I'm forwarding this to a few other lists just to see if i can get some
more input on it. I would like to think this is an arch specific bug as
i imagine there are people using raid 5 with more than 8 disks on amd64
/ i386. However i haven't tried this on amd64, so i am not certain.
1. Steps
On 2016-10-06 11:34, Kenneth Westerback wrote:
1) Why do you say >8 but only give an example using 10 disks?
2) fdisk and disklabels for all the disks you test would be useful, as
would the verbatum output from newfs.
3) The size of the disks would also be useful (although the information
I have some systems with Hapertown CPUS that support VT-x, but not EPT.
Does vmm currently require EPT to work?
On 2016-11-18 13:13, Bob Jones wrote:
I successfully installed OpenBSD 6 on a system that only has USB
console by broadly following the instructions here
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/292891/how-can-i-install-openbsd-using-the-serial-console-without-external-monitor-wi
When the
On 2016-11-18 13:59, Bob Jones wrote:
Re: never reactivate the console unless you do it over ssh
Aah, well therein lies the twist, SSH never comes up, so I guess
you're right, its waiting for tty.
How do now I tell it to not use tty0 (and will doing so prevent me
from using the console port
I know, it'll happen when it happens...
I have a few servers that could really use the updated SMP stuff that
-current has. For some applications it's a night and day difference, but
I'm not all to comfortable running -current on production machines. I'm
just trying to gauge whether or not i
On 2016-12-01 22:01, Aaron Mason wrote:
I've got two Sun Netra X1s (400MHz ultraSPARC IIe, 2GB RAM, 2x40GB
drives) with 5.9 installed, they crash after awhile but I suspect
that's a cooling issue since these things run pretty hot. I'd use
them as firewalls but I can't push any more than ~50Mbps
On a similar note, I have a Sun E6K (circa 1996, 30x 400Mhz CPU's 30GB
of RAM) running 6.0 like a dream, with some minor patches to support
more than 8 disks in softraid 5.
On 2016-12-05 05:41, Theodoros wrote:
Hello misc,
I would like your comments on how could the below affect OpenBSD; if at
all.
link:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/canada-software-encryption-backdoors-feedback,33131.html
Best greetings,
Theodore
How i read this, it doesn't look like
On 2017-03-07 15:34, Karel Gardas wrote:
So if data correctness is your mantra, you don't need whole ZFS for it.
ZFS appeals to me for the snapshots / compression type stuff.
Well, I've not submitted my code yet
for the second attempt (first you can find in the archive) since I got
kind of
On 2017-03-07 11:29, Roderick wrote:
Before I make a decision, I want to ask you for suggestions.
I want to make a small file server, just to separate important
files from my working system. Two disks as Raid 1. Files are to
be read with NFS. Emphasis:
(1) Data Integrity (not security :).
On 2017-03-01 14:23, kasak wrote:
Hello everybody.
I know that speed does not matter this days, and security matter.
But i want an advice, i have xeon computer with fresh disks, they work
pretty fast,
and also i have 1 gbit switch and 1gbit intel nic on both side, here
is iperf test:
$ doas
On 2017-03-07 15:57, Karel Gardas wrote:
RAID10 should be simple. RAID6 is in tree in some form. W.r.t.
HAMMER2/ZFS as a ZFS user using ZFS solely for more than 10 years
already, I'm not so keen anymore about COW due to fragmentation.
Otherwise snapshots are nice, but I'd rather snapshots to be
On 2017-03-07 14:16, Stuart Henderson wrote:
- ZFS *does* checksum, even on mirrors, and can pick which of a pair of
mirrored drives is good and use it to correct the other one.
That i was not aware of, i only thought ZFS did that on RAIDZ pools.
Regardless of whether it will happen or not, I
14 matches
Mail list logo
