on how
to grow a zfs file system. Any one done this?
PS: I want to grow
___
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"
2009/4/13 Tsu-Fan Cheng :
> Hi,
> correct me if I am wrong, but is it true that ntfsprogs is the
> only port that comes with formating disk into NTFS system? because
> days ago I also had this problem with my friend's extra USB 1T HD, I
> had to use my windows laptop to do the job. thanks!!
>
>
Hi,
correct me if I am wrong, but is it true that ntfsprogs is the
only port that comes with formating disk into NTFS system? because
days ago I also had this problem with my friend's extra USB 1T HD, I
had to use my windows laptop to do the job. thanks!!
TFC
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 8:22 PM,
2009/4/11 Jan Henrik Sylvester :
> Chris Rees wrote:
>>
>> 2009/4/11 Jan Henrik Sylvester :
>>>
>>> Yuri wrote:
I need to format NTFS partition to give HD to someone to write things
>>>
>>> mkntfs from sysutils/ntfsprogs should do it.
>>>
>>
>> Yuri had already written ONE LINE below your
Chris Rees wrote:
2009/4/11 Jan Henrik Sylvester :
Yuri wrote:
I need to format NTFS partition to give HD to someone to write things
mkntfs from sysutils/ntfsprogs should do it.
Yuri had already written ONE LINE below your quote:
I tried to use mkntfs from ports/ntfsprogs but it didn't fi
2009/4/11 Jan Henrik Sylvester :
> Yuri wrote:
>> I need to format NTFS partition to give HD to someone to write things
>
> mkntfs from sysutils/ntfsprogs should do it.
>
Yuri had already written ONE LINE below your quote:
> I tried to use mkntfs from ports/ntfsprogs but it didn't finish after an
Hi,
> The easiest way would be to format it inside a "Windows" PC
> that is NTFS capable. But I think your problem is that you
> don't have such a PC at hand...
>
> Maybe a (very overcomplicated) solution is to (install and
> then) run some kind of "Windows" in a VM and format the disk
> from the
Yuri wrote:
> I need to format NTFS partition to give HD to someone to write things
mkntfs from sysutils/ntfsprogs should do it.
(I did use mkntfs successfully with the 1.13.1 version, but never tried
with 2.0.0. ntfsresize from 2.0.0 failed for me when 1.13.1 did work.)
Jan Henrik
__
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:33:13 -0700, Yuri wrote:
> Unfortunately FAT32 has a file size limit 2^32-1 bytes (~4GB)
> And I talk about HD 1TB and files might me larger.
The easiest way would be to format it inside a "Windows" PC
that is NTFS capable. But I think your problem is that you
don't have su
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
i would rather make FAT32 partition
Unfortunately FAT32 has a file size limit 2^32-1 bytes (~4GB)
And I talk about HD 1TB and files might me larger.
Yuri
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org
I need to format NTFS partition to give HD to someone to write things on it
under Windows.
i would rather make FAT32 partition
newfs_msdos
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To
I need to format NTFS partition to give HD to someone to write things on
it under Windows.
I tried to use mkntfs from ports/ntfsprogs but it didn't finish after an
extremely long time, > 24hrs.
Yuri
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
ht
dev = twed0s1d, block = 1, fs = /archive
panic: ffs_blkfree freeing free block
looks like ffs related panic, not ZFS.
something is completely wrong here.
cpuid = 1
Uptime = 11m23s
Physical memory: 1011 MB
Dumping 67 MB: 52 36 20 4
Dump complete
/archive has no files in it as it is an empty
About every 5-10 minutes, my freshly installed freeBSD 7.1 stable box
hangs and begains a kernal dump. I get the following error message:
dev = twed0s1d, block = 1, fs = /archive
panic: ffs_blkfree freeing free block
cpuid = 1
Uptime = 11m23s
Physical memory: 1011 MB
Dumping 67 MB: 52 36 20 4
Hi FreeBSD Team,
I am implementing a stackable file system similar to NULLFS and I have question
on VOP_RENAME_APV function.
