On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 07:29:24PM +0300, Dan Naumov typed:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Rick C.
> Petty wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 11:24:51AM +0200, Ruben de Groot wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 04:20:45PM -0500, Rick C. Petty typed:
> >> > On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 11:39:04AM +020
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 11:53:17AM +1000, Emil Mikulic wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 03:53:58PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > I'm seeing essentially the same think on an 8.0-BETA1 box with an 8-disk
> > raidz1 pool. Every once in a while the system makes it to 0.05% done
> > and gives a vaguel
I have a new box and have been trying to install 7.2 amd64 on it for the
past week. I now see that 8.0-BETA1 is available and would be willing
to install it if it supports my intended config below.
I'm using this page as a guide but am at the console so I'm just using
the Fix It CD:
http://www.f
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 03:53:58PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> I'm seeing essentially the same think on an 8.0-BETA1 box with an 8-disk
> raidz1 pool. Every once in a while the system makes it to 0.05% done
> and gives a vaguely reasonable rebuild time, but it quickly drops back
> to reports 0.00
Dan Naumov wrote:
If I use glabel to label a
disk and then create a pool using /dev/label/disklabel, won't ZFS
eventually overwrite the glabel metadata in the last sector since the
disk in it's entirety is given to the pool?
I would say in this case you're *not* giving the entire disk to the
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:27 AM, Attilio Rao wrote:
> 2009/7/7 Dan Naumov :
>> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Attilio Rao wrote:
>>> 2009/7/7 Dan Naumov :
I just got a panic following by a reboot a few seconds after running
"portsnap update", /var/log/messages shows the following:
>>
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009, Freddie Cash wrote:
>
> I think (never tried) you can use "zpool scrub -s store" to stop the
> resilver. If not, you should be able to re-do the replace command.
Hmm. I think I may be stuck.
% zpool scrub -s store
% zpool status | grep scrub
scrub: resilver in progres
>> Not to derail this discussion, but can anyone explain if the actual
>> glabel metadata is protected in any way? If I use glabel to label a
>> disk and then create a pool using /dev/label/disklabel, won't ZFS
>> eventually overwrite the glabel metadata in the last sector since the
>> disk in it's
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 08:32:12AM +1000, Andrew Snow wrote:
> Mahlon E. Smith wrote:
>
>> Strangely, the ETA is jumping all over the place, from 50 hours to 2000+
>> hours. Never seen the percent complete over 0.01% done, but then it
>> goes back to 0.00%.
>
> Are you taking snapshots from cron
Mahlon E. Smith wrote:
Strangely, the ETA is jumping all over the place, from 50 hours to 2000+
hours. Never seen the percent complete over 0.01% done, but then it
goes back to 0.00%.
Are you taking snapshots from crontab? Older versions of the ZFS code
re-started scrubbing whenever a snaps
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 01:40:02AM +0300, Dan Naumov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Freddie Cash wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Mahlon E. Smith wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009, Freddie Cash wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This is why we've started using glabel(8) to label our drive
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Freddie Cash wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Mahlon E. Smith wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009, Freddie Cash wrote:
>> >
>> > This is why we've started using glabel(8) to label our drives, and then
>> add
>> > the labels to the pool:
>> > # zpool create st
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Mahlon E. Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009, Freddie Cash wrote:
> >
> > This is why we've started using glabel(8) to label our drives, and then
> add
> > the labels to the pool:
> > # zpool create store raidz1 label/disk01 label/disk02 label/disk03
> >
> > Tha
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009, Freddie Cash wrote:
>
> This is why we've started using glabel(8) to label our drives, and then add
> the labels to the pool:
> # zpool create store raidz1 label/disk01 label/disk02 label/disk03
>
> That way, it does matter where the kernel detects the drives or what the
>
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 12:56:14PM -0700, Mahlon E. Smith wrote:
>
> I've got a 9 sata drive raidz1 array, started at version 6, upgraded to
> version 13. I had an apparent drive failure, and then at some point, a
> kernel panic (unrelated to ZFS.) The reboot caused the device numbers
> to shuff
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Mahlon E. Smith wrote:
> I've got a 9 sata drive raidz1 array, started at version 6, upgraded to
> version 13. I had an apparent drive failure, and then at some point, a
> kernel panic (unrelated to ZFS.) The reboot caused the device numbers
> to shuffle, so I d
I've got a 9 sata drive raidz1 array, started at version 6, upgraded to
version 13. I had an apparent drive failure, and then at some point, a
kernel panic (unrelated to ZFS.) The reboot caused the device numbers
to shuffle, so I did an 'export/import' to re-read the metadata and get
the array b
On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 16:05 +0300, Dan Naumov wrote:
> Just wanted a small clarification, does livefs based rescue mode mean
> "fixit environment" or not?
