Hi,
I have a GPT partition like so:
#parted /dev/mapper/storagevg0-ntserveriscsi
GNU Parted 1.7.1
Using /dev/mapper/storagevg0-ntserveriscsi
Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands.
(parted) p
Disk /dev/mapper/storagevg0-ntserveriscsi: 1100GB
Sector size
Answering my own question, you can use the undocumented parameter 'unit' to set
the units to bytes in parted.
r...@storage:~# parted /dev/mapper/storagevg0-ntserveriscsi unit B print
Disk /dev/mapper/storagevg0-ntserveriscsi: 1099511627775B
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition
- Chris MacKenzie cmacken...@internode.on.net wrote:
I prefer to use kpartx to create device mappings from lvm disk
images,
it's much easier than fapping about with offsets :)
usage : kpartx [-a|-d|-l] [-v] wholedisk
-a add partition devmappings
-d del partition
Dave Kempe wrote:
Hi,
I have a GPT partition like so:
#parted /dev/mapper/storagevg0-ntserveriscsi
GNU Parted 1.7.1
Using /dev/mapper/storagevg0-ntserveriscsi
Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands.
(parted) p
Disk /dev/mapper/storagevg0-ntserveriscsi: 1100GB
Thought people might find this interesting. It doesn't get to the cloud
bit, but describes the building block they use.
Petabytes on a budget:
How to build cheap cloud storage
http://blog.backblaze.com/2009/09/01/petabytes-on-a-budget-how-to-build-cheap-cloud-storage/
At Backblaze, we provide
Hi, I work at ApplianSys and although we're not as big as Infoblox
we're a lot more competitive price wise, and we've deployed a lot of
servers in Aus. We do a range of products including integrated DNS,
DHCP and IPAM in our top of the range appliance. A recent case study
can be found here
I know I am a geek but that is hot.
I am wondering if they see any throughput issues with the sata backplanes
and pci sata cards.
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Phil Scarratt f...@draxsen.com wrote:
Thought people might find this interesting. It doesn't get to the cloud
bit, but describes
I was thinking the same, but I reckon because they are just backing
up/archiving data it wouldn't be too bad.
ie They aren't looking for huge performance, just huge, cheap storage.
2009/9/3 Morgan Storey m...@morganstorey.com
I know I am a geek but that is hot.
I am wondering if they see any
On 03/09/09 10:37, Mark Walkom wrote:
I was thinking the same, but I reckon because they are just backing
up/archiving data it wouldn't be too bad.
ie They aren't looking for huge performance, just huge, cheap storage.
2009/9/3 Morgan Storeym...@morganstorey.com
I know I am a geek but
nope the 4-port is PCI 66mhz,
http://www.addonics.com/products/host_controller/adsa4r5.asp taken from
their parts lists so 15 drives will be all running through that
133Mbytes/sec they will see a bottleneck. Me I would get a 3 slot pcie 4x
and use two 8 port sata controllers and save the other for
10 matches
Mail list logo