Re: SSHD (and steam and windows and other stuff)

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 01:28:57PM +1100, Trent W. Buck wrote: > AFAICT the only reason SSHDs exist are: > > * Windows has nothing like bcache/l2arc; or it does. it's called ReadyBoost. Compared to bcache/flashcache or L2ARC for ZFS, it sucks. You can't just tell Windows to use an SSD (or

Re: IPv6

On 13.01.16 20:09, Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote: > On 13/01/2016 10:31 AM, Brian May wrote: > > Tony Langdon via luv-main writes: > > > >> On closer observation, it started with the message from you that I > >> replied to, and it's only you. Another coincidence is that

Re: IPv6

On 13/01/2016 10:31 AM, Brian May wrote: > Tony Langdon via luv-main writes: > >> On closer observation, it started with the message from you that I >> replied to, and it's only you. Another coincidence is that the Subject: >> header hasn't been munged in this thread, yet

Re: SSHD

On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 05:17:12 PM Julien Goodwin via luv-main wrote: > SMR/Archive is something to avoid unless you're going to use the drives > like tape given the ~200MB block size for writes. ...and if you do want to use an SMR drive you need to avoid kernels between 3.18.21 and 4.4.0-rc3,

Re: IPv6

Brian May via luv-main wrote: > Seems to work for me. Is very slow to respond however. 10 seconds just > to get the HTML page, No such delays from here (central Princeton over a cable connection). ping6 shows rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 115.398/119.020/125.329/3.533 ms

Re: SSHD (and steam and windows and other stuff)

Craig Sanders via luv-main writes: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 01:28:57PM +1100, Trent W. Buck wrote: >> AFAICT the only reason SSHDs exist are: >> >> * Windows has nothing like bcache/l2arc; or > > it does. it's called ReadyBoost. Compared to bcache/flashcache or L2ARC >

Re: IPv6

On 13/01/2016 8:42 PM, Erik Christiansen via luv-main wrote: > On 13.01.16 20:09, Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote: >> On 13/01/2016 10:31 AM, Brian May wrote: >>> Tony Langdon via luv-main writes: >>> On closer observation, it started with the message from you that I

Re: IPv6

Tony Langdon via luv-main writes: > I'm just mystified as to why the thread that Russell's message started > is not being From: munged, whereas all else is. Though your message is > munged, and Reply List is working perfectly. Are you sure you are not getting confused with

Re: IPv6

On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:20:06 PM Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote: > It wasn't so much the From: munging that was bothering me, but the > inconsistent reply behaviour (I dislike Reply All, because of the extra > emails it generates, much prefer Reply List). Tony, the dmarc_moderation_action action

Re: IPv6

On 14/01/2016 9:34 AM, Brian May wrote: > Tony Langdon via luv-main writes: > >> I'm just mystified as to why the thread that Russell's message started >> is not being From: munged, whereas all else is. Though your message is >> munged, and Reply List is working perfectly.

Inconsistent list behaviour (was: IPv6)

On 14/01/2016 12:26 PM, Russell Coker wrote: > On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:20:06 PM Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote: >> It wasn't so much the From: munging that was bothering me, but the >> inconsistent reply behaviour (I dislike Reply All, because of the extra >> emails it generates, much prefer Reply

Re: SSHD (and steam and windows and other stuff)

On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 08:43:28 PM Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 01:28:57PM +1100, Trent W. Buck wrote: > > AFAICT the only reason SSHDs exist are: > > * Windows has nothing like bcache/l2arc; or > > it does. it's called ReadyBoost. Compared to bcache/flashcache or