David Hopwood writes:
> Note also that mounting a filesystem read-only does not guarantee that
> the disk will not be written, because of atime updates (this is arguably
> a Unix design flaw, but still has to be taken into account). So r may
I can mount with the -noatime option.
> I don't understa
On 27/08/2007, at 12:36 AM, Rainer J.H. Brandt wrote:
> Sorry, this is a bit off-topic, but anyway:
>
> Ronald Kuehn writes:
>> No. You can neither access ZFS nor UFS in that way. Only one
>> host can mount the file system at the same time (read/write or
>> read-only doesn't matter here).
>
> I can
Ben Middleton wrote:
> I've just purchased an Asus P5K WS, which seems to work OK. I had to download
> the Marvell Yukon ethernet driver - but it's all working fine. It's also got
> a PCI-X slot - so I have one of those Super Micro 8 port SATA cards -
> providing a total of 16 SATA ports across
For what it's worth, I bought a Gigabyte GA-M57SLI-S4 a couple of months
ago and it rocks on a reasonably current Nevada.
Certainly not the cheapest or most expensive, but I felt a good choice
for multiple PCI-E slots and a couple of PCI slots.
http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/Pr
Hey all -
Just saw something really weird.
I have been playing with by box for a little while now, and just noticed
something whilst checking how fast / slow my IDE ports were on a newish
motherboard...
I had been copying around an image. Not a particularly large one - 500M
ISO...
I had been
I've just purchased an Asus P5K WS, which seems to work OK. I had to download
the Marvell Yukon ethernet driver - but it's all working fine. It's also got a
PCI-X slot - so I have one of those Super Micro 8 port SATA cards - providing a
total of 16 SATA ports across the system. Other specs are o
Rainer J.H. Brandt wrote:
> Ronald,
>
> thanks for your comments.
>
> I was thinking about this scenario:
>
> Host w continuously has a UFS mounted with read/write access.
> Host w writes to the file f/ff/fff.
> Host w ceases to touch anything under f.
> Three hours later, host r mounts the file
Rainer,
If you are looking for a means to safely "READ" any filesystem,
please take a look at Availability Suite.
One can safely take Point-in-Time copies of any Solaris supported
filesystem, including ZFS, at any snapshot interval of one's
choosing, and then access the shadow volume on any
Rainer J.H. Brandt wrote:
> Ronald,
>
> thanks for your comments.
>
> I was thinking about this scenario:
>
> Host w continuously has a UFS mounted with read/write access.
> Host w writes to the file f/ff/fff.
> Host w ceases to touch anything under f.
> Three hours later, host r mounts the file
Ronald,
thanks for your comments.
I was thinking about this scenario:
Host w continuously has a UFS mounted with read/write access.
Host w writes to the file f/ff/fff.
Host w ceases to touch anything under f.
Three hours later, host r mounts the file system read-only,
reads f/ff/fff, and unmount
>Yes, thank you for confirming what I said.
>
>So it is possible, but not recommended, because I must take care
>not to read from files for which buffers haven't been flushed yet.
Not, it's much worse than that: UFS will not re-read cached data for
the read-only mount so the read-only mount wil
On Sunday, August 26, 2007 at 17:47:32 CEST, Rainer J.H. Brandt wrote:
> Ronald Kuehn writes:
> > On Sunday, August 26, 2007 at 16:36:26 CEST, Rainer J.H. Brandt wrote:
> >
> > > Ronald Kuehn writes:
> > > > No. You can neither access ZFS nor UFS in that way. Only one
> > > > host can mount the fi
Tim,
thanks for answering...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
...but please don't send HTML, if possible.
>
> Try this explanation..
>
> Host A mounts UFS file system rw
> Hosts B-C mount sam UFS file system read only
>
> In natural scheme of things hosts B-C read files and cache
> metadata about the
Ronald Kuehn writes:
> On Sunday, August 26, 2007 at 16:36:26 CEST, Rainer J.H. Brandt wrote:
>
> > Ronald Kuehn writes:
> > > No. You can neither access ZFS nor UFS in that way. Only one
> > > host can mount the file system at the same time (read/write or
> > > read-only doesn't matter here).
> >
On Sunday, August 26, 2007 at 16:36:26 CEST, Rainer J.H. Brandt wrote:
> Ronald Kuehn writes:
> > No. You can neither access ZFS nor UFS in that way. Only one
> > host can mount the file system at the same time (read/write or
> > read-only doesn't matter here).
>
> I can see why you wouldn't reco
5x(8+1) raidz1 , 1 hot sapre
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Rainer
Try this explanation..
Host A mounts UFS file system rw
Hosts B-C mount sam UFS file system read only
In natural scheme of things hosts B-C read files and cache
metadata about the files and file system.
Host A changes the file system. The metadata that hosts B-C have cached
is now in
Sorry, this is a bit off-topic, but anyway:
Ronald Kuehn writes:
> No. You can neither access ZFS nor UFS in that way. Only one
> host can mount the file system at the same time (read/write or
> read-only doesn't matter here).
I can see why you wouldn't recommend trying this with UFS
(only one ho
18 matches
Mail list logo
