On Mon, 23 May 2011 22:49:49 -0400
Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Monday 23 May 2011 22:00:50 Justin Sherrill wrote:
> > You could stream master -> slave, and then if the master fails, change
> > the slave disk to the master. Dunno if that covers the same area for
> > you.
>
> The filesystem spans mo
On Monday 23 May 2011 22:00:50 Justin Sherrill wrote:
> You could stream master -> slave, and then if the master fails, change
> the slave disk to the master. Dunno if that covers the same area for
> you.
The filesystem spans more than one disk, and one of the disks is going bad.
I'm also going
You could stream master -> slave, and then if the master fails, change
the slave disk to the master. Dunno if that covers the same area for
you.
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Monday 23 May 2011 17:13:57 Matthew Dillon wrote:
>> No, unfortunately there is still one
On Monday 23 May 2011 17:13:57 Matthew Dillon wrote:
> No, unfortunately there is still one sticking point preventing that
> from working. The volume delete code can't remove the root volume
> (in a multi-volume hammer mount one is designated as the root volume.
> In a single-volum
:I'm thinking of founding an ISP and running it with a mix of DragonFly and
:Linux boxes. My current boss showed me a rack-mountable server which he uses.
:If I understood him right, it has three bays where hot-swappable SCSI drives
:can be inserted. I was thinking about how to handle disks tha
I'm thinking of founding an ISP and running it with a mix of DragonFly and
Linux boxes. My current boss showed me a rack-mountable server which he uses.
If I understood him right, it has three bays where hot-swappable SCSI drives
can be inserted. I was thinking about how to handle disks that are
