On Feb 23, 2009, at 8:10 AM, Bill Hacker wrote:
Freddie Cash wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Csaba Henk csaba.h...@creo.hu
wrote:
I need to setup a backup machine, and I intend to utilize today's
snapshotty filesystems (which boils down to Dfly+Hammer or FBSD
+ZFS --
btrfs is not
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 05:19:14PM +0100, Jasse Jansson wrote:
On Feb 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Bill Hacker wrote:
Robert Luciani wrote:
Freddie Cash wrote:
Booting FreeBSD 7.1 into a full KDE 4.2
desktop takes less than 5 minutes. This is using 3x 120 GB SATA
drives in a single raidz1.
Wow 5
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 05:18:09PM +0100, Jasse Jansson wrote:
On Feb 23, 2009, at 8:10 AM, Bill Hacker wrote:
Freddie Cash wrote:
*snipped*
But there we are, Startup 'seeding; is unavidable, but thereafter ...
among other things, looking to reduce the reliance on rsync (and
similar
Jasse Jansson wrote:
On Feb 23, 2009, at 8:10 AM, Bill Hacker wrote:
*trimmed*
But there we are, Startup 'seeding; is unavidable, but thereafter ...
among other things, looking to reduce the reliance on rsync (and
similar CVS'ish or git'ish techniques) having to 'inventory' stuff at
a
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 05:19:14PM +0100, Jasse Jansson wrote:
On Feb 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Bill Hacker wrote:
Robert Luciani wrote:
Freddie Cash wrote:
Booting FreeBSD 7.1 into a full KDE 4.2
desktop takes less than 5 minutes. This is using 3x 120 GB SATA
drives in
On Sun, 22.02.2009 at 22:45:40 +0100, Michael Neumann wrote:
Am Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:33:44 -0800 schrieb Jeremy Chadwick
j...@parodius.com:
What you're trying to describe won't work, for the same reason I
described above (with your zpool add tank ad8s1 command). You can
split the disk
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Robert Luciani rluci...@gmail.com wrote:
Freddie Cash wrote:
Booting FreeBSD 7.1 into a full KDE 4.2
desktop takes less than 5 minutes. This is using 3x 120 GB SATA
drives in a single raidz1.
Wow 5 minutes?!
I don't think I'd be pushing it if I said that
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Jeremy Chadwick j...@parodius.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 05:19:14PM +0100, Jasse Jansson wrote:
On Feb 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Bill Hacker wrote:
Robert Luciani wrote:
Freddie Cash wrote:
Booting FreeBSD 7.1 into a full KDE 4.2
desktop takes less than
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Bill Hacker w...@conducive.org wrote:
Freddie Cash wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Csaba Henk csaba.h...@creo.hu wrote:
I need to setup a backup machine, and I intend to utilize today's
snapshotty filesystems (which boils down to Dfly+Hammer or
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 02:46:15PM +1100, Dmitri Nikulin wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Jeremy Chadwick j...@parodius.com wrote:
I'm a little surprised to see BSD put alongside Linux when it comes to
development pace.
Certainly, I don't mean that BSD is at all keeping pace with
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:36:28PM +0100, Michael Neumann wrote:
Am Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:17:11 -0800
schrieb Jeremy Chadwick j...@parodius.com:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:59:57AM +1100, Dmitri Nikulin wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Bill Hacker w...@conducive.org
wrote:
Michael Neumann wrote:
Am Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:17:11 -0800
schrieb Jeremy Chadwick j...@parodius.com:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:59:57AM +1100, Dmitri Nikulin wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Bill Hacker w...@conducive.org
wrote:
Hopefully more 'good stuff' will be ported out of
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:36:28PM +0100, Michael Neumann wrote:
Am Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:17:11 -0800
schrieb Jeremy Chadwick j...@parodius.com:
*snip*
The one thing we all agree on is that, generally speaking, UFS isn't
cutting it. :-)
*I* don't agree.
Mind, we
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 08:12:36PM +0100, Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
On Sun, 22.02.2009 at 06:33:44 -0800, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:36:28PM +0100, Michael Neumann wrote:
Okay zpool remove doesn't seem to work as expected, but it should
work well at least for RAID-1
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 04:53:35AM +0800, Bill Hacker wrote:
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
*snip*
The problem I was attempting to describe: all pool members must be the
same size, otherwise all members are considered to be equal to the size
of the smallest. In English: you cannot mix-and-match
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Jeremy Chadwick j...@parodius.com wrote:
I've been through this procedure twice in the past year, as I replaced
250GB disks with 500GB, and then 500GB disks with 750GB. It's a *huge*
pain, and I cannot imagine anyone in an enterprise environment using ZFS
to
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Jeremy Chadwick j...@parodius.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 01:36:28PM +0100, Michael Neumann wrote:
Okay zpool remove doesn't seem to work as expected, but it should
work well at least for RAID-1 (which probably no one uses for large
storage systems ;-).
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 7:50 AM, Bill Hacker w...@conducive.org wrote:
Side issue again - just brought up DFLY 2.3.0, default all-hammer layout.
- atop a natacontrol RAID1 on a pair of salvaged 60 GB IBM 'Deathstars'.
- VIA C7 1.5 GHz CPU (the el-cheapo MB aimed at Wal-Mart)
- pulled half the
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Csaba Henk csaba.h...@creo.hu wrote:
I need to setup a backup machine, and I intend to utilize today's
snapshotty filesystems (which boils down to Dfly+Hammer or FBSD+ZFS --
btrfs is not there yet, and I don't feel like dwelving into Solaris).
Set up such an
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Jeremy Chadwick j...@parodius.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:59:57AM +1100, Dmitri Nikulin wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Bill Hacker w...@conducive.org wrote:
Hopefully more 'good stuff' will be ported out of Solaris before it hits
the
Freddie Cash wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Csaba Henk csaba.h...@creo.hu wrote:
I need to setup a backup machine, and I intend to utilize today's
snapshotty filesystems (which boils down to Dfly+Hammer or FBSD+ZFS --
btrfs is not there yet, and I don't feel like dwelving into
On 2009-02-21, Csaba Henk csaba.h...@creo.hu wrote:
snip
I don't feel like dwelving into Solaris
This is a little off topic...but
I don't blame you as I have gone through installing and then ditching
Solaris more than a few times myself. This last time with Solaris 10
10/08 I think it's going
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:59:57AM +1100, Dmitri Nikulin wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Bill Hacker w...@conducive.org wrote:
Hopefully more 'good stuff' will be ported out of Solaris before it hits the
'too costly vs the alternatives' wall and is orphaned.
Btrfs has been merged
23 matches
Mail list logo
