> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Zaphod Beeblebrox
> Sent: 21 May 2008 01:48
> To: Freddie Cash
> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Status of ZFS in -stable?
>
> Correct. If I
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Freddie Cash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On May 20, 2008 12:08 pm Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
> > On 18 May Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
> > > However, when using Norton Ghost to make backup snapshots, the files
> > > (on ZFS) come out corrupt. They are not corrupt on UFS
On May 20, 2008 12:08 pm Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
> On 18 May Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
> > However, when using Norton Ghost to make backup snapshots, the files
> > (on ZFS) come out corrupt. They are not corrupt on UFS backed SAMBA
> > service.
>
> Since when does Norton Ghost claim to support ZFS?
On 18 May Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
> However, when using Norton Ghost to make backup snapshots, the files
> (on ZFS) come out corrupt. They are not corrupt on UFS backed SAMBA
> service.
Since when does Norton Ghost claim to support ZFS?
If not, how can you expect the files *not* to be corrupted?
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Marc UBM Bocklet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 May 2008 00:26:49 -0400
> Pierre-Luc Drouin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I would like to know if the memory allocation problem with zfs has
> > been fixed in -stable? Is zfs considered to be more "stable"
On Tue, 13 May 2008 00:26:49 -0400
Pierre-Luc Drouin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to know if the memory allocation problem with zfs has
> been fixed in -stable? Is zfs considered to be more "stable" now?
>
> Thanks!
> Pierre-Luc Drouin
We just set up a zfs based fileserver
Hugo Silva wrote:
Daniel Gerzo wrote:
Hello Pierre-Luc,
Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 6:26:49 AM, you wrote:
Hi,
I would like to know if the memory allocation problem with zfs has been
fixed in -stable? Is zfs considered to be more "stable" now?
I am using ZFS on my laptop as a typica
Daniel Gerzo wrote:
Hello Pierre-Luc,
Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 6:26:49 AM, you wrote:
Hi,
I would like to know if the memory allocation problem with zfs has been
fixed in -stable? Is zfs considered to be more "stable" now?
It's still an experimental feature in FreeBSD, thoug
Hello Pierre-Luc,
Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 6:26:49 AM, you wrote:
> Hi,
> I would like to know if the memory allocation problem with zfs has been
> fixed in -stable? Is zfs considered to be more "stable" now?
It's still an experimental feature in FreeBSD, though the memory
allocation issues might
