Hey,
I will submit it. However does Opensolaris have a seperate HCL? or do i just
use the solaris one?
Cheers
Mark
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailma
On 8/22/07, Peter Baumgartner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I would also like to use this module. This bug
> http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6561700 leads me to believe
> it can be used with the current version of Samba.
>
> Do I need to rebuild Samba? If so, does anybody have point
Brad Plecs wrote:
> I hate to start rsyncing again, but may be forced to; policing the snapshot
> space consumption is
> getting painful, but the online snapshot feature is too valuable to discard
> altogether.
>
> or if there are other creative solutions, I'm all ears...
OK, you asked for "
I would also like to use this module. This bug
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6561700 leads me to believe it
can be used with the current version of Samba.
Do I need to rebuild Samba? If so, does anybody have pointers on doing that?
I'm not having any luck trying to build 3.2.0
Just wanted to voice another request for this feature.
I was forced on a previous Solaris10/ZFS system to rsync whole filesystems, and
snapshot the backup copy to prevent the snapshots from negatively impacting
users. This obviously has the effect of reducing available space on the system
by o
We have the same issue (using dCache on Thumpers, data on ZFS).
A workaround has been to move the directory on a local UFS filesystem using a
low nbpi parameter.
However, this is not a solution.
Doesn't look like a threading problem, thanks anyway Jens !
This message posted from opensolaris
Ralf Ramge wrote:
> I consider this a big design flaw of ZFS.
Are you saying that it's a design flaw of ZFS that we haven't yet implemented
remote replication? I would consider that a missing feature, not a design
flaw. There's nothing in the design of ZFS to prevent such a feature (and in
fa
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 09:49:26AM -0700, Sergey Chechelnitskiy wrote:
Hi Sergey,
>
> I have a flat directory with a lot of small files inside. And I have a java
> application that reads all these files when it starts. If this directory is
> located on ZFS the application starts fast (15 mins) w
Ralf,
> Well, and what I want to say: if you place the bitmap volume on the
> same
> disk, this situation even gets worse. The problem is the
> involvement of
> SVM. Building the soft partition again makes the handling even more
> complex and the case harder to handle for operators. It's the b
>Hi,
>
>For what your looking for the gigabyte M61p-S3 is the perfect mobo.
>Six sata ports DDRII and a am2 dual core AMD is really cheap. Only
>downside is that the realtek NIC oesnt work as far as i know.
>However an intel gigabit card is relativly cheap and works. And even
>with all that i was
Hi,
For what your looking for the gigabyte M61p-S3 is the perfect mobo. Six sata
ports DDRII and a am2 dual core AMD is really cheap. Only downside is that the
realtek NIC oesnt work as far as i know. However an intel gigabit card is
relativly cheap and works. And even with all that i was able
Wow,
I just opened a whole can of worms there that went flying over my head. Thanks
for all the information! i'll see if i can plough through it all :)
I'm guessing that i might be able to do asynchronous, but the problem is that
the video is going to be streaming from a camera in real time. An
£ukasz K writes:
> > Is ZFS efficient at handling huge populations of tiny-to-small files -
> > for example, 20 million TIFF images in a collection, each between 5
> > and 500k in size?
> >
> > I am asking because I could have sworn that I read somewhere that it
> > isn't, but I can't find t
£ukasz K writes:
> > Is ZFS efficient at handling huge populations of tiny-to-small files -
> > for example, 20 million TIFF images in a collection, each between 5
> > and 500k in size?
> >
> > I am asking because I could have sworn that I read somewhere that it
> > isn't, but I can't find t
Brandorr wrote:
> Is ZFS efficient at handling huge populations of tiny-to-small files -
> for example, 20 million TIFF images in a collection, each between 5
> and 500k in size?
>
> I am asking because I could have sworn that I read somewhere that it
> isn't, but I can't find the re
Jim Dunham wrote:
> This is just one scenario for deploying the 48 disks of x4500. The
> blog listed below offers another option, by mirroring the bitmaps
> across all available disks, bring the total disk count back up to 46,
> (or 44, if 2x HSP) leaving the other two for a mirrored root disk.
16 matches
Mail list logo
