On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 02:43:44 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
It's easy enough: its = belonging to it; it's = it is/was/has.
The apostrophe denotes a missing letter or two, not possession.
The confusion arises because, when used with a name, an apostrophe is
needed for a possessive. Of course, if
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:11:37 -0400, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
I have one of those. But I decided to stick with traditional DOS
partitioning style and grub instead of GPT and grub2.
I am leaning toward traditional partitioning, but with grub2. Do those
two not mix well?
GRUB2 works fine
What's the disadvantage of compiling in sandbox instead of compiling
directly with userpriv?
On Aug 13, 2012 2:19 PM, Nilesh Govindrajan cont...@nileshgr.com wrote:
What's the disadvantage of compiling in sandbox instead of compiling
directly with userpriv?
*advantage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12.08.2012 05:10, Dale wrote:
Mark Knecht wrote:
All of that is the OS, not grub which is in the MBR I think.
emerge grub-static and then do the install as per the boot
loader instructions in the manual. It will likely work fine
then.
Good
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 13.08.2012 10:50, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
On Aug 13, 2012 2:19 PM, Nilesh Govindrajan
cont...@nileshgr.com wrote:
What's the disadvantage of compiling in sandbox instead of
compiling
directly with userpriv?
*advantage
I think the
Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
On Aug 13, 2012 2:19 PM, Nilesh Govindrajan cont...@nileshgr.com
mailto:cont...@nileshgr.com wrote:
What's the disadvantage of compiling in sandbox instead of compiling
directly with userpriv?
*advantage
I found this:
As far as I recall the issues are with 64 bit nomultilib only. I think
I used grub-legacy on amd64 multilib without issues, though I'm not
sure since I use grub2 since 1.98 came out (without issues, by the way)
You are correct. On a no-multilib 64 bit system you cannot compile
grub:1 - you
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Nilesh Govindrajan cont...@nileshgr.comwrote:
On Aug 13, 2012 2:19 PM, Nilesh Govindrajan cont...@nileshgr.com
wrote:
What's the disadvantage of compiling in sandbox instead of compiling
directly with userpriv?
*advantage
If you do things like parallel
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:11:37 -0400, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
I have one of those. But I decided to stick with traditional DOS
partitioning style and grub instead of GPT and grub2.
I am leaning toward traditional
On Mon, Aug 13 2012, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:11:37 -0400, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
GRUB2 works fine with MBR partition tables. But if you're starting from
scratch, you may as well use GPT and get rid of the legacy MBR
limitations and fragility.
OK, but what about EFI? That
On Sun, Aug 12 2012, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:11:37 -0400
Allan Gottlieb gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10 2012, Alan McKinnon wrote:
You also don't need an IO scheduler - ssd access is random like
RAM, no heads moving in and out so no sector ordering to worry
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:17:23 -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
GRUB2 works fine with MBR partition tables. But if you're starting
from scratch, you may as well use GPT and get rid of the legacy MBR
limitations and fragility.
I'm not dissing GPT...but what's fragile about MBR?
The MBR
Howdy gentooers,
I am looking for a filesystem that perfomes well for a cache directory.
Here's some data on that dir:
- cache for prescaled images files + metadata files
- nested directory structure ( 20/2022/202231/*files* )
- about 20GB
- 100.000 directories
- about 2 million files
The system
On Mon 13 Aug 2012 05:37:27 PM IST, Michael Mol wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Nilesh Govindrajan
cont...@nileshgr.com mailto:cont...@nileshgr.com wrote:
On Aug 13, 2012 2:19 PM, Nilesh Govindrajan
cont...@nileshgr.com mailto:cont...@nileshgr.com wrote:
What's the
On Mon 13 Aug 2012 06:46:53 PM IST, Michael Hampicke wrote:
Howdy gentooers,
I am looking for a filesystem that perfomes well for a cache
directory. Here's some data on that dir:
- cache for prescaled images files + metadata files
- nested directory structure ( 20/2022/202231/*files* )
- about
You should have a look at xfs.
I used to use ext4 earlier, traversing through /usr/portage used to be
very slow. When I switched xfs, speed increased drastically.
This might be kind of unrelated, but makes sense.
I guess traversing through directories may be faster with XFS, but in my
On Aug 13, 2012 9:01 PM, Michael Hampicke mgehampi...@gmail.com wrote:
You should have a look at xfs.
I used to use ext4 earlier, traversing through /usr/portage used to be
very slow. When I switched xfs, speed increased drastically.
This might be kind of unrelated, but makes sense.
I
On 13.08.2012 15:16, Michael Hampicke wrote:
- about 20GB
- 100.000 directories
- about 2 million files
The system has 2x Intel Xon Quad-cores (Nehalem), 16GB of RAM and two
10.000rpm hard drives running a RAID1.
1st thought: switch to SSDs
2nd thought: maybe lots of writes? - get a SSD for
Michael Hampicke wrote:
You should have a look at xfs.
I used to use ext4 earlier, traversing through /usr/portage used
to be very slow. When I switched xfs, speed increased drastically.
This might be kind of unrelated, but makes sense.
I guess traversing through
Have you indexed your ext4 partition?
# tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/your_partition
# e2fsck -D /dev/your_partition
Hi, the dir_index is active. I guess that's why delete operations take as
long as they take (index has to be updated every time)
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Michael Hampicke mgehampi...@gmail.comwrote:
Have you indexed your ext4 partition?
# tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/your_partition
# e2fsck -D /dev/your_partition
Hi, the dir_index is active. I guess that's why delete operations take as
long as they take (index
2012/8/13 Daniel Troeder dan...@admin-box.com
On 13.08.2012 15:16, Michael Hampicke wrote:
- about 20GB
- 100.000 directories
- about 2 million files
The system has 2x Intel Xon Quad-cores (Nehalem), 16GB of RAM and two
10.000rpm hard drives running a RAID1.
1st thought: switch to
I guess traversing through directories may be faster with XFS, but in my
experience ext4 perfoms better than XFS in regard to operations (cp, rm) on
small files.
I read that there are some tuning options for XFS and small files, but
never tried it.
But if somone seconds XFS I will try it
On Mon 13 Aug 2012 08:28:15 PM IST, Michael Hampicke wrote:
I guess traversing through directories may be faster with XFS,
but in my experience ext4 perfoms better than XFS in regard to
operations (cp, rm) on small files.
I read that there are some tuning options for XFS and
Am 13.08.2012 16:52, schrieb Michael Mol:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Michael Hampicke
mgehampi...@gmail.comwrote:
Have you indexed your ext4 partition?
# tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/your_partition
# e2fsck -D /dev/your_partition
Hi, the dir_index is active. I guess that's why
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:17:23 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk
wrote:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:11:37 -0400, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
I have one of those. But I decided to stick with traditional DOS
partitioning
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Michael Hampicke mgehampi...@gmail.comwrote:
Am 13.08.2012 16:52, schrieb Michael Mol:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Michael Hampicke
mgehampi...@gmail.comwrote:
Have you indexed your ext4 partition?
# tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/your_partition
#
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:17:23 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk
wrote:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:11:37 -0400, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
Am 13.08.2012 16:52, schrieb Michael Mol:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Michael Hampicke
mgehampi...@gmail.com mailto:mgehampi...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you indexed your ext4 partition?
# tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/your_partition
# e2fsck -D /dev/your_partition
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:03:38AM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 02:43:44 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
It's easy enough: its = belonging to it; it's = it is/was/has.
The apostrophe denotes a missing letter or two, not possession.
The confusion arises because, when used
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 06:14:11PM -0500, Dale wrote:
I have always used GRUB splashimage without genkernel and without anything
special to get it going other than the correct path in
/boot/grub/grub.conf;
e.g.
default 0
timeout 30
splashimage=(hd0,9)/boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz
On Aug 13, 2012 11:04 PM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:17:23 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk
wrote:
Am 13.08.2012 19:14, schrieb Florian Philipp:
Am 13.08.2012 16:52, schrieb Michael Mol:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Michael Hampicke
mgehampi...@gmail.com mailto:mgehampi...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you indexed your ext4 partition?
# tune2fs -O dir_index
Hey there
As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after some
convinction work done by the ML and a friend. In order to justify the switch
for myself, I made some performance comparisons.
So, in case anyone is interested, here are my results.
The only thing I don't
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Michael Hampicke mgehampi...@gmail.com wrote:
Howdy gentooers,
I am looking for a filesystem that perfomes well for a cache directory.
Here's some data on that dir:
- cache for prescaled images files + metadata files
- nested directory structure (
Am Montag, 13. August 2012, 15:13:03 schrieb Paul Hartman:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Michael Hampicke mgehampi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Howdy gentooers,
I am looking for a filesystem that perfomes well for a cache directory.
Here's some data on that dir:
- cache for prescaled images
On Monday 13 Aug 2012 18:46:22 Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 06:14:11PM -0500, Dale wrote:
Just a thought. Could it be that the text and the background is the
same color? If you put white text on a white background, all you see is
white which looks blank, empty or
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 11:55:31 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:17:23 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Neil Bothwick
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Frank Steinmetzger war...@gmx.de wrote:
As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after some
convinction work done by the ML and a friend. In order to justify the switch
for myself, I made some performance comparisons.
So, in case
Am Montag, 13. August 2012, 20:55:23 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger:
Hey there
As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after some
convinction work done by the ML and a friend. In order to justify the
switch for myself, I made some performance comparisons.
So, in
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:20:04AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am Montag, 13. August 2012, 20:55:23 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger:
Hey there
As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after some
convinction work done by the ML and a friend. In order to justify
On Monday 13 August 2012 09:03:38 Neil Bothwick wrote:
The confusion arises because, when used with a name, an apostrophe is
needed for a possessive.
The confusion arises because the apostrophe has two functions, which
collide in its/it's. Who can tell /a priori/ which applies in any given
Am Dienstag, 14. August 2012, 01:18:20 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:20:04AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Am Montag, 13. August 2012, 20:55:23 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger:
Hey there
As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 02:23:25AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
so all in all you got performance improvements you had to spend several
hundred of dollars for just through recompiling. Should give you food for
thought.
I don't understand that sentence. Where did I spend 100s
Am Dienstag, 14. August 2012, 02:39:44 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 02:23:25AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
so all in all you got performance improvements you had to spend
several
hundred of dollars for just through recompiling. Should give you food
I think btrfs probably is meant to provide a lot of the modern
features like reiser4 or xfs
Unfortunately btrfs is still generally slower than ext4 for example.
Checkout http://openbenchmarking.org/, eg
http://openbenchmarking.org/s/ext4%20btrfs
The OS will use any spare RAM for disk caching,
47 matches
Mail list logo
