On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 09:50:10PM -0700, Erik Trimble wrote:
Nah, the 8x2.5-in-2 are $220, while the 5x3.5-in-3 are $120.
And they have a sas expander inside, unlike every other variant of
these I've seen so far. Cabling mess win.
--
Dan.
pgpNzVMcKh5yn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
The motherboard is AMD based and it has two controllers; one OnChip controller
that is integrated into the SouthBridge chip (SB750) and an OnBoard controller
using the JMicron JMB362 chip and a JMB322 port multiplier. Both controllers
supports both AHCI and Native IDE mode which can be
That would add unnecessary code to the ZFS layer for something that
cron can handle in one line.
Actually ... Why should there be a ZFS property to share NFS, when you can
already do that with share and dfstab? And still the zfs property
exists.
I think the proposed existence of a ZFS scrub
Most software introduced in Linux clearly violates the UNIX
philosophy.
Hehehe, don't get me started on OSX. ;-) And for the love of all things
sacred, never say OSX is not UNIX. I made that mistake once. Which is not
to say I was proven wrong or anything - but it's apparently a subject
The only tool I'm aware of today that provides a copy of the data,
and all of the ZPL metadata and all the ZFS dataset properties is 'zfs
send'.
AFAIK, this is correct.
Further, the only type of tool that can backup a pool is a tool like
dd.
How is it different to backup a pool, versus
That would add unnecessary code to the ZFS layer for something that
cron can handle in one line.
Actually ... Why should there be a ZFS property to share NFS, when you can
already do that with share and dfstab? And still the zfs property
exists.
Probably because it is easy to create new
On 21.03.2010 14:26, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
Most software introduced in Linux clearly violates the UNIX
philosophy.
Hehehe, don't get me started on OSX. ;-) And for the love of all things
sacred, never say OSX is not UNIX. I made that mistake once. Which is not
to say I was proven wrong
On 3/21/10 4:19 AM, Robin Axelsson wrote:
The motherboard is AMD based and it has two controllers; one OnChip controller
that is integrated into the SouthBridge chip (SB750) and an OnBoard controller
using the JMicron JMB362 chip and a JMB322 port multiplier. Both controllers
supports both
David,
Thanks for the pointers! That version looks more mature from the listed
functionality Fencing, and Quorum etc. Would be interested to know how
it performs in real life.
..Remco
David Magda wrote:
On Mar 20, 2010, at 14:37, Remco Lengers wrote:
You seem to be concerned about the
On 03/15/10 01:01 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
This sounds really bizarre.
Yes, it is. ButCR 6880994 is bizarre too.
One detail suggestion on checking what's going on (since I don't have a
clue towards a real root-cause determination): Get an md5sum on a clean
copy of the file, say from a
On Mar 20, 2010, at 10:12 PM, Brandon High wrote:
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Richard Elling richard.ell...@gmail.com
wrote:
For those disinclined to click, data retention when mirroring wins over raidz
when looking at the problem from the perspective of number of drives
available.
On Mar 21, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Frank Middleton wrote:
On 03/15/10 01:01 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
This sounds really bizarre.
Yes, it is. ButCR 6880994 is bizarre too.
Rolling back to a conversation with Frank last fall, here is the output
of fmdump which shows the single bit flip. Extra
On Mar 17, 2010, at 6:57 AM, Khyron wrote:
Rather, I am asking:
Why do we want to adapt zfs send to do something it was never intended
to do, and probably won't be adapted to do (well, if at all) anytime soon
instead of
optimizing existing technologies for this use case?
So when you
On Mar 21, 2010, at 6:40 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
The only tool I'm aware of today that provides a copy of the data,
and all of the ZPL metadata and all the ZFS dataset properties is 'zfs
send'.
AFAIK, this is correct.
Further, the only type of tool that can backup a pool is a tool like
On Mar 19, 2010, at 9:25 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
ZFS+CIFS even provides
Windows Volume Shadow Services so that Windows users can do this on
their own.
I'll need to look into that, when I get a moment. Not familiar with
Windows Volume Shadow Services, but having people at home
Was wondering if anyone can see any issues with the ARC in the following
output?
bash-3.00# ./arc_summary.pl
System Memory:
Physical RAM: 6023 MB
Free Memory : 784 MB
LotsFree: 90 MB
ZFS Tunables (/etc/system):
ARC Size:
Current Size: 1159 MB (arcsize)
Target Size (Adaptive): 2106 MB (c)
Min
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010, Tony MacDoodle wrote:
Was wondering if anyone can see any issues with the ARC in the following output?
Do you expect us to see something wrong? Based on the cache hit ratio
(99%), it seems to be working exceedingly well.
Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
ln -s .zfs/snapshot snapshots
Voila. All Windows or Mac or Linux or whatever users are able to
easily access snapshots.
Clever.
Just one minor problem though, you've circumvented the reason why the
snapdir
property defaults to hidden. This probably won't affect clients that
Actually ... Why should there be a ZFS property to share NFS, when you
can
already do that with share and dfstab? And still the zfs property
exists.
Probably because it is easy to create new filesystems and clone them;
as
NFS only works per filesystem you need to edit dfstab every time
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 08:59:29PM -0400, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
ln -s .zfs/snapshot snapshots
Voila. All Windows or Mac or Linux or whatever users are able to
easily access snapshots.
Not being a CIFS user, could you clarify/confirm for me.. is this
just a presentation issue, ie
20 matches
Mail list logo
