Re: RFC: Upgrade BIND version in RELENG_7 to BIND 9.6.x

2010-12-21 Thread Doug Barton
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Thanks to everyone who replied, the feedback was very useful. Unfortunately I have missed the deadline for getting this into 7.4, so the current thinking is that I will do the update after the release is cut so that those who need to stay with the

Re: New ZFSv28 patchset for 8-STABLE

2010-12-21 Thread Ruben van Staveren
Ok, On 16 Dec 2010, at 13:44, Martin Matuska wrote: > Please test, test, test. Chances are this is the last patchset before > v28 going to HEAD (finally) and after a reasonable testing period into > 8-STABLE. > Especially test new changes, like boot support and sendfile(2) support. > Also be sure

Re: How to debug a double fault? (Re: Could MSGBUF_SIZE be made a loader tunable?)

2010-12-21 Thread Eugene Grosbein
On 15.12.2010 16:37, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > Andriy Gapon wrote: >> on 06/12/2010 07:20 per...@pluto.rain.com said the following: >>> Would there be some fundamental problem in changing MSGBUF_SIZE >>> from a compiled-in constant to a tunable that could be set at the >>> loader prompt? >>>

Re: ZFS raidz recovery

2010-12-21 Thread Gareth de Vaux
On Mon 2010-12-06 (13:07), Gareth de Vaux wrote: > 'zpool replace' also only works if you physically swap out a disk > at the same port, or replace disk1 with disk2 online. 'zpool remove' > and 'zpool detach' don't remove devices from a raidz. > > So I can recover an array if I have an extra disk

Re: Tunables (Re: How to debug a double fault? (Re: Could MSGBUF_SIZE be made a loader tunable?))

2010-12-21 Thread Andriy Gapon
on 19/12/2010 11:11 per...@pluto.rain.com said the following: > Andriy Gapon wrote: >> on 16/12/2010 11:34 per...@pluto.rain.com said the following: >>> Andriy Gapon wrote: BTW, are you sure that you correctly placed initialization of msgbufsize ? >>> >>> I am not at all sure of that ..