There isnt really a thing as better, just different. WHich is best for you
depends on your requirements and resources.
A zfs based solution would work on that system as its just serving a few
clients, and on the assumption that they arent to demanding it should run
fine. Bunging in more memory if
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 06:43:25PM +0200, Pol Hallen wrote:
> Hi all and sorry for this (newbie) question.
>
> I study FreeBSD (I come from linux) and I'm not sure which filesystem use.
>
> My situation: install a fileserver (samba) for 3 clients and put it as
> gateway/server on internet (ssh, a
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012, Rick Miller wrote:
I install FreeBSD 8.3-R on a DL360 G8 with two disk volumes, the 2nd
of which is 3TB. The fdisk partition editor shows the disk geometry
as 812160 cyl/255 heads/32 sectors = 6627225600 sectors (3235950MB).
sysinstall creates a slice on the 3TB volume that
Thanks Mike and Matthew,
the -u switch was what I missed. It now works fine.
Regards,
Matthias
On 17.05.2012 13:52, Mike Clarke wrote:
On Thursday 17 May 2012, Matthias Petermann wrote:
dump -a -1 -f /mnt/da0/backup-compaq.1.dump /
Try a new full backup with
dump -0aLuf /mnt/da0/back
On Thursday 17 May 2012, Matthias Petermann wrote:
> dump -a -1 -f /mnt/da0/backup-compaq.1.dump /
Try a new full backup with
dump -0aLuf /mnt/da0/backup-compaq.1.dump /
then for the incremental use
dump -1aLuf /mnt/da0/backup-compaq.1.dump /
The option you're missing is "u", but "L
On 17/05/2012 12:49, Matthias Petermann wrote:
> currently I am experiencing something confusing. Some hours ago I did a
> level 0 dump with the following command:
>
> dump -a -0 -f /mnt/da0/backup-compaq.0.dump /
>
> This results in a quite big dump file. After changing a couple of files,
>
On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Michael wrote:
What are the valid filesystem types in Partition Editor?
Installer gives two examples: freebsd-ufs and freebsd-swap. I guess that I
can use freebsd-zfs but what are the others? And is that list accessible from
the installer itself (some kind of help system) o
2009/8/11 mojo fms
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Naeem Afzal wrote:
>
> >
> >I created this small partition of 512K bytes on disk, I am noticing
> > about 24% is used up before system can be mounted and used. My assumption
> > was about 4% is supposed to be used if minfree is set to 0.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Naeem Afzal wrote:
>
>I created this small partition of 512K bytes on disk, I am noticing
> about 24% is used up before system can be mounted and used. My assumption
> was about 4% is supposed to be used if minfree is set to 0.
>
>#newfs -U -l -m 0 -n -o s
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 13:54 +0200, Olivier Mueller wrote:
> -> it took about 12 hours to delete these 30GB of files and
> sub-directories (smarty cache files: many small files in many dirs).
Haven't you ever had the pleasure of running Sendmail on Solaris? :)
Move this data store to a separate pa
If you aren't using ZFS, or even a GEOM volume with mirror/RAID5/softup/etc,
you cannot make the statement that hardware RAID is faster. I learned
that 3 years ago.
i state exactly opposite. all hardware raid cards are made just to suck
money from those who believe in it.
like "performance
rg; Benjamin Krueger
; Olivier Mueller ;
freebsd-performa...@freebsd.org; Bill Moran
Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2009 2:31:16 PM
Subject: RE: filesystem: 12h to delete 32GB of data
> It could just be me, but I swear Hardware RAID has been faster for many
> many years, especially with RAID5 arrays -
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Matthew Seaman
wrote:
> Gary Gatten wrote:
>> OT now, but in high i/o envs with high concurrency needs, RAID5 is
>> still the way to go, esp if 90% of i/o is reads. Of course it depends
>> on file size / type as well... Anyway, let's sum it up with "a
>> storage su
Gary Gatten wrote:
OT now, but in high i/o envs with high concurrency needs, RAID5 is
still the way to go, esp if 90% of i/o is reads. Of course it depends
on file size / type as well... Anyway, let's sum it up with "a
storage subsystem is only as fast as its slowest link"
It's not just the bal
yes, some of them suck royally.
you should rather say "some of them doesn't suck".
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr..
