Hi All,
sorry for all the duplicates. Feel free to pass on to other interested
parties.
The OpenSolaris Storage Community is holding a Storage Summit on
February 23 at the Grand Hyatt San Francisco, prior to the FAST
conference.
The registration wiki is here:
https://wikis.sun.com/display/OpenS
Hi Robert,
Robert Milkowski wrote:
PB> Honeycomb is an archival storage appliance based on Solaris and Java. We
PB> essentially have a clustered environment (8/16 nodes) and a mechanism to
PB> store and retrieve data (SDK/API). The data on the system is protected
PB> through self-healing (kind o
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Peter Buckingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For Honeycomb we use ramdisk images that we load from disk. The images
are ~700MB, but it is possible to make usable Solaris images < 400 MB.
I am sorry, it seems that I did miss what "Honeycomb" is, yo
UNIX admin wrote:
Wasn't it possible to do it in a cleaner way, i.e. start from
SUNWCrnet and use pkgrm, so that the system integrity remains
consistent? I have to try that exercise one of these days...
Yep, I actually remove some packages too. But to get to ~64MB I think
you will need to be a
Ian Collins wrote:
> Interesting, do you have anything published?
Not yet. I'm working on putting something together as part of the Honeycomb
project. We've had interest both internally and externally about what we
are doing. Our system looks more like a server than a traditional embedded
applian
Ian Collins wrote:
> I'm more interested in paring things down to a minimal kernel that can
> be loaded from FLASH. 64-128MB would be my target.
That may well be possible with some more extreme measures. What I started
with is the reduced network core install which is ~200MB. This doesn't
include
Ian Collins wrote:
Has anyone done any work on a minimal embeddable Open Solaris that can
boot from FLASH on a single board PC?
I was think initially of the windows CE space, rather than the embedded
Linux one.
For Honeycomb we use ramdisk images that we load from disk. The images
are ~700MB,
Stephen Lau wrote:
I think the Appliances community is a perfectly suited place for your
current discussion of Honeycomb...
I've already made a proposal there. Just trying to make sure that
everyone feels I'm addressing their concerns ;-)
peter
___
Darren J Moffat wrote:
What about source code ? I think for this to be an OpenSolaris project
I'd want to see source. OpenSolaris isn't a general Sun site for all
stuff.
I understand that opinion. It's pretty clear that if we get this
approved we won't be putting up source code tomorrow, ho
Stephen Lau wrote:
Ian Collins wrote:
Stephen Lau wrote:
You seem to have misread the email. Stephen (Harpster)'s email is
explicitly asking the community to get involved in the discussion. As
the copyright holder - yes, only Sun can make the actual license
switch - but this is not a unilate
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. Please, no external PSUs! I HATE those wall-wart things!
The only reason an external PS might be required is the space issue.
But then again, I agree that it's a pain and should be avoided if
possible. Perhaps Andy B. can fix that?
I've never understood why people
Hi John,
you seem to have summed up the situation reasonably well. I have a few
comments in-line below.
John Plocher wrote:
You seem to be lacking a few important things, though:
A vision/roadmap for an open community that is more than
a "Sun Honeycomb Product Enthusiast Group", and
Hi Alan (and Steve)
Alan Burlison wrote:
I agree with Steve about this - unless you are going to release some
code as open source, the project doesn't belong on opensolaris.org. A
SDK and API isn't sufficient. Hell, we have released the Solaris APIs
for as long as Solaris has existed, in the
Richard Lowe wrote:
I'd like to see more details first.
Sources? continued development and work in the community?
I'm not seeing much in the above (though maybe that's me being dense)
that seems opensolaris related. We are neither a hosting service, nor a
marketing organization...
I underst
Stephen Lau wrote:
Are you intending to provide any source, or do any open development?
The plan is to provide the SDK initially so that we establish the apis
that we use for use in other projects (eg. http://www.fedora.info)
Once we have some agreement on that we will look at opening up
Ho
Hi All,
Honeycomb is a unique archival storage product developed within Sun. It
is built upon a clustered system and provides strong reliability
guarantees for it's data storage (Write-Once, Read Many) and metadata.
