On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 05:22:48PM +0100, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
It is based on solaris, but many of the drivers and apps are quite
different, and it supports a generic sas jbod's ses functions -
Supermicro in my case (which is what controls the led's), when
OpenSolaris does not.
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 02:04, Dave Koelmeyer davekoelme...@me.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an oi_147 x86 system (progressively upgraded from OpenSolaris
2009.06) that for ages now launches a bunch of applications (consistently)
on login to the desktop, even though Preferences - Startup Applications
On 7/02/11 09:55 PM, Michael Schuster wrote:
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 02:04, Dave Koelmeyerdavekoelme...@me.com wrote:
Hi,
I have an oi_147 x86 system (progressively upgraded from OpenSolaris
2009.06) that for ages now launches a bunch of applications (consistently)
on login to the desktop,
I'm planning to upgrade my two mirrored 500 GB SATAII rpool disks to
2x2TB disks.
A friend with some Sun experience claims there was some problem with
using ZFS on large disks, possibly because of block size on some new
large disks.
Can anyone enlighten me or point me to the proper docs
I've got three 2tb disks, one Seagate and two Western Digital in a RaidZ - all
are functioning fine on SATA.
On Monday 07 February 2011 09:26:53 Hans J. Albertsson wrote:
I'm planning to upgrade my two mirrored 500 GB SATAII rpool disks to
2x2TB disks.
A friend with some Sun experience
Duh!
I forgot to add something which you very likely already know anyway ... if you
have a 32 bit version installed, you can't address a drive more than 1tb.
___
OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org
Situation:
32bit kernel (VTOC and EFI label [?]): Limit if larger than 1TB (1TB still ok)
64bit kernel: if VTOC label: Limit if larger than 2TB (2TB still ok)
if EFI label: No reasonable limit.
Drawback: EFI hardly has boot support on most current BIOS based x86 computers.
On Feb 7, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Hans J. Albertsson wrote:
I'm planning to upgrade my two mirrored 500 GB SATAII rpool disks to 2x2TB
disks.
A friend with some Sun experience claims there was some problem with using
ZFS on large disks, possibly because of block size on some new large
Could someone enlighten me as to what is wrong with WD's disks, and
particularly what's wrong with their EARS disks?
On 2011-02-07 12:52, Piotr Jasiukajtis wrote:
On Feb 7, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Hans J. Albertsson wrote:
I'm planning to upgrade my two mirrored 500 GB SATAII rpool disks to 2x2TB
Hi all,
yesterday morning one of the disks on the root pool of a pc of mine which is
used as iscsi target via comstar had a read/write failure, this morning at
00:10 GMT+1 a scrub started (from cron) on the same rpool (I think it went
nowhere).
Since the rpool hosts the boot image
The question isn't what's wrong. The question is how good the
support is for disks with 4K sectors - which includes the WD EARS
drives.
I think some (most?) such drives can emulate a drive with 512
byte sectors, but with a performance hit, esp. if the filesystem
has 4K or larger blocks that are
Hi,
I don't see attachment, here it is:
--8
maurilio@krumiro:~$ fmdump -eV -t 02/06/11 07:00
TIME CLASS
feb 06 2011 07:00:58.537372326 ereport.fs.zfs.probe_failure
nvlist version: 0
class = ereport.fs.zfs.probe_failure
On Feb 7, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Robin Axelsson wrote:
Could someone enlighten me as to what is wrong with WD's disks, and
particularly what's wrong with their EARS disks?
1. They emulate 512b with a big write performance hit.
Workaround is to use patched zpool or use zfs sync=disabled, however
Something that someone mentioned in passing triggered a thought.
My server gets it's ip address via DHCP from my ISP. Currently I have a
cron job that queries the address and, if it changed, update a DNS
server externally. This way I can use mail and web services external to
my network.
After upgrading global zone to oi_148 from os 2009.04 , my only ipkg
zone on the host fails to upgrade
root@host:~# zoneadm -z db attach -u
Log File: /var/tmp/db.attach_log.qqaWYi
Attaching...
preferred global publisher: openindiana.org
Global zone version:
OK - this is going to be a difficult one to explain. Then again, I'm always
known for coming across the strange stuff.
Local box...
Ubuntu 10.10
User name michelle UID 1101
group name michelle UID 1101
Remote box...
OI 148
User name michelle uid 1101
group name michelle UID 1101
control group
On 02/07/11 07:43, Gary Gendel wrote:
Can I replace the cron job with a trigger from the dhcp client when it
gets a new IP address instead? Is this possible with the current dhcp
client?
Yes. If /etc/dhcp/eventhook exists and is executable, it is run when
the DHCP state machine does
On 02/07/11 11:41, Michelle Knight wrote:
OK - this is going to be a difficult one to explain. Then again, I'm always
known for coming across the strange stuff.
Local box...
Ubuntu 10.10
User name michelle UID 1101
group name michelle UID 1101
Remote box...
OI 148
User name michelle uid 1101
One think to keep in mind with SMB mounts (on both Linux or SunOS)
is that all your access on the server happens with the credentials you
specify to the mount command. Also, the owner, group, and modes
you see locally are (usually) fiction. Hope that helps.
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 2:41 PM,
Hi,
I think you need to grab an piece of paper and pencil and trace step
by step the way you have setup and see if a directory or file,etc is not
correctly configured, like, trace a program by hand to find a logical
error.
I have ... and that's what has driven me to looking like
On 2 Feb 2011, at 19:30, Mads Worsøe Duun wrote:
*The Illumos pkgsrc project*
I have created Illumos pkgsrc project at
http://www.illumos.org/projects/worsoe.
Great stuff!
The is about making NetBSD's pkgsrc http://www.pkgsrc.org shine on
Illumos/Openindiana. Pkgsrc already work on
On 02/07/11 11:41, Michelle Knight wrote:
through the smba mount.
Hi,
I think the problem relies in samba
may be of some help:
When the share is mounted it will use the root user id by default,
meaning you will be unable to read/write the share as any other user. To
allow other
On Monday 07 February 2011 23:06:14 Edward Martinez wrote:
On 02/07/11 11:41, Michelle Knight wrote:
through the smba mount.
Hi,
I think the problem relies in samba
may be of some help:
I think you're correct.
There would be no other explanation why I could delete a file that I own,
23 matches
Mail list logo
