On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> Even better, I can sent you the deb packages?
That would also work, I then can create a diff to see what you changed
and try to incorporate my idea with ZFS-over-NFS.
Hi mir,
have you a public git with all the changes? I'd like to try but I
don't want to extract all the patches from this list, try to figure
out which ones are already taken care of and manually apply them.
Best,
LnxBil
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Michael Rasmussen
Hi Andreas,
Even better, I can sent you the deb packages?
On June 15, 2017 10:20:32 AM GMT+02:00, Andreas Steinel
wrote:
>Hi mir,
>
>have you a public git with all the changes? I'd like to try but I
>don't want to extract all the patches from this list, try to figure
>out
I still dont see a usecase for this?
On June 15, 2017 11:09:21 AM GMT+02:00, Andreas Steinel
wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Michael Rasmussen
>wrote:
>> Hi Andreas,
>> Even better, I can sent you the deb packages?
>
>That would also work, I
On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 18:54:29 +0200
Andreas Steinel wrote:
>
> And I can't see how ZFS-over-NFS would be any different than
> ZFS-over-iSCSI? Am I see this so wrong? What are the usecases for
> ZFS-over-iSCSI exactly?
Three obvious advantages:
1) Better performance
2) Lower
Hi all,
I have noticed a possible bug in pve-manager and/or qemu-kvm.
Scenario.
You have a VM running and now you want to should it down. To do this
you can choose either to use the shutdown function from the gui or the
console or use the client native shutdown method. This all works as
expected
On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 23:03:56 +0200
Andreas Steinel wrote:
>
> Compared to what? Of course not local ZFS, because everything applies
> also to local ZFS. TRIM support is the only point I understand in
> comparison to "ordinary" iSCSI backed on "fat" files.
>
Compared to ZFS
Hi mir,
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 18:54:29 +0200
> Andreas Steinel wrote:
>> And I can't see how ZFS-over-NFS would be any different than
>> ZFS-over-iSCSI? Am I see this so wrong? What are the usecases
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage.pm |2 +
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 1289 ++
PVE/Storage/Makefile |2 +-
PVE/Storage/Plugin.pm|2 +-
4 files changed, 1293 insertions(+), 2
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm b/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
index c438519..0f2a56d 100644
--- a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
+++
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 7 ++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm b/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
index 771061e..c438519 100644
--- a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
+++
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage.pm |2 +
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 1289 ++
PVE/Storage/Makefile |2 +-
PVE/Storage/Plugin.pm|2 +-
4 files changed, 1293 insertions(+), 2
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 129 +--
1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
diff --git a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm b/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
index 0f2a56d..fee3d27 100644
---
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm b/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
index c438519..0f2a56d 100644
--- a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
+++
snapshot backup of CT broke general snapshot handling.
Handle snapshot creation and deletion properly.
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 1570 +-
1 file changed, 782 insertions(+), 788 deletions(-)
diff
v5 regression and indentation fix
V4 Adds support for creating snapshot backups of LXC containers. This more or
less makes the plugin feature complete. Only outstanding feature depends on a
bug fix in the FreeNAS API which is first scheduled for next stable release:
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 129 +--
1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
diff --git a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm b/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
index 0f2a56d..fee3d27 100644
---
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 7 ++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm b/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
index 771061e..c438519 100644
--- a/PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm
+++
v5 regression and indentation fix
V4 Adds support for creating snapshot backups of LXC containers. This more or
less makes the plugin feature complete. Only outstanding feature depends on a
bug fix in the FreeNAS API which is first scheduled for next stable release:
snapshot backup of CT broke general snapshot handling.
Handle snapshot creation and deletion properly.
Signed-off-by: Michael Rasmussen
---
PVE/Storage/FreeNASPlugin.pm | 1570 +-
1 file changed, 782 insertions(+), 788 deletions(-)
diff
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
> I still dont see a usecase for this?
And I can't see how ZFS-over-NFS would be any different than
ZFS-over-iSCSI? Am I see this so wrong? What are the usecases for
ZFS-over-iSCSI exactly?
21 matches
Mail list logo