In VOP_RENAME_APV function:
VOP_RENAME_APV(struct vop_vector *vop, struct vop_rename_args *a)
{
int rc;
if (vop->vop_rename != N
De: Ivan Voras
Enviada em: 29/01/2009 07:51:39
Para: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Assunto: Re: exFAT File System Format
Mario Lobo wrote:
>> Hi guys;
>> News:
>>
http://bhandler.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!70F64BC910C9F7F3!5216.entry?w
>> a
Mario Lobo wrote:
>Hi guys;
>News:
>http://bhandler.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!70F64BC910C9F7F3!5216.entry?w
>a=wsignin1.0&sa=911422520
>Any chance of this being supported on FBSD so we can dump ntfs for
>good?
Feel free to fund a developer to implement it :)
(i.e. no)
si
still "improving" this crap?
can't they just add UFS?
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009, Mario Lobo wrote:
Hi guys;
News:
http://bhandler.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!70F64BC910C9F7F3!5216.entry?w
a=wsignin1.0&sa=911422520
Any chance of this being supported on FBSD so we can dump ntfs for
good?
T
Hi guys;
News:
http://bhandler.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!70F64BC910C9F7F3!5216.entry?w
a=wsignin1.0&sa=911422520
Any chance of this being supported on FBSD so we can dump ntfs for
good?
Thanks,
Mario
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.o
I don't know how Gjournal works, but it works below the filesystem (so
^^
next lines shows you actually know.
thanks for answer, for me it's definitely not worth using, i would prefer
waiting for fsck every few months or less than to have much slower writes
i think
Le Wed, 3 Dec 2008 15:21:19 +0100 (CET),
Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> >>> I use gjournal since FreeBSD 7.0 and it seems to work fine.
> >> is it really smart enough to not write everything twice or am i
> >> wrong?
> >
> > It writes everything twice :)
> >
> > (but every journal
I use gjournal since FreeBSD 7.0 and it seems to work fine.
is it really smart enough to not write everything twice or am i wrong?
It writes everything twice :)
(but every journaling system has to write something twice)
there is a big difference between something (metadata, short data
write
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>>> what file system would you choose? What options are out there besides
>>> UFS and ZFS? What FS's are least likely to have corruption issues
>>> when there are power hits?
>>
>> May be UFS + gjournal.
>> I use gjournal si
what file system would you choose? What options are out there besides
UFS and ZFS? What FS's are least likely to have corruption issues
when there are power hits?
May be UFS + gjournal.
I use gjournal since FreeBSD 7.0 and it seems to work fine.
is it really smart enough to not
.
>
> So, my question is this... If you were building a brand new 6.3/7.0
> server with decent performance (dual core, 32 Bit OS - because of
> known compatibility issues with specific software, 4 GB RAM, etc...)
> what file system would you choose? What options are out there be
Don O'Neil([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.12.02 08:57:58 -0800:
> With all the discussions of ZFS lately, I'm beginning to wonder if it's
> really ready for a production environment. Concerns over memory utilization,
> speed, stability, etc...
>From everything I've read people use it in production succe
l core, 32 Bit OS - because of known
compatibility issues with specific software, 4 GB RAM, etc...) what file
system would you choose? What options are out there besides UFS and ZFS?
i use UFS everywhere. it's ACTUALLY high performance, just lacking ZFS
32 Bit OS - because of known
compatibility issues with specific software, 4 GB RAM, etc...) what file
system would you choose? What options are out there besides UFS and ZFS?
What FS's are least likely to have corruption issues when there are power
hits?
The 3ware 9690SA outperforms gmirror and can be had in 4 port with the
did you made tests comparing it with gmirror with the same config?
battery for $600 or so. 8 port with a battery is closer to $1000
Hardware RAID gets you boot support from stripes,
already said what should be done.
em
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>> | | the simple answer is that software RAID on todays computers vastly
>> | outperforms ANY hardware raid solution, maybe except the ones for
>> 1$ | or more.
>>
>> You're basically correct, but I think you're overestimati
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
| On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 10:03:02AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
|> I've occasionally wondered why there isn't a simple device commonly available
|> which consists of a few hundred MB of battery backed (or otherwise persis
| | the simple answer is that software RAID on todays computers vastly |
outperforms ANY hardware raid solution, maybe except the ones for 1$ | or
more.
You're basically correct, but I think you're overestimating the price of
a good RAID controller.
no. please give me example of any RAID
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 10:03:02AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> I've occasionally wondered why there isn't a simple device commonly available
> which consists of a few hundred MB of battery backed (or otherwise persistent
> in the face of power loss) RAM that can plug into a PCI slot and fulfil t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
|>
|> What you're asking for is "too much" -- and this conversation is
|> starting to delve into freebsd-hardware, not freebsd-questions.
|
| the simple answer is that software RAID on todays computers vastly
| outperform
Ok, I have to pickup gVinum where I left it 4 years ago. Hopefully, the
software is stable now.
