On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Miod Vallat m...@online.fr wrote:
Please, please, please, can someone port ZFS, just to end this endless
thread...?
Please someone port HAMMER instead. We are only interested in free
software, with no strings attached.
YAY!!!
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Jeremie Le Hen jere...@le-hen.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 05:15:35PM -0500, Bryan Horstmann-Allen wrote:
I apologize this is off-topic, but I'm somewhat close to the illumos project
and would like to correct a few things.
[...things corrected...]
On 2013 Feb 22 (Fri) at 09:27:59 +0100 (+0100), Tomas Bodzar wrote:
:On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Jeremie Le Hen jere...@le-hen.org wrote:
: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 05:15:35PM -0500, Bryan Horstmann-Allen wrote:
: I apologize this is off-topic, but I'm somewhat close to the illumos project
:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:29:21AM +0100, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote:
OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so
OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big
difference with FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux.
2013/2/22 Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado i...@juanfra.info:
Here in the BSD world, we have HAMMER, a good alternative with a license
compatible and a reasonable requirements.
Here in the OpenBSD world we don't have HAMMER.
Best
Martin
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 04:22:51AM -0500, Jiri B wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:29:21AM +0100, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado
wrote:
OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so
OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big
difference with
The source was available, but it relies on Sun/Oracle patents.
The CDDL license it was provided under allows use of those patents,
but only subject to certain conditions, and there are indemnification
clauses that some projects cannot agree to.
Does this mean that freebsd, netbsd, maczfs, zfs
but Martin Schröder is not a developer. So what is his word worth???
I don't know and neither does Martin Schröder.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013, at 04:23 AM, Martin Schröder wrote:
2013/2/22 Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado i...@juanfra.info:
Here in the BSD world, we have HAMMER, a good alternative
YES, unless they signed NDA. Which I can tell you they did.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013, at 05:44 AM, Paolo Aglialoro wrote:
The source was available, but it relies on Sun/Oracle patents.
The CDDL license it was provided under allows use of those patents,
but only subject to certain conditions, and
2013/2/22 Eric Furman ericfur...@fastmail.net:
but Martin Schröder is not a developer. So what is his word worth???
http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq8.html#Journaling
Now go and fuck yourself.
2013/2/22 Paolo Aglialoro paol...@gmail.com:
The source was available, but it relies on Sun/Oracle patents.
The CDDL license it was provided under allows use of those patents,
but only subject to certain conditions, and there are indemnification
clauses that some projects cannot agree to.
Please take personal insults off list. We are not interested.
--
Don't cook tonight -- starve a rat today!
That proves nothing.
Until your name is on this list;
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/ports/geo/openbsd-developers/files/OpenBSD
YOU ARE NOT A DEVELOPER.
FUCK YOU!
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013, at 06:29 AM, Martin Schröder wrote:
2013/2/22 Eric Furman ericfur...@fastmail.net:
but
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 04:22:51AM -0500, Jiri B wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:29:21AM +0100, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado
wrote:
OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so
OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big
difference with
OpenBSD doesn't believe much in them, and doesn't need lkms for all basic usage.
It just didn't get disabled in case someone (like OpenAFS users) wants it.
It doesn't work on all platforms, either
2013/2/22 Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado i...@juanfra.info:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 04:22:51AM
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 06:42, Eric Furman wrote:
Until your name is on this list;
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/ports/geo/openbsd-developers/files/OpenBSD
YOU ARE NOT A DEVELOPER.
Now that's hysterical.
On 2/22/2013 8:02 AM, Ted Unangst wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 06:42, Eric Furman wrote:
Until your name is on this list;
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/ports/geo/openbsd-developers/files/OpenBSD
YOU ARE NOT A DEVELOPER.
I'm making this into a shirt.
~Brian
Yeah, can I order one? This thread is hilariously funny! I even managed to get
an entire car full of people laughing by reading it to them from my mobile.
Long live OpenBSD and long live ZFS - I love you both!
On 22 Feb 2013, at 16:18, Brian Callahan bcal...@devio.us wrote:
On 2/22/2013
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Tomas Bodzar tomas.bod...@gmail.com wrote:
What's much more funny is that Oracle is paying for training and
support to Joyent to be able to offer at least some level of support
in ZFS for its own customers :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc
Funny
Please, please, please, can someone port ZFS, just to end this endless
thread...?
