On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's my pair of MTAs:
$ uptime
12:24PM up 1295 days, 13:10, 1 user, load averages: 0.19, 0.20, 0.31
$ uptime
12:24PM up 1925 days, 20:30, 4 users, load averages: 0.90, 0.75, 0.84
On 24/04/2013 16:21, Neil Bothwick wrote:
-- Neil Bothwick I have seen things you lusers would not believe. I've
seen Sun monitors on fire off the side of the multimedia lab. I've seen
NTU lights glitter in the dark near the Mail Gate. All these things will
be lost in time, like the root
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's my pair of MTAs:
$ uptime
12:24PM up 1295 days, 13:10, 1 user, load averages: 0.19, 0.20,
0.31
$ uptime
12:24PM up 1925 days,
On 25/04/2013 09:55, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's my pair of MTAs:
$ uptime
12:24PM up 1295 days, 13:10, 1 user, load averages: 0.19, 0.20,
On 2013-04-25 3:47 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote:
You seriously haven't upgraded your kernel on those machines for 3.5/5.2
years??
Yes, something like that.
Politics get involved. But please let's not go there - the pain is too
much to
Therefore Ext2 is a perfect match:
* it is so old, that I guess by now most bugs have been found and
squashed;
* it is so old, that virtually any Linux (or Windows, FreeBSD, or
most other knows OS's) are able to at least read it;
* it is so old, that by now I bet there are
On 23/04/2013 23:10, Jarry wrote:
On 23-Apr-13 22:40, Alan McKinnon wrote:
ext4 is fine. All the horror stories ended years ago and almost all
major distros ship it as a default.
Hm, I remember one horror story about ext4 data corruption bug
which circulated in public just a few months
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 01:22:37 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
I have mix of various sizes. The best feature about ReiserFS is that
it doesn't do inodes, so I don't have to be psychic about my future file
mix when I format the partition. For that reason alone, I'm tempted to
stay with ReiserFS3.
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 21:37:52 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
I've used ReiserFS3 for years with no problems,
but I keep hearing horror stories about it.
I haven't read any horror stories re Reiser 3 ,
Where have you been f0r the last ten years? A quick search of this list's
archives will
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Hilco Wijbenga
hilco.wijbe...@gmail.com wrote:
[...] So when I needed to install a
new machine, I looked around and settled on JFS. This box has been
running for about half a year now (so that includes several power
failures) without any problems. I certainly
On 24/04/2013 10:27, Ciprian Dorin Craciun wrote:
I stay away for Btrfs for now. And to be frank I don't quite like
Btrfs's, and ZFS's for that matter, approach of throwing together all
the layers, from the file-system, to the RAID, to the block
management, etc. I find the layered approach
On 04/24/2013 10:26:52 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
SUSE are using btrfs in SLES, so it can't be that experimental or
unstable
any more.
That depends on the version of the kernel in use. I remember having
lost all data of a
btrfs file system with an early 3.x kernel. Meanwhile there have been
On 24/04/2013 10:24, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 01:22:37 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
I have mix of various sizes. The best feature about ReiserFS is that
it doesn't do inodes, so I don't have to be psychic about my future file
mix when I format the partition. For that reason
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:00:06 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
- avoid Postfix and Qmail
Why? I ask because I have a mail server with reiserfs on the mail
spool, it's been running for several years and behaved impeccably,
but if there is a good reason to switch, I will.
It's one of
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:50:11 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Then I want to tell the system how much storage I want for what purpose.
If Joe Blow is to get 20G of storage for his ~, I want to tell the
system there is a thing called joeb and it has a hard quota of 20G. The
software must then go
130424 Neil Bothwick wrote:
130423 Philip Webb hadn't read any horror stories re Reiser 3 :
Where have you been for the last ten years?
Reading this list various Linux news sites.
A quick search of this list's archives will reveal several.
If it's so easy, please point me to a couple
Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:50:11 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Then I want to tell the system how much storage I want for what purpose.
If Joe Blow is to get 20G of storage for his ~, I want to tell the
system there is a thing called joeb and it has a
On 24/04/2013 11:27, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:50:11 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Then I want to tell the system how much storage I want for what purpose.
If Joe Blow is to get 20G of storage for his ~, I want to tell the
system there is a thing called joeb and it has a hard
On 24/04/2013 11:21, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:00:06 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
- avoid Postfix and Qmail
Why? I ask because I have a mail server with reiserfs on the mail
spool, it's been running for several years and behaved impeccably,
but if there is a good reason
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:08:12 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
It's a shame there appears to be no equivalent of a soft quota in ZFS.