AFAIK it's not
at least when i tried it in 6.*
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
T
What you're asking for is "too much" -- and this conversation is
starting to delve into freebsd-hardware, not freebsd-questions.
the simple answer is that software RAID on todays computers vastly
outperforms ANY hardware raid solution, maybe except the ones for 1$
or more.
_
eremy Chadwick
Sent: Wednesday, 1 October 2008 5:45 AM
To: Danny Do
Cc: 'Wojciech Puchar'; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Optimal File System config for 2.5TB RAID5
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 04:49:27AM +0700, Danny Do wrote:
> I got Perc 4E-DI Embedded Raid Adapter (256MB) from D
On Tuesday, September 30, 2008, at 02:44PM, "Jeremy Chadwick" <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The only hardware RAID controller I've seen praise for, under FreeBSD,
>are Areca controllers.
3ware has provided very good FreeBSD support as well.
___
freebsd-qu
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 04:49:27AM +0700, Danny Do wrote:
> I got Perc 4E-DI Embedded Raid Adapter (256MB) from DELL for my current SCSI
> system. They said it's the enterprise class. I don't know much about the
> performance between software RAID and hardware RAID.
I'm not familiar with PERC (LSI
ebsd.org
Subject: RE: Optimal File System config for 2.5TB RAID5
>
> The reason I want to use hardware RAID is because I got so much problem
with
> software RAID5 4 years ago on FreeBSD 5.4. I still remember those
> nightmares. Furthermore, hardware RAID5 doesn't require much knowledg
The reason I want to use hardware RAID is because I got so much problem with
software RAID5 4 years ago on FreeBSD 5.4. I still remember those
nightmares. Furthermore, hardware RAID5 doesn't require much knowledge and
management.
But you could be right, the CPU speed is triple now, software RAID
ssage-
From: Wojciech Puchar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 30 September 2008 9:16 PM
To: Danny Do
Cc: 'Josh Paetzel'; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: RE: Optimal File System config for 2.5TB RAID5
> SATA using 1MB IO transfer size, I don't know! I think the SATA sys
SATA using 1MB IO transfer size, I don't know! I think the SATA system will
SATA drives aren't much slower than SCSI.
simply make this 1MB IO transfer size.
as you still want "hardware" RAID5 it looks you simply read maybe every
second word from my mails we exchanged privately.
>Why do you think slower drives using an interface that has known
>problems handling concurrent connections will be faster than faster
>drives using an interface designed for concurrency?
My current 6x300GB SCSI system using the FreeBSD "default max raw I/O
transfer size" (64KB). Assume that all r
*/
>> #endif
>> #ifndef MAXDUMPPGS
>>
>>
>> To store files greater than 10MB, I come up with the following proposal for
>> my File System:
>> - UFS2
>> - Soft Update Enable
>> - block-size 1,048,576
>>
>> I am not completely
I/O transfer size
> */
> #endif
> #ifndef MAXPHYS
> #define MAXPHYS (1024 * 1024) /* max raw I/O transfer size */
> #endif
> #ifndef MAXDUMPPGS
>
>
> To store files greater than 10MB, I come up with the following proposal for
> my File System:
> - UFS2
MAXDUMPPGS
To store files greater than 10MB, I come up with the following proposal for
my File System:
- UFS2
- Soft Update Enable
- block-size 1,048,576
I am not completely sure what advantage I got from this configuration but I
am pretty sure that FSCK is much quicker with 1M file system
Mike Bristow said:
> > What's this stuff? shutdown -r is implemented using reboot.
>
> Only when you give it -o. Otherwise it sends a signal to init,
> and init manages the shutdown.The code you quote is only
> run if -o is given
But the code is init implementing reboot is the same as in t
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 04:12:09PM +0200, Michel Talon wrote:
> Gunther Mayer wrote:
>
> > > Don't use "reboot", use shutdown -r now. I also had the same problem
> > > once
> > > (had to get physical access to the box to fix it) and it was because
> > > of
> > > the "reboot".
> > >
> >
> > Tha
201 - 300 of 838 matches
Mail list logo