It could just be me, but I swear Hardware RAID has been faster for many
many years, especially with RAID5 arrays - or anything that requires
maybe with RAID5, but using RAID5 today (huge disk sizes, little sense to
save on disk space) instead of RAID1/10 doesn't make much sense, as RAID5
is sl
May 06 13:08:46 2009
Subject: RE: filesystem: 12h to delete 32GB of data
It could just be me, but I swear Hardware RAID has been faster for many
many years, especially with RAID5 arrays - or anything that requires
parity calcs. Most of my benchmarking was done on SCO OpenServer and
Novell UnixW
In response to "Gary Gatten" :
> It could just be me, but I swear Hardware RAID has been faster for many
> many years, especially with RAID5 arrays - or anything that requires
> parity calcs. Most of my benchmarking was done on SCO OpenServer and
> Novell UnixWare and Netware, but hardware RAID c
sage -
From: Wojciech Puchar
To: Bill Moran
Cc: Gary Gatten; Benjamin Krueger ;
freebsd-performa...@freebsd.org ; Olivier
Mueller ; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Wed May 06 13:31:53 2009
Subject: Re: filesystem: 12h to delete 32GB of data
> yes, some of them suck royally.
you should r
config, or gmirror/gstripe config.
usually it's far much slower
Sorry, but my experience with that very server using a P400 controller with
256MB write cache is very different. My benchmarks showed that controller
using Raid5 (with only 4 disks) is significantly faster than software
layouts.
It could just be me, but I swear Hardware RAID has been faster for many
many years, especially with RAID5 arrays - or anything that requires
parity calcs. Most of my benchmarking was done on SCO OpenServer and
Novell UnixWare and Netware, but hardware RAID controllers were always
faster and of cou
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
means you had 6 million files. df -i would have been more useful in
the output above.
This brings a number of questions up:
* Are you _sure_ softupdates is enabled on that partition? That's
he showed mount output - he has softdeps on.
* Are these 7200RPM disks or
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 05:34:24PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > -> it took about 12 hours to delete these 30GB of files and
> >
> > sub-directories (smarty cache files: many small files in many dirs).
> > It's a little bit surprising, as it's on a recent HP proliant DL360 g5
> > with SAS disk
means you had 6 million files. df -i would have been more useful in
the output above.
This brings a number of questions up:
* Are you _sure_ softupdates is enabled on that partition? That's
he showed mount output - he has softdeps on.
* Are these 7200RPM disks or 15,000? Again, going t
-> it took about 12 hours to delete these 30GB of files and
sub-directories (smarty cache files: many small files in many dirs).
It's a little bit surprising, as it's on a recent HP proliant DL360 g5
with SAS disks (Raid1) running freebsd 6.x
( /dev/da0s1f on /usr (ufs, local, soft-updates) )
if
In response to Olivier Mueller :
>
> Yes, it is one of the best options. My initial goal was to delete all
> files older than N days by cron (find | xargs | rm, etc.), but if each
> cronjob takes 2 hours (and takes so much cpu time), it's probably not
> the best way.
>
> I'll make some more te
Thanks for your answer Bill! (and to Will as well),
Some more infos I gathered a few minutes ago:
[~/templates_c]$ date; du -s -m ; date
Wed May 6 13:35:15 CEST 2009
2652 .
Wed May 6 13:52:36 CEST 2009
[~/templates_c]$ date ; find . | wc -l ; date
Wed May 6 13:52:56 CEST 2009
30546
In response to Olivier Mueller :
> Hello,
>
> $ df -m ; date ; rm -r templates_c ; df -m ; date
> Filesystem 1M-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
> /dev/da0s1a 989 45 864 5%/
> /dev/da0s1f128631 102179 1616086%/usr
> [...]
> Wed May 6 00:23:01 CEST 2009
>
Antonio, good day.
Mon, May 04, 2009 at 12:50:59PM +0200, Antonio Tommasi wrote:
> i've freebsd 7.0 in production and i've this hard-drive
>
> Filesystem SizeUsed AvailCapacity Mounted on
> /dev/aacd0s1a 64G15G 44G 26%/
>
> In a directory (spamassassin) i've
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:11:28 -0600, Tim Judd wrote:
> It's funny that OpenBSD's manpage says it uses FFS, not UFS -- when even I
> thought it said UFS before I looked it up.
Don't FFS and UFS refer to the same file system, the
Berkeley Fast File System, also known as 4.2bsd? In
my "studies" accor
something I wonder about
I know OpenBSD and FreeBSD both have different versions of the "UFS"
filesystems
(FreeBSD newfs(8) -O option, OpenBSD newfs(8) -O)
has someone tried to use all combinations of all options to see if they
work?
