Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:52:06PM -0800, Matthew Tippett wrote: Hmm... No sure what happened there again. What I sent (pulled from my Sent folder... === Thanks for the comment Arnaud. For comparative benchmarking on Phoronix.com http://Phoronix.com, Michael invariable leaves it in the default configuration 'in the way the developers or vendor wanted it for production'. This is by rule. A quick question: why is ZFS used in the benchmark? Both operating systems were in their stock configuration aside from FreeBSD 9.0 using ZFS. UFS is the default on FreeBSD, not ZFS. FreeBSD was not left in the default configuration. -- Denny Lin ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: unable to pwd in ZFS snapshot
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 01:32:03PM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote: On 26 Dec 2010, at 10:05, Daniel Braniss wrote: On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 09:26:13AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote: Setting snapdir to visible should fix this right away: # zfs set snapdir=visible tank/foo it did indeed! any reason why this should not be the default behaviour? Personally, I want to have the snapshot, but not see the directory otherwise so that it doesn't get scooped up by rsync et al inadvertently btw, why use rsync if 'zfs send| zfs recv' work realy nice? If I wanted to rsync the contents of /path/to/foo/ to another computer, rsync would unintenionally pick up the contents of /path/to/foo/.zfs/, so it's best to have .zfs hidden most of the time. Other commands such as cp should also have this problem. -- Denny Lin ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: unable to pwd in ZFS snapshot
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 09:26:13AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote: this is still broken in 8.2-PRERELEASE, there seems to be a patch, but it's almost a year old. http://people.freebsd.org/~jh/patches/zfs-ctldir-vptocnp.diff Setting snapdir to visible should fix this right away: # zfs set snapdir=visible tank/foo -- Denny Lin ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Results of BIND RFC
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:11:50AM +0400, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote: On 02.04.2010 9:24, Stanislav Sedov wrote: While it certainly might make sense to drop BIND out of the base, I'm not sure dropping bind tools as well from it is the best decision. How hard it will be to continue maintaining bind tools inside the base (so the critical ones like dig and nslookup still will be available), while moving the rest of it (the server itself and supporting tools) to the port? Hi, All. I'm agree with Stas. If it is not so hard to maintain bind-tools in the base, It is very useful to still having them in base system. +1 here. Dig and some of the other tools are extremely useful and important, so it would be nice if they were in the base system instead of a separate port. -- Denny Lin ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
