On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 06:28:17PM -0500, Peter Tripp wrote:
HI Eugen,
Whether it's compatible entirely depends on the chipset of the SATA
controller.
This is what I was trying to find out. I guess I just have to
test it empirically.
Basically that card is just a dual port 6gbps PCIe
Thanks for the help Chris!
Cheers,
Fritz
You wrote:
original and and rename the new one, or zfs send or ?? Can I do a send and
receive into a filesystem with attributes set as I want or does the receive
keep the same attributes as well? Thank you.
That will work. Just create the new
On Dec 4, 2012, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Either way I'll know the hardware support situation soon
enough.
Have you tried contacting Sonnet?
-Gary
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 03:38:07AM -0800, Gary Driggs wrote:
On Dec 4, 2012, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Either way I'll know the hardware support situation soon
enough.
Have you tried contacting Sonnet?
No, but I did some digging. It *might* be a Marvell 88SX7042,
which would be then supported
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 11:07:17AM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 06:28:17PM -0500, Peter Tripp wrote:
HI Eugen,
Whether it's compatible entirely depends on the chipset of the SATA
controller.
This is what I was trying to find out. I guess I just have to
test it
On Nov 29, 2012, at 1:56 AM, Jim Klimov jimkli...@cos.ru wrote:
I've heard a claim that ZFS relies too much on RAM caching, but
implements no sort of priorities (indeed, I've seen no knobs to
tune those) - so that if the storage box receives many different
types of IO requests with different
On 2012-12-03 18:23, Jim Klimov wrote:
On 2012-12-02 05:42, Jim Klimov wrote:
So... here are some applied questions:
Well, I am ready to reply a few of my own questions now :)
Continuing the desecration of my deceased files' resting grounds...
2) Do I understand correctly that for the
