Doug Hughes d...@will.to writes:
The reason that data volumes on rpool is generally not a good idea is
for recoverability. You can take all of the disks of a given pool and
move them to another system, except rpool. rpool defines the system
itself, so data volumes there are tied to that
On 02/10/15 12:28, Harry Putnam wrote:
Later when I finally got over being a tight a__ and put down the
`jack' for a cage 4 big discs and whatever other hardware needed.
It would be more difficult to move (send/receive) the data filesystems
like rpool/mybig/pileof/data to the new discs than
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015, Harry Putnam wrote:
Michael Hase mich...@edition-software.de writes:
[...] Thanks for the (snipped suggestion)
In the meantime all disks and the 4x2.5 bay migrated to a xeon e3 box
(no reinstall necessary), as these old hp boxes are way to expensive
to run 24x7 here in
I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc
that rpool is on. I'm not sure why that is so.
In my current situation I need more space but to rig up my
`HP xw8600 workstation' with more disc space will require getting a cage
and some new discs, not to mention the huffing and
Harry Putnam writes:
[...]
However I do have 2 1tb discs laying unused.
So, (finally cutting to chase) how bad of an idea would it be to use
those two 1tb discs for a mirrored rpool and whatever data.
There should not be any problem whatsoever. For a home setup, having
additional data
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015, Harry Putnam wrote:
I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc
that rpool is on. I'm not sure why that is so.
In my current situation I need more space but to rig up my
`HP xw8600 workstation' with more disc space will require getting a cage
and some
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015, Harry Putnam wrote:
I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc
that rpool is on. I'm not sure why that is so.
The main reason why is that then you can't just blow away the OS
install pool and reinstall from scratch without needing to do
something
On 2/7/2015 7:38 AM, Volker A. Brandt wrote:
Harry Putnam writes:
[...]
However I do have 2 1tb discs laying unused.
So, (finally cutting to chase) how bad of an idea would it be to use
those two 1tb discs for a mirrored rpool and whatever data.
There should not be any problem whatsoever.
Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us writes:
[...]
It was good to hear from other posters that there is nothing wrong
with, in my use case, putting data sets on same disc as rpool.
The main reason why is that then you can't just blow away the OS
install pool and reinstall from
Michael Hase mich...@edition-software.de writes:
[...] Thanks for the (snipped suggestion)
In the meantime all disks and the 4x2.5 bay migrated to a xeon e3 box
(no reinstall necessary), as these old hp boxes are way to expensive
to run 24x7 here in germany.
Do you mean they just pull to
from my android device.
-Original Message-
From: Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com
To: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org
Sent: Sat, 07 Feb 2015 7:24
Subject: [OpenIndiana-discuss] data on rpool - Bad idea?
I've read that it is a bad idea to have datasets on the same disc
that rpool
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015, Harry Putnam wrote:
But, those comments give me pause.
There is an additional reason I should have mentioned. Rpool disks
are special because they are boot disks and x86 boot disks need to be
partitioned and prepared in a particular way. Replacing a boot disk
is an
12 matches
Mail list logo
