On Sun, February 22, 2009 23:37, Frank Cusack wrote:
On February 22, 2009 9:56:02 PM -0600 David Dyer-Bennet d...@dd-b.net
wrote:
On Sun, February 22, 2009 21:06, Frank Cusack wrote:
Your example worked because you are only replicating a filesystem
within the root pool. This works because
On Sun, February 22, 2009 23:38, Frank Cusack wrote:
On February 22, 2009 10:05:57 PM -0600 David Dyer-Bennet d...@dd-b.net
wrote:
I've got this pretty definite problem with zfs receive -d; I've posted
examples before, but here's the cleanest one so far. This shows
carefully
what's where,
b == Blake blake.ir...@gmail.com writes:
c There are other problems besides the versioning.
b Agreed - I don't think that archiving simply the send stream
b is a smart idea (yet, until the stream format is stabilized
*there* *are* *other* *problems* *besides* *the*
Hello David,
Saturday, February 21, 2009, 10:33:05 PM, you wrote:
DA on Sat Feb 21 2009, Miles Nordin carton-AT-Ivy.NET wrote:
Many new ZFS users are convinced to try ZFS because they want to back
up non-ZFS filesystems onto zpool's because it's better than tape, so
that's not a crazy idea.
Hello all:
I recall that some time last year, somone from Sun had written a two
part blog post calling for a technical discussion on the effort
involved with making ZFS work on the Linux kernel.
May I have a pointer to that blog post, please ?
-- Ram
Hi folks,
I recently read up on Scott Dickson's blog with his solution for
jumpstart/flashless cloning of ZFS root filesystem boxes. I have to say
that it initially looks to work out cleanly, but of course there are
kinks to be worked out that deal with auto mounting filesystems mostly.
I don't know what's causing this, nor have I seen it.
Can you send more information about the errors you
see when the system crashes and svc.configd fails?
Doing the scrub seems like a harmless and possibly
useful thing to do. Let us know what you find out
from it.
Lori
On 02/23/09 11:05,
On Sun, February 22, 2009 23:06, James C. McPherson wrote:
On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 22:05:57 -0600 (CST)
David Dyer-Bennet d...@dd-b.net wrote:
I even vaguely think I've done it before, but maybe it was against some
other component.
Anyway, the obvious place I find is
Mario Goebbels wrote:
One thing I'd like to see is an _easy_ option to fall back onto older
uberblocks when the zpool went belly up for a silly reason. Something
that doesn't involve esoteric parameters supplied to zdb.
Between uberblock updates, there may be many write operations to a data
Hi I have a script that creates accounts and zfs file systems for each
account. The list of accounts is fairly large ~5200. I have in the past
been able to run this script and create filesystems for all 5200 accounts.
With snv_107 I get periodic failures while running the script. primarily
the
Forgive the double posts, they will cease immediately
panic[cpu0]/thread=dacac880: BAD TRAP: type=e (#pf Page fault)
rp=d9f61850 addr=1048c0d occurred in module zfs due to an illegal
access to a user address
net-init: #pf Page fault
Bad kernel fault at addr=0x1048c0d
pid=1069,
on Mon Feb 23 2009, Robert Milkowski milek-AT-task.gda.pl wrote:
Hello David,
Saturday, February 21, 2009, 10:33:05 PM, you wrote:
DA on Sat Feb 21 2009, Miles Nordin carton-AT-Ivy.NET wrote:
Many new ZFS users are convinced to try ZFS because they want to back
up non-ZFS filesystems
Hello,
I am building a home file server and am looking for an ATX mother board
that will be supported well with OpenSolaris (onboard SATA controller,
network, graphics if any, audio, etc). I decided to go for Intel based
boards (socket LGA 775) since it seems like power management is better
13 matches
Mail list logo
