Am 17.03.2010 22:00, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 21:44:34 +0100, Florian Philipp wrote:
Just for clarification: Is it really necessary to unplug the broken disk
for this to work?
If read access fails on sda and the BIOS tries sdb, would this also
work? Isn't grub's hd0 always
On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 09:37 -0500, Harry Putnam wrote:
There was talk of opensolaris going by the wayside with the Oracle
takeover of Sun... but Oracle has since announced its intention of
puttin even more resources into `opensolaris' development than Sun was
doing.
that will kill it for
Am 16.03.2010 22:26, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:13:29 +, Stroller wrote:
How does your system boot if your RAID1 system volume fails?
You put GRUB on both disks, then you can boot from either on its
own.
Is this reliable? I don't contest it, I'm just asking.
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 21:44:34 +0100, Florian Philipp wrote:
Just for clarification: Is it really necessary to unplug the broken disk
for this to work?
If read access fails on sda and the BIOS tries sdb, would this also
work? Isn't grub's hd0 always the disk on which grub resides (e.g. the
On 15/03/2010 22:29, Andrea Conti wrote:
This IMHO pretty much rules out any kind of server-class hardware, which
tends to be both costly and power-hungry. If you're thinking about
buying used stuff, be sure to factor in the cost and difficulty of
finding spares in some years' time.
I'm
On 16 Mar 2010, at 16:32, Steve wrote:
...
Given the point above I would also stick with software RAID.
...
If reliability is your primary concern, I would go for a simple RAID1
setup;
Absolutely. Software raid is cheaper and implies less hardware to
fail. Similarly, RAID1 minimises the
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 19:57:49 +, Stroller wrote:
How does your system boot if your RAID1 system volume fails?
You put GRUB on both disks, then you can boot from either on its own.
--
Neil Bothwick
Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional!!
signature.asc
Description: PGP
On 16 Mar 2010, at 20:04, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 19:57:49 +, Stroller wrote:
How does your system boot if your RAID1 system volume fails?
You put GRUB on both disks, then you can boot from either on its own.
Is this reliable? I don't contest it, I'm just asking.
On Tuesday 16 March 2010 21:13:29 Stroller wrote:
On 16 Mar 2010, at 20:04, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 19:57:49 +, Stroller wrote:
How does your system boot if your RAID1 system volume fails?
You put GRUB on both disks, then you can boot from either on its own.
Is
On 16/03/2010 19:57, Stroller wrote:
How does your system boot if your RAID1 system volume fails? The one
you have grub on? I think you mentioned a flash drive, which I've seen
mentioned before. This seems sound, but just to point out that's
another, different, single point of failure.
Well,
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:13:29 +, Stroller wrote:
How does your system boot if your RAID1 system volume fails?
You put GRUB on both disks, then you can boot from either on its
own.
Is this reliable? I don't contest it, I'm just asking. It's just this
was one of my
Steve gentoo_...@shic.co.uk writes:
I have recently started looking at server resilience and availability in
the context of a hardware failure or hardware upgrade. I've come to the
conclusion that it would be very desirable if terrabyte-scale data did
not need to be restored from backup.
+1 on zfs w/ solaris for storage, just don't go cheap and get desktop disks.
--
Kyle
On 15/03/2010 15:49, Kyle Bader wrote:
+1 on zfs w/ solaris for storage, just don't go cheap and get desktop disks.
I have to admit, I do like the idea of ZFS, though not quite enough to
justify maintaining Solaris in addition to my other infrastructure.
I was thinking about something rather
On 15 Mar 2010, at 16:26, Steve wrote:
...
From ages ago, I remember iSCSI being bandied about. Did that ever go
anywhere (i.e. is this easy to do from Gentoo?)
I believe it is quite widely used - it is mentioned often on the linux-
poweredge list. I would imagine the Linux kernel allows
On 15/03/2010 18:21, Stroller wrote:
It's hard to be more specific without knowing your usage.
Yes... I was deliberately vague to see what options came up... but I can
be more specific. The budget is miniscule - and the performance demands
(bandwidth and latency) are completely non-challenging.
Hi,
The budget is miniscule - and the performance demands
(bandwidth and latency) are completely non-challenging.
This IMHO pretty much rules out any kind of server-class hardware, which
tends to be both costly and power-hungry. If you're thinking about
buying used stuff, be sure to factor in
17 matches
Mail list logo