We (the development team) would like to start to provide information
about t
Eric Enright wrote:
> Linux overcommits / lazy loads on memory allocations, though this is
> tunable. I believe the default setting is to overcommit, which can
> lead to the random killing of processes in order to retrieve memory
> should one run out. I forget the terminology used for that partic
huy vu wrote:
Thank to you both, Nacho and Joerg. However I would love to hear why
the call to exec would fail right after a call to fork(). From
reading things about vfork() it sounds like its sole purpose is to
allow people to call exec right after a fork. I just like to
understand why exec doe
James McPherson wrote:
> On 11/30/06, John Brewer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Can you please submit a RFE to hotplug SATA drives on Solaris.
>> I would but I do not currently have access to one to test.
>
> I think that this might be covered by the existing AHCI project
> (which is closed :<).
>
Steven Stallion wrote:
> Are there plans to have native SATA support for the nForce4 chipsets?
>
I believe Sun is working on a driver for this, but I'm not sure on when
the plans are to integrate it.
peter
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolar
James Carlson wrote:
> Bruno Bonfils writes:
>> I'm a bit surprise there is not VRRP daemon for Solaris (afaik),
>> that's why I thinking about write one for our favorite OS. Though,
>> my C skills are not very high, and I prefer to work with few others
>> people on this project, that's why I ask h
Eric Lowe wrote:
> In my mind at least, LKML is a good model, but it's hard to explain how
> such a list works if you haven't been on it and participated for any
> length of time. Such a forum bridges the gaps between the various
> projects which are peppered all over the place. It keeps everyone i
Hi All,
There was some discussion about having a more technical mailing
list/community ala freebsd hackers/lkml/...
Was there any progress made on that? I'm definitely interested in
discoverying/learning more about the internals of Solaris.
thanks,
peter
___
Juergen Keil wrote:
Or I can wait until the grub menu timeout expires. This starts loading the
default entry. multiboot and the boot_archive is loaded. Text screen is
cleared, , and the system hangs - before printing the
"SunOS Release 5.xx" copyright string.
A completely wild guess but
We have some hardware that has had similar problems. It may be that the
A20 is actually enabled anyway. You might want to just do a return in
the gateA20. We do:
ENTRY(gateA20)
movb$2, %al
outb$0x92
ret
but you could always just try returning ;-)
this is in s
Jürgen Keil wrote:
It came up with the usual loading Stage 2but got
no further, so at least it reads the DVD and tries to
boot from it.
It hangs in GRUB's gateA20() subroutine, called from
usr/src/grub/grub-0.95/stage2/common.c function init_bios_info(), here:
http://cvs.opensolaris.org/
Hi Eric,
Eric Lowe wrote:
>> okay, we've just seen some strange problems without swap. i haven't had
>> time to look into why, so we are just going to use swap anyway for now.
>
> Please let us know you perceive to be "strange issues" are.
I'll look into filing a bug when i get a chance. Basica
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is kinda what tmpfs could offer if it was possible to have
> pre-load it.
>
> However, this sounds very much like an ordinary filesystem: you load in
> RAM what you need and nothing more.
i'd like to be able to load it like a ramdisk. in linux (sorry, it's
what i k
Jonathan Adams wrote:
>
> 6230033 prtdiag should be implemented for Solaris x86
> 6313638 SMBIOS Support for Solaris
>
> both integrated in snv_23, and both should be available in Solaris
> 10 Update 2.
okay, i guess i need to update. our product is based on Solaris 10, so
i'm still trying to fi
Hi All,
There are a bunch of things that I'd like to see in solaris. Although
some of these my be showing my lack of knowledge of solaris though...
- support for initramfs (rather than just plain ramdisks)
- better support for running without swap
o hence having a
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> Peter Buckingham wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> There are a bunch of things that I'd like to see in solaris. Although
>> some of these my be showing my lack of knowledge of solaris though...
>>
>> - support for initramfs (rather
Hi All,
There are a bunch of things that I'd like to see in solaris. Although
some of these my be showing my lack of knowledge of solaris though...
- support for initramfs (rather than just plain ramdisks)
- better support for running without swap
o hence having a
32 matches
Mail list logo