It's funny that OpenBSD's manpage says it uses FFS, not UF
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel C. Dowse wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:36:31 -0400
> Chuck Robey wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> I just put a OpenBSD partition on a EIDE disk I had laying around. I'd had
>> some
>> advice (apparently ba
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:36:31 -0400
Chuck Robey wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I just put a OpenBSD partition on a EIDE disk I had laying around. I'd had
> some
> advice (apparently bad) that the OpenBSD UFS filesystem could provide a
> filesystem that I could acce
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:36:31 -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> Is there ANY filesystem that would be a good bet, so that I could transfer
> stuff
> to & from FreeBSD to OpenBSD? Besides (obviously) UFS?
Yes, there is, and it even isn't a file system.
It's tar. You can easily create a tar archive
and
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Polytropon wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:37:29 -0600, Tim Judd wrote:
> > MS-DOS FAT32
>
> Ugh. :-)
>
>
>
> > Severely limited, but that is as close to as a universal filesystem as
> you
> > can get.
>
> Among BSDs, UFS / FFS should work. To get rid of the man
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:37:29 -0600, Tim Judd wrote:
> MS-DOS FAT32
Ugh. :-)
> Severely limited, but that is as close to as a universal filesystem as you
> can get.
Among BSDs, UFS / FFS should work. To get rid of the many
limitations in the MS-DOS file system, tar is really the
best solution.
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Chuck Robey wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Are there any filesystems which FreeBSD has which offer compatibility to
> OpenBSD? I want to add a OpenBSD partition to my long-existing FreeBSD
> disk,
> make it OpenBSD, but I want to be
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:54:41 -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Are there any filesystems which FreeBSD has which offer compatibility to
> OpenBSD? I want to add a OpenBSD partition to my long-existing FreeBSD disk,
> make it OpenBSD, but I want to be
On Wednesday 21 January 2009 08:14:49 Clifton Royston wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:01:04PM +0100, Matias Surdi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is there any way to avoid the system going to single user mode when a
> > secondary storage device cannot be mounted?.
> >
> > I mean, if all system filesyste
This should work. I'll try it.
Thanks for the idea
2009/1/21 Clifton Royston :
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:01:04PM +0100, Matias Surdi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is there any way to avoid the system going to single user mode when a
>> secondary storage device cannot be mounted?.
>>
>> I mean, if all sy
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:01:04PM +0100, Matias Surdi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any way to avoid the system going to single user mode when a
> secondary storage device cannot be mounted?.
>
> I mean, if all system filesystems are OK, how can set up a device with a
> custom mount point so that
Nov 26 20:48:11 server kernel: ad4: WARNING - WRITE_DMA48 UDMA ICRC error
(retrying request) LBA=1364750271
Nov 26 20:48:11 server kernel: ad4: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA48
status=51 error=4 LBA=1364750271
Nov 26 20:48:11 server kernel:
g_vfs_done():ad4s1g[WRITE(offset=682932174848, length=131072)]error
Rick Janssen wrote:
>> Rick Janssen wrote:
>>
>>> I've been playing around with FreeBSD for some time now, still being
>>> unable to solve some problems. Let me explain.
>>>
>>> I'm trying to run a webserver on the machine. Just basic, nothing too
>>> fancy. Problem concerns the following: The
Rick Janssen wrote:
> I've been playing around with FreeBSD for some time now, still being
> unable to solve some problems. Let me explain.
>
> I'm trying to run a webserver on the machine. Just basic, nothing too
> fancy. Problem concerns the following: The website served is speedy as
> expected w
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
The RAID card itself may have a BBU, so during loss of power any cached
data *on the card* will be attempt to be flushed to disk... except the
PC (including hard disks -- unless they're powered from some other
source) is already down/offline by this point. And let's not f
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 10:05:43PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 07:33:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > > One of the main functions of softupdates is to order disk updates in such
> > > a way that the fs organizational integrity is maintained at all times.
> >
> > And w
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 07:33:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > One of the main functions of softupdates is to order disk updates in such
> > a way that the fs organizational integrity is maintained at all times.
>
> And we've recently found that this is simply not the case. The benefits
> o
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 08:41:59PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 04:38:49PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 06:12:07PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> > > Doesn't hw.ata.wc affect only card-level caching?
> >
> > hw.ata.wc causes the ata(4) subsystem to
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 04:38:49PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 06:12:07PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> > Doesn't hw.ata.wc affect only card-level caching?
>
> hw.ata.wc causes the ata(4) subsystem to disable write caching on all
> disks attached to the subsystem. It doe
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 04:38:49PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> ...
