> 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
On 2013-04-25 3:47 AM, Alan McKinnon 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 bear :-)
Lol! I feel
On 25/04/2013 09:55, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>> On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon 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
$ upt
Alan McKinnon wrote:
>On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon 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 aver
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 pa
On 24/04/2013 17:22, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon 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
>>
>> Thos
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
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 n
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
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
Who's paying for this bandwith?
N.
On 4/24/13, Neil Bothwick 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 data in the
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 need
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
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 g
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
>> thi
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 in
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 sol
On 2013-04-24 6:27 AM, Alan McKinnon 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 dealing with mail, they do th
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 1:22 AM, Walter Dnes 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 the UPS not
sending the
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 ma
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 severa
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
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 misleadin
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
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
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 quota of
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 (s
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
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
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
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 10:27, 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 Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Hilco Wijbenga
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 am very pleased with
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 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 ReiserFS
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
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 i
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
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 t
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
> 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, btr
I'll add my anecdotes :)
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Alan McKinnon 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 the dev suffix
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:10 PM, 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 publ
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:10 PM, 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 pu
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:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/23/6
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 edg
On 23 April 2013 11:40, 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
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"...
[ ] Us
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 boo
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 Reiser
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
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
52 matches
Mail list logo
