On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 03:07:00PM -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Tru Huynh t...@centos.org wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:10:58AM -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
If you are running CentOS-4, the last 2 kernels do not (yet) have
corresponding kmod-xfs. You need to
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Tru Huynh t...@centos.org wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 03:07:00PM -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
The one for the .22 centosplus kernel will be nice to have as well.
Btw I have rebuild the kmod-xfs independant version for the .22 kernel
(regular
and
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Tru Huynh t...@centos.org wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 03:07:00PM -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
The one for the .22 centosplus kernel will be nice to have as well.
Btw I have rebuild the kmod-xfs independant version for the .22 kernel
(regular
and
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Tru Huynh t...@centos.org wrote:
We can push either version in the next weeks, say June 15th?
to their final repositories. Does that sound good?
Not quite. That version is now obsolete -
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 08:16:42AM -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
Here is the updated version:
http://centos.toracat.org/kmods/CentOS-4/xfs/SRPMS/
Please discard the obsoleted ones (I did not bump the version/release
number). Let me know when your binaries are ready for testing.
rebuilds and
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Tru Huynh t...@centos.org wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:10:58AM -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
If you are running CentOS-4, the last 2 kernels do not (yet) have
corresponding kmod-xfs. You need to wait for CentOS devs to build
those kmods or to supply a kernel
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 02:03:32PM -0700, Scott Silva wrote:
on 5-14-2009 1:24 PM Pasi ??? spake the following:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 06:23:05PM +0200, Bernhard Gschaider wrote:
Thank you all for your quick answers (you guys must have started
typing BEFORE I hit the Send-button).
The
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Rainer Duffner rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
The eighties called - they want their stone-age way to handle disks
back
Heh. Well, if he wants them fsck'd in the first place ...
___
CentOS mailing list
Hi!
I'm justing in the process of setting up a new fileserver for our
company. I'm installing CentOS 5.3 (64 bit) on it.
One of the problems with it is that it has a 3.5TB filesystem for
the user data which I formatted during setup as an ext3. Now my
experience with our current fileserver is
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 05:44:11PM +0200, Bernhard Gschaider wrote:
Hi!
I'm justing in the process of setting up a new fileserver for our
company. I'm installing CentOS 5.3 (64 bit) on it.
One of the problems with it is that it has a 3.5TB filesystem for
the user data which I formatted
2009/5/14 Bernhard Gschaider bgschaid_li...@ice-sf.at:
One of the problems with it is that it has a 3.5TB filesystem for
the user data which I formatted during setup as an ext3.
Yes, using ext3 is a real pain especially on such large partitions. I
advice you to switch to XFS.
--
With best
Bernhard Gschaider wrote:
Hi!
I'm justing in the process of setting up a new fileserver for our
company. I'm installing CentOS 5.3 (64 bit) on it.
One of the problems with it is that it has a 3.5TB filesystem for
the user data which I formatted during setup as an ext3. Now my
experience
Thank you all for your quick answers (you guys must have started
typing BEFORE I hit the Send-button).
The general consensus seems to be If you can start anew: use
XFS. This leaves one question: as the XFS is not included in the
standard-kernel which option offers the smoothest sailing
Hi,
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 12:23, Bernhard Gschaider
bgschaid_li...@ice-sf.at wrote:
which option offers the smoothest sailing
(especially during kernel-updates):
- kernel from centosplus
- kmod-xfs from centosplus
- kmod-xfs from extras
Use kmod-xfs from extras (it should be already
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Filipe Brandenburger
filbran...@gmail.com wrote:
Use kmod-xfs from extras (it should be already enabled in your yum
config) unless you already need the centosplus kernel for another
reason.
See here:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Bernhard Gschaider
bgschaid_li...@ice-sf.at wrote:
One of the problems with it is that it has a 3.5TB filesystem for
the user data which I formatted during setup as an ext3.
An option I haven't seen suggested yet is to split this into several
filesystems that
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 06:23:05PM +0200, Bernhard Gschaider wrote:
Thank you all for your quick answers (you guys must have started
typing BEFORE I hit the Send-button).
The general consensus seems to be If you can start anew: use
XFS. This leaves one question: as the XFS is not included
on 5-14-2009 1:24 PM Pasi � spake the following:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 06:23:05PM +0200, Bernhard Gschaider wrote:
Thank you all for your quick answers (you guys must have started
typing BEFORE I hit the Send-button).
The general consensus seems to be If you can start anew: use
XFS. This
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
on 5-14-2009 1:24 PM Pasi � spake the following:
It seems XFS might be added as a default to RHEL 5.4..
Probably not a default, but an option.
I wonder which high-end customer *finally* drove them to do this (if,
indeed,
Am 14.05.2009 um 21:25 schrieb Bart Schaefer:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Bernhard Gschaider
bgschaid_li...@ice-sf.at wrote:
One of the problems with it is that it has a 3.5TB filesystem for
the user data which I formatted during setup as an ext3.
An option I haven't seen suggested
Scott Silva wrote:
on 5-14-2009 1:24 PM Pasi � spake the following:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 06:23:05PM +0200, Bernhard Gschaider wrote:
Thank you all for your quick answers (you guys must have started
typing BEFORE I hit the Send-button).
The general consensus seems to be If you can start
on 5-14-2009 2:21 PM Les Mikesell spake the following:
Scott Silva wrote:
on 5-14-2009 1:24 PM Pasi � spake the following:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 06:23:05PM +0200, Bernhard Gschaider wrote:
Thank you all for your quick answers (you guys must have started
typing BEFORE I hit the Send-button).
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:10:58AM -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
If you are running CentOS-4, the last 2 kernels do not (yet) have
corresponding kmod-xfs. You need to wait for CentOS devs to build
those kmods or to supply a kernel version independent kmod.
I have just pushed the latest .22
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 17:21, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:
Is this a reasonable choice on a 32 bit machine? I thought 4k stacks
were a problem.
Oh yeah, I failed to mention in my previous e-mail that all the
machines I have running XFS are using x86_64 versions of CentOS.
I
24 matches
Mail list logo
