CmdLnKid pisze:
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 13:16 -, pj wrote:
Ishmael F.E. wrote:
[...]
.
so, ¿how can I upgrade the ports?
unfortunatley I don't have time to compile my 64bit system
You don't need to compile whole OS to compile ports, if this is what you
had in mind.
Have you looked at the
2009/7/7 Marat N.Afanasyev ama...@ksu.ru:
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 systems, as you
On 2009-Jul-05 21:56:23 +0400, Marat N.Afanasyev ama...@ksu.ru 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
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
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 debug
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 entirely free. :)
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
--
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 time.
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Ken Smithkensm...@cse.buffalo.edu 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
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
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
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 a lot bigger
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Rick C.
Pettyrick-freebsd2...@kiwi-computer.com 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
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
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
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
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Mahlon E. Smith mah...@martini.nu 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
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 shuffle,
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 7, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Mahlon E. Smith mah...@martini.nu 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
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Freddie Cashfjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Mahlon E. Smith mah...@martini.nu 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:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 01:40:02AM +0300, Dan Naumov wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Freddie Cashfjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Mahlon E. Smith mah...@martini.nu wrote:
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009, Freddie Cash wrote:
This is why we've started using glabel(8)
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
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 crontab?
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 entirety
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 progress
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:27 AM, Attilio Raoatti...@freebsd.org wrote:
2009/7/7 Dan Naumov dan.nau...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Attilio Raoatti...@freebsd.org wrote:
2009/7/7 Dan Naumov dan.nau...@gmail.com:
I just got a panic following by a reboot a few seconds after running
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 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%
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:
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 vaguely
31 matches
Mail list logo
