There is a #ifdef SPARSE_MAPPING at line 701,and again a #ifdef
SPARSE_MAPPING at line 713.I just can't understand the second
one.Does it have any special mean ?
thanks .
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
...only checks if nfs_server_enable *or* nfs_client_enable is true
before trying to start rpc.statd and rpc.lockd; but rpc.lockd won't
work if the nfsclient module compiled in or loaded. I can't make up
my mind whether to hack rpc.lockd to kldload nfsclient, hack
/etc/rc.d/nfslocking to require
Hi List,
I'm running a cluster over here (15 Xeon's) and need to put a couple of new
master database servers on line. I've done some testing with FreeBSD/amd64 but
aside from a small increase in performance, haven't really seen anything too
dramatic (this is a single Supermicro Xeon 2.40 Ghz
Seems like doing a shutdown -p now on the current
5.4-STABLE branch is resulting in FS corruption.
I've done this 4 times now and all but 1 time the
machine has failed to boot with a panic:
mod=0100600, inum=1271817, fs=/var
panic: ffs_valloc: dup alloc
cpuid = 0
boot() called on cpu#0
The only
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 03:38:49AM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote:
Seems like doing a shutdown -p now on the current
5.4-STABLE branch is resulting in FS corruption.
I've done this 4 times now and all but 1 time the
machine has failed to boot with a panic:
mod=0100600, inum=1271817, fs=/var
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 03:38:49AM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote:
Why would FS's be being corrupted by shutdown -p now where
as reboot doesnt seem to?
Maybe the machine is being powered down before your disks have
finished writing their data to disk.
My ThinkPad has done
Kris Kennaway wrote::
Surely thats what the buffer sync is doing. Watching the console both
these actions appear to be doing identical things but the end results
are quite different :( buffers are always under 5 usually 2 and its not
like there's been a great deal of activity. The last test I did
7 matches
Mail list logo