> In this scenario, write caching on the disks is usually done by the
> controller itself (through a BIOS option), and not by FreeBSD.
This should have read: "... usually enabled/disabled by the controller
itself". :-) Sorry
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 06:12:07PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 07:49:00PM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> > Given that you don't have a BBU, what is the status of write caching
> > on the individual hard drives? You'll have to use 3dm2 or the CLI
> > equivalent to investiga
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 07:49:00PM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Given that you don't have a BBU, what is the status of write caching
> on the individual hard drives? You'll have to use 3dm2 or the CLI
> equivalent to investigate this, as the RAID controller tends to hide
> that level of inform
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Rich Fairbanks wrote:
>
>> Now, this is how I set up the array. I installed the card, popped in the
>> drives. The card bios found the drives and allowed me to setup in RAID 5.
>> Then, FreeBSD booted and found the "disk" as da
Rich Fairbanks wrote:
Now, this is how I set up the array. I installed the card, popped in the
drives. The card bios found the drives and allowed me to setup in RAID 5.
Then, FreeBSD booted and found the "disk" as da0. I want the entire array to
be one big chunk of space. In other words, I don't
At 1TB the drive will take very long to fsck if the server ever crashes
or looses power.
If this is a problem you should look into using gjournal(8)
Not sure off hand why it would be so slow, but keep in mind raid5 isn't
particularly fast for writes
Rich Fairbanks wrote:
Hi,
I'm new to Fr
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 04:02:11 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Davour
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Gary Newcombe wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:48:48 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Davour
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >>
> about tr
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:48:48 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Davour
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>
> >> about trying to make the data as available as possible. Do anyone here
> >> have
> >> any suggestion about what kind of filesystem would be best to use? Can
On Tue 2008-09-23 23:13:32 UTC+0200, Laszlo Nagy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> For making backups I would probably just use FAT32 and tar, because
>> practically anything (not just FreeBSD & Linux) will mount FAT32 file
>> systems, and tar should respect your file attributes (owner, group,
>> crea
Except that you cannot create files with >4GB size on FAT32. You might be
able to use an archiver that is able to split archives into smaller parts.
or simply split(1)
This has always been a problem. FreeBSD is open source. So Linux is, but they
do not have a common filesystem that could b
mount_ext2fs is available in FreeBSD but I can't speak for its
reliability.
i can. it simply works.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PRO
about trying to make the data as available as possible. Do anyone here have
any suggestion about what kind of filesystem would be best to use? Can ufs2
be read by linux? It looks like it from my short persual of google hits, but
it also looks kind of complicated. IS ext2 a safer bet? Anything to
For making backups I would probably just use FAT32 and tar, because
practically anything (not just FreeBSD & Linux) will mount FAT32 file
systems, and tar should respect your file attributes (owner, group,
creation timestamp, last modified timestamp, etc).
Except that you cannot create files
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:17:21 +0200 (CEST)
Andreas Davour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've bought a usb connected disk to use as backup, and I've been
> thinking about trying to make the data as available as possible. Do
> anyone here have any suggestion about what kind of filesystem would
>
I have an EXT2 USB flash drive on a FreeBSD system, and it works perfectly.
I have also used EXT2 filesystems on IDE drives in a USB caddy, and they work
fine as well.
On September 23, 2008 04:19:06 pm andrew clarke wrote:
> On Tue 2008-09-23 17:17:21 UTC+0200, Andreas Davour ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue 2008-09-23 17:17:21 UTC+0200, Andreas Davour ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I've bought a usb connected disk to use as backup, and I've been
> thinking about trying to make the data as available as possible. Do
> anyone here have any suggestion about what kind of filesystem would be
> b
On Behalf Of Jim
>> Just a thought, but in normal circumstances files *are* written to,
>> even when they are just being read: the access time is updated
(unless
>> you mount the fs with the noatime flag).
>>
>
> quite true, but isn't that file metadata and not the actual file? I
> thought most f
> Just a thought, but in normal circumstances files *are* written to,
> even when they are just being read: the access time is updated (unless
> you mount the fs with the noatime flag).
>
quite true, but isn't that file metadata and not the actual file? I
thought most filesystems had a file-entry
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 03:12:59PM -0400, Jim typed:
>
> I'm aware of nothing but a UPS can completely protect me from an
> outage. I was just wondering why that ONE file system was misbehaving,
> and the rest are prefectly fine - which seemed odd. Additionally, why
> were files that are read, but
In response to Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > If the files themselves are disappearing, then it could be the directory
> > entry that's getting corrupted.