Maybe it is the use of the term quota that is misleading, when in
reality it is more akin to volume size.
quota is this context is indeed a misleading term.
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:10:56 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Some directory operations (including unlink(2)) are not synchronous
on ReiserFS, which can result in data corruption with applications
relying heavily on file-based locks (such as mail transfer agents
qmail[9] and Postfix[10]) if
On 24/04/2013 11:37, Philip Webb wrote:
130424 Neil Bothwick wrote:
130423 Philip Webb hadn't read any horror stories re Reiser 3 :
Where have you been for the last ten years?
Reading this list various Linux news sites.
A quick search of this list's archives will reveal several.
If
On 24/04/2013 12:17, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:10:56 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Some directory operations (including unlink(2)) are not synchronous
on ReiserFS, which can result in data corruption with applications
relying heavily on file-based locks (such as mail transfer
On 2013-04-24 1:22 AM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
- avoid Postfix and Qmail
Eh???
Been running postfix/courier-imap and now dovecot for 8+ years on
reiserfs with zarro problems... including a few scary moments after 2
unclean shutdown events due to extended power outage and
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 07:17:26 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
So I continue to believe that Reiser 3 is remarkably reliable,
at least if you don't try running it virtually on itself
or blame hardware problems on the software.
I didn't say otherwise, in fact I've already posted to this thread about
On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's my pair of MTAs:
$ uptime
12:24PM up 1295 days, 13:10, 1 user, load averages: 0.19, 0.20, 0.31
$ uptime
12:24PM up 1925 days, 20:30, 4 users, load averages: 0.90, 0.75, 0.84
Those two just keep on accepting and
On 24 April 2013, at 11:16, Neil Bothwick wrote:
...
Volume size so far fits my needs just fine, but that's because I've
never needed quotas as such. I find quotas too inflexible anyway, it's a
case of forcing a simplistic hardware rule into the human space and that
never really solves the
Am 24.04.2013 19:38, schrieb Stroller:
On 24 April 2013, at 11:16, Neil Bothwick wrote:
...
Volume size so far fits my needs just fine, but that's because I've
never needed quotas as such. I find quotas too inflexible anyway, it's a
case of forcing a simplistic hardware rule into the human
On 24 April 2013, at 18:53, Michael Hampicke wrote:
...
Your system must be more complex than I'm imagining, because I see this
obvious answer of a bash script which loops through /home/*, runs `du` or
`df` and sends an email to anyone who's consuming more than 90%. Obviously
this needs
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:38:42 +0100, Stroller wrote:
Sometimes a simplistic rule is what's needed. If you are selling
off-site storage in 1GB chunks, you need to stop people using more
than they have paid for. Hard quotas do this, soft quotas let you
warn them first, before things get
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:07:05 +0100, Stroller wrote:
That only works on small systems. I have systems here where a 'du' on
/home would take hours and produce massive IO wait, because there's so
much data in there.
Of course. Excuse me.
My original idea was in respect of the previous
On 24 April 2013, at 19:32, Neil Bothwick wrote:
...
Your system must be more complex than I'm imagining, because I see this
obvious answer of a bash script which loops through /home/*, runs `du`
or `df` and sends an email to anyone who's consuming more than 90%.
Obviously this needs to be
Who's paying for this bandwith?
N.
On 4/24/13, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:07:05 +0100, Stroller wrote:
That only works on small systems. I have systems here where a 'du' on
/home would take hours and produce massive IO wait, because there's so
much
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:44:18 +0100, Stroller wrote:
The warnquota command, from sys-fs/quota, does this for all user and
all filesystems with a single command called from cron. Yes, you could
reinvent the wheel with a shell script, but the wheel already exists
for filesystems other than
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:45:21 -0400, Nick Khamis wrote:
Who's paying for this bandwith?
What bandwidth? We're discussing disk space usage. Unless you're
referring to the bandwidth consumed by the discussion, which jumps
massively every time someone quotes and reposts an entire email to add a
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:22:36PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
On 24/04/2013 11:37, Philip Webb wrote:
130424 Neil Bothwick wrote:
130423 Philip Webb hadn't read any horror stories re Reiser 3 :
Where have you been for the last ten years?
Reading this list various Linux news sites.