Please, please, please, can someone port ZFS, just to end this endless
thread...?
Please someone port HAMMER instead. We are only interested in free
software, with no strings attached.
No, just end the thread.
--
There's an old proverb that says just about whatever you want it to.
On 2013-02-20, Keith ke...@scott-land.net wrote:
Hi, thanks for the info. Yesterday I did a backup, format, restore of
the /var/www partition although to be honest I wasn't really sure what i
was doing with regards to the newfs command. I tried running newfs
-iwith different values and
On 2013-02-20, Matthias Appel appel.matth...@gmail.com wrote:
*ZFS was open source (FSF would say free) until Oracle acquired Sun
The source was available, but it relies on Sun/Oracle patents.
The CDDL license it was provided under allows use of those patents,
but only subject to certain
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:32:02AM +0100, Matthias Appel wrote:
Yupp, I think, that's (beside the CDDL part of ZFS) it the major
turn-off in any kind of productive enviroment.
At the moment I don't know how FreeBSD handles the ZFS development, but
maintaining a not-really-fully-ZFS
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 05:15:35PM -0500, Bryan Horstmann-Allen wrote:
I apologize this is off-topic, but I'm somewhat close to the illumos project
and would like to correct a few things.
[...things corrected...]
Well, thank you very much for correcting me and providing us high quality
I apologize this is off-topic, but I'm somewhat close to the illumos project
and would like to correct a few things.
+--
| On 2013-02-21 22:12:45, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
|
| So, long story short, I do not see any option
There is zero reason not to have ZFS in a free system. Consider its inclusion
in FreeBSD.
Just because FreeBSD decided to compromise in regards to ZFS, does not
mean everyone else has to as well. They could include all sorts of
other code with similar licenses, yet there they often stand firm.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 05:15:35PM -0500, Bryan Horstmann-Allen wrote:
I apologize this is off-topic, but I'm somewhat close to the illumos project
and would like to correct a few things.
+--
| On 2013-02-21
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 07:41:11AM -0500, Nick Holland wrote:
On 02/19/13 05:47, MJ wrote:
Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files
in a single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the
right tool for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado
i...@juanfra.info wrote:
OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so
OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big
difference with FreeBSD/NetBSD/Linux.
lkm(4) is outdated with wrong
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:54:58PM -0430, Andres Perera wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado
i...@juanfra.info wrote:
OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so
OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:54:58 -0430, Andres Perera wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado
i...@juanfra.info wrote:
OpenBSD doesn't have support for loadable kernel modules or FUSE, so
OpenBSD should include the code inside of the kernel. This is a big
difference
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Rod Whitworth glis...@witworx.com wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:54:58 -0430, Andres Perera wrote:
...
lkm(4) is outdated with wrong information about a feature no longer present?
From cvsweb:src/lkm/ap/Attic/README
Revision 1.3
Mon Feb 24 22:30:12 2003 UTC
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013, at 11:43 PM, Philip Guenther wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Rod Whitworth glis...@witworx.com
wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:54:58 -0430, Andres Perera wrote:
...
lkm(4) is outdated with wrong information about a feature no longer present?
From
On 2013-02-21, at 11:21 PM, Eric Furman wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013, at 11:43 PM, Philip Guenther wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Rod Whitworth glis...@witworx.com
wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:54:58 -0430, Andres Perera wrote:
...
lkm(4) is outdated with wrong information about a
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:32:02AM +0100, Matthias Appel wrote:
And by talking of ZFS, why not consider
ext3/4,reiser,xfs,jfs,ntfs,whatever-fs to be ported to OpenBSD?
Where are the diffs? For example real improvement would be FAT/NTFS
speed on OpenBSD, as it is much much slower than on Linux.
Jiri B ji...@devio.us writes:
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:32:02AM +0100, Matthias Appel wrote:
And by talking of ZFS, why not consider
ext3/4,reiser,xfs,jfs,ntfs,whatever-fs to be ported to OpenBSD?
