On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Marc UBM Bocklet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 May 2008 00:26:49 -0400 > Pierre-Luc Drouin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I would like to know if the memory allocation problem with zfs has > > been fixed in -stable? Is zfs considered to be more "stable" now? > > > > Thanks! > > Pierre-Luc Drouin > > We just set up a zfs based fileserver in our home. It's accessed via > samba and ftp, connected via an em 1gb card. > FreeBSD is installed on an 80GB ufs2 disk, the zpool consists of two > 750GB disks, set up as raidz (my mistake, mirror would probably have > been the better choice). > We've been using it for about 2 weeks now and there have been no > problems (transferred lots of big and small files off/on it, maxing out > disk speed). For standard filestore, Samba/NFS has worked fine. However, when using Norton Ghost to make backup snapshots, the files (on ZFS) come out corrupt.They are not corrupt on UFS backed SAMBA service. _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