>
> The files are there, but their content is corrupted.
Well ... that seems to contradict my theory ...
> > Even if you're
> > not doing it d
> If the files themselves are disappearing, then it could be the directory
> entry that's getting corrupted.
The files are there, but their content is corrupted.
> Even if you're
> not doing it directly, is your mp3 software writing temp or other
> status files to that directory? If you're curio
In response to Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I'm aware of nothing but a UPS can completely protect me from an
> outage. I was just wondering why that ONE file system was misbehaving,
> and the rest are prefectly fine - which seemed odd. Additionally, why
> were files that are read, but not written,
> In case of frequent power outages, I guess the right answer is "get a
> UPS". :)
Aye, I just got one. But for the longest time, it was a bit out of my
price range due to other priorities. Actually, the whole model line
was defective, so they are sending me a new one, and I have to wait
for it to
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 07:05:51PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > Ans set 'hw.ata.wc="0"' in /boot/loader.conf to stop the drives from
> > caching writes.
>
> it will GREATLY reduce write performance. not just a bit, but many times.
Of course. And mounting filesystems with sync will also reduc
Ans set 'hw.ata.wc="0"' in /boot/loader.conf to stop the drives from
caching writes.
it will GREATLY reduce write performance. not just a bit, but many times.
WRT softupdates/gjournal, see below.
In case of frequent power outages, I guess the right answer is "get a
UPS". :)
it is definitely
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:30:38PM -0400, Jim wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 7:30 AM, Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In response to Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >> I have a computer that is in a situation where it is losing power
> >> occasionally. All but one of the filesystems are
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 7:30 AM, Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In response to Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> I have a computer that is in a situation where it is losing power
>> occasionally. All but one of the filesystems are going along fine.
>> Once file system seems to lose data on a p
In response to Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I have a computer that is in a situation where it is losing power
> occasionally. All but one of the filesystems are going along fine.
> Once file system seems to lose data on a power outage. Even if it only
> reads a file, and doesn't write it, it may sti
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 12:10:03PM -0400, Robert Huff wrote:
>
> Leslie Jensen writes:
>
> > /: write failed, filesystem is full
> > install: /boot/kernel/wlan_tkip.ko.symbols: No space left on device
> > *** Error code 71
> >
> > My question is can I get around this or have I made my / slic
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 06:08:39PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
>
>
> Bill Moran skrev:
> >In response to Leslie Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >>During "make installkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC" I get
> >>
> >>/: write failed, filesystem is full
> >>install: /boot/kernel/wlan_tkip.ko.symbols: No s
quoth the darren kirby:
> quoth the Martin Tournoij:
> > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 05:44:43PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
> > > During "make installkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC" I get
> > >
> > > /: write failed, filesystem is full
> > > install: /boot/kernel/wlan_tkip.ko.symbols: No space left on device
quoth the Martin Tournoij:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 05:44:43PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
> > During "make installkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC" I get
> >
> > /: write failed, filesystem is full
> > install: /boot/kernel/wlan_tkip.ko.symbols: No space left on device
> > *** Error code 71
> >
> > output
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 05:44:43PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
>
> During "make installkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC" I get
>
> /: write failed, filesystem is full
> install: /boot/kernel/wlan_tkip.ko.symbols: No space left on device
> *** Error code 71
>
> output of df -H gives
>
> Filesystem Si
Bill Moran skrev:
In response to Leslie Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
During "make installkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC" I get
/: write failed, filesystem is full
install: /boot/kernel/wlan_tkip.ko.symbols: No space left on device
*** Error code 71
output of df -H gives
Filesystem SizeUsed
In response to Leslie Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> During "make installkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC" I get
>
> /: write failed, filesystem is full
> install: /boot/kernel/wlan_tkip.ko.symbols: No space left on device
> *** Error code 71
>
> output of df -H gives
>
> Filesystem SizeUsed
I have an app server that uses mmap a lot. After running a long batch
(four hours, 5,100+ transactions), I got the message filesystem full
(/usr--ufs, local, soft-updates). df -i says plenty of space.
I restarted the batch process, and watched app server process
carefully with fstat -p, and it
I installed an amd 64 bit 6.2 freebsd with the default filesystem (on 3
drives)
and my MySQL seems to have a 4Gb limit. Is there another filesystem I can
select
which bypasses this limit?