Where are the diffs? For example real improvement would be FAT/NTFS
speed on OpenBSD, as it
I suspect the application described here should not use a filesystem,
probably a database will be better for the aim. However, assuming it
is not possible to fix/change the application behavior, I guess using
several filesystems/mount points will help. While ZFS (and many
others) will be good at
Am 20.02.2013 09:21, schrieb Jiri B:
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:32:02AM +0100, Matthias Appel wrote:
And by talking of ZFS, why not consider
ext3/4,reiser,xfs,jfs,ntfs,whatever-fs to be ported to OpenBSD?
Where are the diffs? For example real improvement would be FAT/NTFS
speed on OpenBSD, as
On 20/02/2013 07:36, Jan Stary wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 00:35, Keith wrote:
Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding
millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I
won't get inode issues ?
newfs defaults to -f 2k and -b 16k which is fine
On Feb 20 20:58:49, ke...@scott-land.net wrote:
On 20/02/2013 07:36, Jan Stary wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 00:35, Keith wrote:
Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding
millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I
won't get inode issues ?
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Jan Stary h...@stare.cz wrote:
I tried running
newfs -iwith different values and settled on newfs -i 1 /var/www
as it seemed at the time to makes the make the most inodes and that
was just based on how much output was generated while newfs was
running.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 08:42:01AM +0100, Janne Johansson wrote:
2013/2/19 Keith ke...@scott-land.net:
Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding
millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I won't
get inode issues ?
Since you probably
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 09:09:49AM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 08:42:01AM +0100, Janne Johansson wrote:
2013/2/19 Keith ke...@scott-land.net:
Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding
millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb
Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files in a single
directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the right tool for the job.
You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant to handle this problem because you
need ZFS.
What limits does ZFS have?
Or you could just use ZFS, XFS, whateverFS in a separate unix/linux box and
go NFS on it, simulating a true external storage appliance :)
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:47 AM, MJ m...@sci.fi wrote:
Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files in a
single directory?
Hi,
Or you could fix your application, to not do stupid things (like
generating millions of files in a single directory) in the first
place... ;-)
On 2013-02-19 at 12:10 CET
Paolo Aglialoro paol...@gmail.com wrote:
Or you could just use ZFS, XFS, whateverFS in a separate unix/linux box and
go
On 19/02/2013 10:47, MJ wrote:
Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files in a single
directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the right tool for the job.
You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant to handle this problem because you
need ZFS.
What
On 19 Feb 2013, at 1:40 PM, Rafal Bisingier wrote:
Hi,
Or you could fix your application, to not do stupid things (like
generating millions of files in a single directory) in the first
place... ;-)
+1
On 2013-02-19 at 12:10 CET
Paolo Aglialoro paol...@gmail.com wrote:
Or you
On 02/19/13 05:47, MJ wrote:
Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files
in a single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the
right tool for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant
to handle this problem because you need ZFS.
What
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Nick Holland
n...@holland-consulting.net wrote:
I use ZFS, and have a few ZFS systems in production, and what it does is
pretty amazing, but mostly in the sense of the gigabytes of RAM it
consumes for basic operation (and unexplained file system wedging).
I've
On 02/19/13 05:47, MJ wrote:
Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files
in a single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the
right tool for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant
to handle this problem because you need ZFS.
What limits
Am 19.02.2013 18:01, schrieb Eric S Pulley:
[snip]
I feel anyone expecting to run any of the recently hatched filesystem on
10+ year old hardware falls into the design flaw category you mention. As
for needing to turn nobs to get it to work properly this is not necessary
if you use a modern
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 00:35, Keith wrote:
Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding
millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I
won't get inode issues ?
newfs defaults to -f 2k and -b 16k which is fine if you
know in advance you will
Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding
millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I
won't get inode issues ?
The problem is that my server has the default disk layout as I didn't
expect to have millions of files (I though they would be
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:35:31AM +, Keith wrote:
Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding
millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I
won't get inode issues ?
The problem is that my server has the default disk layout as I
didn't
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 00:35, Keith wrote:
Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding
millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I
won't get inode issues ?
Yes, newfs -i with a smaller number. Note that the number of inodes
is highly
2013/2/19 Keith ke...@scott-land.net:
Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding
millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I won't
get inode issues ?
Since you probably aren't going to have 50G/2k number of files in a
single dir, then you'd be
59 matches
Mail list logo