Yes, that's what it means. It's known to not work at the moment but
it's being worked on. I wanted to mention that because it might have
been
portupgrade -aPP seems to have worked, thougth I got LOTS of warnings and
plenty of packages weren't upgraded to the latest version (like gstreamer*
which latest version seems to be 0.10.22 but I still have 0.10.20 as
dependency
for pidgin)
.
As for compiling, I think it's not worth unless the OS i
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Rick C.
Petty wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 11:24:51AM +0200, Ruben de Groot wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 04:20:45PM -0500, Rick C. Petty typed:
>> > On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 11:39:04AM +0200, Ruben de Groot wrote:
>> > > On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 10:46:50AM +02
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 11:24:51AM +0200, Ruben de Groot wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 04:20:45PM -0500, Rick C. Petty typed:
> > On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 11:39:04AM +0200, Ruben de Groot wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 10:46:50AM +0200, Dimitry Andric typed:
> > > >
> > > > Right, so it's
Oh FFS! This morning I sent the following email..
> Six months is a long gap! I was hooinh the problem had gone away. I
> havent seen it on here since I started running 7.2-STABLE, and
> before that I made it go away by using a debug kernel.
...and within an hour of typing that I also started see
Ken Smith writes:
The first public test build of the FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE test cycle is now
available, 8.0-BETA1. Through the next week or so more information
about the release will be posted but here is the current target schedule
for the other 'major events':
BETA2: July 13, 2009
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Ken Smith wrote:
> Be careful if you have SCSI drives, more USB disks than just the memory
> stick, etc - make sure /dev/da0 (or whatever you use) is the memory
> stick. Using this image for livefs based rescue mode is known to not
> work, that is one of the things
On Tue, July 7, 2009 07:53, Tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote:
> I saw in the past requests for adding carp in standard kernel.
> As of today, is there any chance to have it in kernel, as loadable module?
> It would semplify a lot usage of freebsd-ipdate, instead of rebuilduing
> a custom kernel each tim
I saw in the past requests for adding carp in standard kernel.
As of today, is there any chance to have it in kernel, as loadable module?
It would semplify a lot usage of freebsd-ipdate, instead of rebuilduing
a custom kernel each time.
Thanks,
Tonino
--
--
Quoting Ian J Hart :
Quoting Ian J Hart :
Is this likely to be hardware? Details will follow if not.
[copied from a screen dump]
Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
cpuid = 1; apic id = 01
fault virtual address = 0x0
fault code = supervisor write data, page not present
instruction
On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 04:20:45PM -0500, Rick C. Petty typed:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 11:39:04AM +0200, Ruben de Groot wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 10:46:50AM +0200, Dimitry Andric typed:
> > >
> > > Right, so it's a lot bigger on amd64. I guess those 64-bit pointers
> > > aren't entirel
> The problem returns:
> Jul 6 20:12:10 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:";
> throttling interrupt source
Six months is a long gap! I was hooinh the problem had gone away. I
havent seen it on here since I started running 7.2-STABLE, and
before that I made it go away by using a deb
Amza Marian wrote:
Thank you sir.
Is there any solution for this issue ? (because applications does not
work correctly. - like mysql.)
Why wouldn't MySQL work correctly? Does it inspect FreeBSD sysctls? (why
would it, since you can configure its memory usage through its
configuration files
On 2009-Jul-05 21:56:23 +0400, "Marat N.Afanasyev" wrote:
>i have a strange problem with writing data to my ufs2+su filesystem.
Overall, I think you are pushing UFS and have hit one of its limits.
>1. i made a 1T gpt partition on my storage server, and formatted it:
>newfs -U -m 0 -o time -i 327
2009/7/7 Marat N.Afanasyev :
> Kostik Belousov wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 12:15:46AM +0400, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
>>>
>>> Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 09:45:45PM +0400, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote:
>
> i have a huge amount of small files on the source sy
32 matches
Mail list logo