UFS2 doesn't have 4GB limit and it's the default. i have 9GB file at
present.
it is mysql limit
Wher
Jim Pazarena wrote:
> I installed an amd 64 bit 6.2 freebsd with the default filesystem (on 3
> drives)
> and my MySQL seems to have a 4Gb limit. Is there another filesystem I
> can select
> which bypasses this limit?
>
> Where can I read about available filesystems on FreeBSD?
http://jeremy.zawo
On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 09:41:35AM -0700, Jim Pazarena wrote:
> I installed an amd 64 bit 6.2 freebsd with the default filesystem (on 3
> drives)
> and my MySQL seems to have a 4Gb limit. Is there another filesystem I can
> select
> which bypasses this limit?
The default filesystem in FreeBSD do
Check out "df -i"
Also check out "man tunefs" tunefs(8) "-m" flag.
~BAS
On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 16:03 -0700, Dixit, Viraj wrote:
> Folks,
>
> My FreeBSD 5.3 system message logs are showing me this info,
>
> Jun 12 14:53:48 gatekeeper kernel: pid 58059 (ftpd), uid 1049 inumber
> 141313 on /u
> sr
At 07:03 PM 6/12/2007, Dixit, Viraj wrote:
My FreeBSD 5.3 system message logs are showing me this info,
Jun 12 14:53:48 gatekeeper kernel: pid 58059 (ftpd), uid 1049 inumber
141313 on /usr: filesystem full
/dev/da0s1f 7529054 7381944 -455214 107%/usr
Well, df shows /usr at 107% of capac
On 6/13/07, Dixit, Viraj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Folks,
My FreeBSD 5.3 system message logs are showing me this info,
Jun 12 14:53:48 gatekeeper kernel: pid 58059 (ftpd), uid 1049 inumber
141313 on /u
sr: filesystem full
Jun 12 15:34:17 gatekeeper kernel: pid 60158 (ftpd), uid 1049 inumber
1
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 04:03:38PM -0700, Dixit, Viraj wrote:
> Folks,
>
> My FreeBSD 5.3 system message logs are showing me this info,
>
> Jun 12 14:53:48 gatekeeper kernel: pid 58059 (ftpd), uid 1049 inumber
> 141313 on /u
> sr: filesystem full
> Jun 12 15:34:17 gatekeeper kernel: pid 60158 (ft
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/04/07, Chris Hesselrode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
mount reload of '/' failed: No such file or directory
Can't stat /dev/ad6s1e: No such file or directory (6 times ... with
different ending letters)
How can I fix this?
In the /dev there are only:
ad4
ad4s1
ad
On 12/04/07, Chris Hesselrode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My friend took out a hard disk we had in a computer, that ran an
internal web server, threw it in a new box, as a secondary drive. Now
that I've smacked him around a bit, and put it back in the original
box, it won't boot. When doing an fsc
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007, mal content wrote:
>On 02/04/07, Peter A. Giessel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 2007/04/01 23:21, bram seems to have typed:
>>> If both machines are connected through a network you may also want to
>>> take a look at netatalk
>>
>>or Samba or NFS. For my network, I mostly t
On 02/04/07, Peter A. Giessel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2007/04/01 23:21, bram seems to have typed:
> If both machines are connected through a network you may also want to
> take a look at netatalk
or Samba or NFS. For my network, I mostly transfer files between my
Macs (5 boxes) and FreeBS
On 2007/04/01 23:21, bram seems to have typed:
> If both machines are connected through a network you may also want to
> take a look at netatalk
or Samba or NFS. For my network, I mostly transfer files between my
Macs (5 boxes) and FreeBSD (4 boxes) boxes via sftp. It doesn't "mount"
any drives
On Apr 1, 2007, at 9:08 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
I'd do it on the FreeBSD machine. IIRC Mac OSX did some funky
stuff with the MBR / slices when formatting disks.
-Garrett
I just took another disk, formated with UNIX Files System on my
Mac, and it mounts just fine as UFS on my FreeBSD syst
mal content schreef:
Hello.
I have a small USB hard disk enclosure and would like to start
using it to transfer files between OS X and FreeBSD machines.
Is there a filesystem that both OS X and FreeBSD can reliably
read and write to? I've heard that OS X supports UFS, but there's
no clear defin
Eric Crist wrote:
On Apr 1, 2007, at 3:46 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
mal content wrote:
On 01/04/07, Eric Crist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Apr 1, 2007, at 12:53 PM, mal content wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I have a small USB hard disk enclosure and would like to start
> using it to transfer files b
1 - 100 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
