Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:32:46 +1200
> Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> Mike Meyer wrote:
>>> My benchmarks with gcc 4 showed an that 64 bit code ran an average of
>>> about 33% faster than 32 bit code.
>>>
>> By code, is that generated code or the compiler
Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 16:49:25 +1200
> Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> Mike Meyer wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:59:24 +1200
>>> Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
Alfred Monticello wrote:
> The one in /opt/sfw can
[context?]
Micah Leier wrote:
> Where would the right place to ask be?
The other lists have been mentioned, my original comment was about
Solaris 10 questions here.
> also, it's not so much that I'm daft, its that I need a large array that can
> be expanded slowly, and performance isn't that i
hi,
could someone plse tell me what are the arguments of the "-B" flag in this
mkisofs invokation someone posted in this forum last month? should it be used
at all?
mkisofs is -G .../hsfs.bootblock -B ... -l -ldots -R -N -D -V SOL_11_SPARC -o
.../solaris_1.iso .../solaris_1.product
i am conf
Micah Leier writes:
> Thanks for your replies. I posted here because two of the questions weren't
> ZFS specific, and I hadn't seen the lvm-discuss group. I believe the why
> can't I add drives slowly to RAID-Z question has been asked a million times,
> and so far nothing has been done about it,
+--
| On 2008-08-22 14:10:44, Anne Moore wrote:
|
| Most of my machines are running OpenSolaris. Is there a tool/application out
| there that will install on OpenSolaris (or Solaris 10 even) that will
| monitor all of my S
Thanks for your replies. I posted here because two of the questions weren't ZFS
specific, and I hadn't seen the lvm-discuss group. I believe the why can't I
add drives slowly to RAID-Z question has been asked a million times, and so far
nothing has been done about it, so I figured I would probab
Hi All
Most of my machines are running OpenSolaris. Is there a tool/application out
there that will install on OpenSolaris (or Solaris 10 even) that will
monitor all of my Solaris boxes (uptime, disk drive usage, etc?)
thank you for the help
Anne
__
Haik,
Thank you very much for the quick answer. It is strange that there is a
discrepancy.
This could explain "errors" that I was getting in execution traces from a
simulator.
For everyone's reference, the ranges given in the docs are:
0x2000 - 0xFFC0 for 32-bit processes
and
0x0100 -
Trevor Meyerowitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking for the legal process address in sun4v for both 32 bit and 64 bit
> modes.
>
> The 2nd edition of the solaris internals book (section 9.2.2, figure 9.4) has
> the figures for sun4u and before.
>
> These are listed as 0x0001 - 0xFFBEC000 for
You can't really add a drive to Raid-5 either (at least not in SVM). You can
do it, but it's not really RAID-5 any more because the data isn't striped
across the new disk. It's concatenated. So it doesn't really offer a better
"add-a-drive" situation.
Write performance of SVM raid-5 will be
Micah Leier writes:
> Where would the right place to ask be?
I'd go for [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the "why can't I add drives
slowly to RAID-Z?" question, and [EMAIL PROTECTED] for
general Solaris Volume Manager questions.
> also, it's not so much that I'm daft, its that I need a large array that can
On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 16:49:25 +1200
Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Meyer wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:59:24 +1200
> > Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Alfred Monticello wrote:
> >>> The one in /opt/sfw can produce 64bit code but is a 32bit binary.
> >> What's wrong w
Where would the right place to ask be? also, it's not so much that I'm daft,
its that I need a large array that can be expanded slowly, and performance
isn't that important. Adding a drive (which people have asked about a ton) is
impossible with RAID-Z, and this seems a pretty decent work around
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking for the legal process address in sun4v
> for both 32 bit and 64 bit modes.
>
> The 2nd edition of the solaris internals book
> (section 9.2.2, figure 9.4) has the figures for sun4u
> and before.
>
> These are listed as 0x0001 - 0xFFBEC000 for 32
> bit mode, and
> 0x1.
15 matches
Mail list logo
