On Friday, 15. July 2005 21:14, Matthias Buelow wrote:
Why am I arguing in an uphill battle here?
important to the FreeBSD community? Such issues should not even
have to be discussed at all!
I completely agree, and there's really no point in arguing with people who are
happy to throw dollars
* Matthias Buelow [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-07-16 01:42 +0200]:
David Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A corrupted journal can be detected. If it's corrupted, discard
the whole thing, or only the relevant entry. The filesystem will
remain consistent.
If track corruption occurs after the
I was looking for a place to download 6.0-BETA1-powerpc-bootonly.iso
to test om my PowerMac G4. But I cannot find it on any of the ftp-
sites og mirrors. Where can I download it?
Sincerely, Øystein Holmen
Den 15. jul. 2005 kl. 12:56 skrev Scott Long:
Announcement
The FreeBSD
Am Samstag, 16. Juli 2005 13:06 schrieb Øystein Holmen:
I was looking for a place to download
6.0-BETA1-powerpc-bootonly.iso to test om my PowerMac G4. But I
cannot find it on any of the ftp- sites og mirrors. Where can I
download it?
http://people.freebsd.org/~grehan/
At least that's where
Am Samstag, 16. Juli 2005 13:06 schrieb Øystein Holmen:
I was looking for a place to download
6.0-BETA1-powerpc-bootonly.iso to test om my PowerMac G4. But I
cannot find it on any of the ftp- sites og mirrors. Where can I
download it?
Forgot that:
'k, first time I've ever seen this happen ... this morning, around 4am,
vnode usage jumped by almost 130k ... no idea why, since the previous
morning, it was only by ~20k ... but:
Jul 16 04:12:00 mercury root: debug.numvnodes: 336460 - debug.freevnodes: 6404
- debug.vnlru_nowhere: 0 -
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005, Matthias Buelow wrote:
David Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A corrupted journal can be detected. If it's corrupted, discard
the whole thing, or only the relevant entry. The filesystem will
remain consistent.
If track corruption occurs after the journal is written,
Matthias Buelow wrote this message on Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 22:11 +0200:
for write barriers in the block drivers had been implemented, we
phk removed support for write barriers because no one was making use
of them... FreeBSD had them, and when there is *CODE* that makes use
of them, they'll be
Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
The track which is corrupted could contain data that wasn't written
to in months. How would the journal help?
I don't understand this question.
The track destroyed could contain sectors which are in no way related
to the sectors the OS is writing to.
And in what
Somewhere around Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 22:13 , the world stopped
and listened as [EMAIL PROTECTED] graced us with
this profound tidbit of wisdom that would fulfill the enjoyment of
future generations:
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:22:14 +0200
From: Matthias Buelow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
* Matthias Buelow [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-07-16 16:07 +0200]:
Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
The track which is corrupted could contain data that wasn't written
to in months. How would the journal help?
I don't understand this question.
The track destroyed could contain sectors which are
David Taylor wrote:
No. I'm just asking if you know of ANY ata drives that will wait for the
cache to be flushed before claiming the disable cache command has
succeeded. I don't, but I haven't looked.
I don't know either. I assume that they do. Does it matter?
I mean, I'm not suggesting a
Bill Vermillion wrote:
You can fsck a mounted file system and fsck will run in read-only
mode. That way you can check for problems, and if there is
something wrong you can shutdown and restart. FreeBSD will NOT
run fsck in anything other than READ ONLY when the file system is
mounted
I thought
At Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 16:29 , our malformed and occasionally
flatulent friend Matthias Buelow spewed forth this fount of brain juice:
Bill Vermillion wrote:
You can fsck a mounted file system and fsck will run in read-only
mode. That way you can check for problems, and if there is
On Jul 15, 2005, at 11:08, Bill Vermillion wrote:
If you only do huge copies and immediate shutdowns rarely, then
maybe it's just a good idea to remember how softupdates work, and
then fsck, then shutdown.
This may sound simplistic, but what about a triple sync(8)? (sync;
sync; sync)
I know you'll find this hard to believe, but on Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 10:52 ,
David Magda actually admitted to saying:
On Jul 15, 2005, at 11:08, Bill Vermillion wrote:
If you only do huge copies and immediate shutdowns rarely, then
maybe it's just a good idea to remember how softupdates
On Sat, 2005-07-16 at 16:16 +0200, Matthias Buelow wrote:
David Taylor wrote:
No. I'm just asking if you know of ANY ata drives that will wait for the
cache to be flushed before claiming the disable cache command has
succeeded. I don't, but I haven't looked.
I don't know either. I
On Jul 16, 2005, at 11:03, Bill Vermillion wrote:
Actually I saw that documented a very very long time ago in
an Intel Unix manual.
It's present in more recent documentation. :)
The sync utility can be called to ensure that all disk writes have
been
completed before the processor
Bill Vermillion said:
Actually I saw that documented a very very long time ago in
an Intel Unix manual. And Intel got out of Unix in the mid to late
1980s. I don't recall if that was the one that was sold to Kodak -
the picture people - which then was sold to Interactive ?? - and
eventually
Paul Mather [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Despite that, I have never EVER had a problem with data consistency on
my file systems. (The only problem I have had is when I added an ATA
controller card one time and forgot to disable its RAID BIOS, which
promptly spammed over my geom_mirror
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 11:19:53PM +0800, Li Ruijiang wrote:
I am a chinese user,and today I upgraded my FreeBSD system from 5.3 release
to 6.0
all is successful except that I can not input chinese.
The XIM needs two environment variables:LANG and LC_ALL
so I export them to zh_CN.GBK in my
Rick Kelly wrote:
The main reason for sync;sync;sync on V7 UNIX was because you couldn't
do a shutdown, only a halt to the hardware monitor, on the PDP11. You
can verify that behavior with SIMH. :-)
Uhm.. that's the same on the VAX.. in what way would that preclude
a shutdown? NetBSD certainly
Paul Mather wrote:
on reboot. (Actually, what I find to be more inconvenient is the
resynchronisation time needed for my geom_mirror, which takes a lot
longer than a fsck.) I understand that fsck delays for large file
systems is the major impetus behind the journalling work, not as a fix
for a
Lowell Gilbert wrote:
Well, break it down a little bit. If an ATA drive properly implements
the cache flush command, then none of the ongoing discussion is
Are you sure this is the case? Are there sequence points in softupdates
where it issues a flush request and by this guarantees fs
At 1:06 PM +0200 7/16/05, Øystein Holmen wrote:
I was looking for a place to download 6.0-BETA1-powerpc-bootonly.iso
to test om my PowerMac G4. But I cannot find it on any of
the ftp-sites og mirrors. Where can I download it?
It may have been taken down. There were a few problems with the
No, it's at a level below softupdates that this must be done. Softupdates
only understands when things have been marked completed with
biodone()--the underlying scsi/ata/sata driver must make the determination
as to when biodone should be called.
The flush has to be done there. _IF_ the flush
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005, Rick Kelly wrote:
The main reason for sync;sync;sync on V7 UNIX was because you couldn't
do a shutdown, only a halt to the hardware monitor, on the PDP11. You
can verify that behavior with SIMH. :-)
And you weren't supposed to use sync;sync;sync but this:
# sync
# sync
27 matches
Mail list logo
