Thanks to both C. P. and Pete for your responses. Comments inline:
> Case 1.) is probably harmless, because geli would return a
> corrupted sectors' content to zfs... which zfs will likely detect
> because it wouldn't checksum correctly. So zfs will correct it
> out of redundant storage, and writ
First posting here, hopefully I'm doing it right =)
I also posted this to the FreeBSD forum, but I know some hast folks monitor
this list regularly and not so much there, so...
Basically, I'm testing failure scenarios with HAST/ZFS. I got two nodes,
scripted up a bunch of checks and failover acti
On Jun 30, 2011, at 4:28 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 29/06/2011 23:03, Mark Saad wrote:
>
>> The svn sources are here http://svn.freebsd.org/base/projects/suj/8/ .
>>
>> Why would suj not make it into 8-STABLE ?
>
> It is a too large patch, and it changes a lot of important, known and
> working
On 6/30/11 8:08 PM, Christian Baer wrote:
Please keep in mind though that I am not the only person out there with
the same error using the same controller (type). I somehow doubt that
all those hits by Google are all caused by power difficulties and the
common controller is pure coincidence.
J
On 18.06.2011 19:52, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
Hello Jeremy!
Thanks for your long answer! I'm sorry to have kept you waiting but I
was out of town and turned off all my computers while I was away.
> It may be that the kernel is panic'ing and auto-rebooting before he can
> see the message in questio
On 6/30/11 7:31 PM, Christian Baer wrote:
As far as I can tell so far there isn't any realy kernel panik. But the
machine resets alright. All I can find in /var/log/messages is what I
have already written. :-(
A serial console is easy enough to set up on a Sun for example, but in
this case, I am
On 18.06.2011 18:49, Stefan Bethke wrote:
>> I have to slightly explain the word "crash" here: I don't actually
>> have to hard reset the system myself. My box just does a reboot by
>> itself. No filesystem is unmounted cleanly and because the machine
>> isn't really new and powerful fsck takes pr
2011/6/30 O. Hartmann
> It's a pitty.
>
Indeed, it is. I have 3 1068s for 45 bays, I'm gonna have to buy new cards
:(.
--
Joshua Boyd
E-mail: boy...@jbip.net
http://www.jbip.net
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/ma
Antony Mawer wrote:
> Not sure if this is the right place to post it -- about 6 years ago I
> put together a module which displays an ASCII splash screen on boot
> (rather than the graphical splash_pcx and splash_bmp modules).
As a user, I think this is rather cool; at least it is more useful for
On 29/06/2011 23:03, Mark Saad wrote:
> The svn sources are here http://svn.freebsd.org/base/projects/suj/8/ .
>
> Why would suj not make it into 8-STABLE ?
It is a too large patch, and it changes a lot of important, known and
working code (like softupdates). In other words, it's too risky.
___
On 06/29/11 15:57, Joshua Boyd wrote:
2011/6/29 O. Hartmann mailto:ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de>>
Questions:
a) Is this an issue of FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE or is it a firmware/BIOS
issue which can be solved?
Hi Oliver,
Neither, unfortunately. The 1068E based cards do not support drives
11 matches
Mail list logo