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:04:27 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
I don't know if it's configurable somewhere, but I vaguely recall
seeing an occasional bootup where I get a message about the system
having gone more than X days without being fsck'd. So it helpfully
does it for me automatically and
I recently got a new Dell desktop PC at home, and ran Windows for a
while to make sure nothing is broken. Now I'm getting ready to
partition and reformat for a Gentoo install. My understanding is that
BTRFS and EXT4 are still a bit bleeding edge. I've used ReiserFS3 for
years with no
On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 14:40 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
I recently got a new Dell desktop PC at home, and ran Windows for a
while to make sure nothing is broken. Now I'm getting ready to
partition and reformat for a Gentoo install. My understanding is that
BTRFS and EXT4 are still a bit
On 04/23/2013 02:40 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
I recently got a new Dell desktop PC at home, and ran Windows for a
while to make sure nothing is broken. Now I'm getting ready to
partition and reformat for a Gentoo install. My understanding is that
BTRFS and EXT4 are still a bit bleeding edge.
Walter Dnes wrote:
I recently got a new Dell desktop PC at home, and ran Windows for a
while to make sure nothing is broken. Now I'm getting ready to
partition and reformat for a Gentoo install. My understanding is that
BTRFS and EXT4 are still a bit bleeding edge. I've used ReiserFS3 for
Am 23.04.2013 20:48, schrieb Michael Mol:
That said, I've been using ext4 for the past 3-4 years on nearly
all my systems without a problem. The only scenario I don't use
ext4 is for /boot...and there I use ext3.
really? I never tried that and still use ext2 there.
No big difference at boot
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 02:48:19PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote
Incidentally, if you use ext3, and your kernel supports ext4, chances
are it's the kernel's ext4 code that's handling your ext3 fs. I don't
even bother compiling in ext2 and ext3.
Interesting. From make menuconfig...
[ ] Use
On 23 April 2013 11:40, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
I recently got a new Dell desktop PC at home, and ran Windows for a
while to make sure nothing is broken. Now I'm getting ready to
partition and reformat for a Gentoo install. My understanding is that
BTRFS and EXT4 are still
On 23/04/2013 20:40, Walter Dnes wrote:
I recently got a new Dell desktop PC at home, and ran Windows for a
while to make sure nothing is broken. Now I'm getting ready to
partition and reformat for a Gentoo install. My understanding is that
BTRFS and EXT4 are still a bit bleeding edge.
On 23-Apr-13 22:40, Alan McKinnon wrote:
ext4 is fine. All the horror stories ended years ago and almost all
major distros ship it as a default.
Hm, I remember one horror story about ext4 data corruption bug
which circulated in public just a few months ago:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Jarry mr.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23-Apr-13 22:40, Alan McKinnon wrote:
ext4 is fine. All the horror stories ended years ago and almost all
major distros ship it as a default.
Hm, I remember one horror story about ext4 data corruption bug
which
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Jarry mr.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23-Apr-13 22:40, Alan McKinnon wrote:
ext4 is fine. All the horror stories ended years ago and almost all
major distros ship it as a default.
Hm, I remember one horror story about ext4 data corruption bug
which circulated
I'll add my anecdotes :)
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
In over 10 years, I have never had a file system failure with any of
these (all used a lot):
ext2
ext3
ext4
zfs
reiser3
ext2, ext3, ext4, btrfs here.
ext4 for years (ever since it lost
On 24/04/13 06:34, Paul Hartman wrote:
I'll add my anecdotes :)
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
wrote:
In over 10 years, I have never had a file system failure with any of
these (all used a lot):
ext2
ext3
ext4
zfs
reiser3
ext2, ext3, ext4,
William Kenworthy wrote:
I find filesystems are very much a case of YMMV :)
I will NOT use an ext fs again willingly - lost too many whole systems,
corruption - Ive had less problems with DOS!
Reiserfs, has had its moments but is by far the most stable system,
though NTFS isnt bad these
130423 Walter Dnes wrote:
I recently got a new Dell desktop PC at home
Now I'm getting ready to partition and reformat for a Gentoo install.
I've used ReiserFS3 for years with no problems,
but I keep hearing horror stories about it.
I haven't read any horror stories re Reiser 3 ,
which I've
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 09:37:52PM -0400, Philip Webb wrote
I haven't read any horror stories re Reiser 3 ,
which I've been using for 10 years without any problem ever.
Reiser 4 was stalling even before its creator's legal problems
seems unlikely to get kernel support,
but Reiser 3 is
53 matches
Mail list logo
