On 7-May-07, at 5:27 PM, Andy Lubel wrote:
I think it will be in the next.next (10.6) OSX,
Well, the iPhone forced a few months schedule slip, perhaps *instead
of* dropping features?
Mind you I wouldn't be particularly surprised if ZFS wasn't in 10.5.
Just so long as we get it eventua
I think it will be in the next.next (10.6) OSX, we just need to get apple to
stop playing with their silly cell phone (that I cant help but want, damn
them!).
I have similar situation at home, but what I do is use Solaris 10 on a
cheapish x86 box with 6 400gb IDE/SATA disks, I then make them into
Lee,
Yes, the hot spare (disk4) should kick if another disk in the pool fails
and yes, the data is moved to disk4.
You are correct:
160 GB (the smallest disk) * 3 + raidz parity info
Here's the size of raidz pool comprised of 3 136-GB disks:
# zpool list
NAMESIZEUSED
Toby Thain wrote:
On 7-May-07, at 3:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Lee,
You can decide whether you want to use ZFS for a root file system now.
You can find this info here:
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/boot/
Bearing in mind that his machine is a G4 PowerPC. When Solaris 10 is
On 7-May-07, at 3:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Lee,
You can decide whether you want to use ZFS for a root file system now.
You can find this info here:
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/boot/
Bearing in mind that his machine is a G4 PowerPC. When Solaris 10 is
ported to this p
Cindy,
Thanks so much for the response -- this is the first one that I
consider an actual answer. :-)
I'm still unclear on exactly what I end up with. I apologize in
advance for my ignorance -- the ZFS admin guide assumes knowledge
that I don't yet have.
I assume that disk4 is a hot spa
Hi Lee,
You can decide whether you want to use ZFS for a root file system now.
You can find this info here:
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/boot/
Consider this setup for your other disks, which are:
250, 200 and 160 GB drives, and an external USB 2.0 600 GB drive
250GB = disk1
200GB =
Lee Fyock wrote:
least this year. I'd like to favor available space over performance, and
be able to swap out a failed drive without losing any data.
Lee Fyock later wrote:
In the mean time, I'd like to hang out with the system and drives I
have. As "mike" said, my understanding is that zfs wo
Al Hopper wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2007, mike wrote:
Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most
unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to
corrupt your data?
Yes - I won't argue that ZFS can be applied exactly as you state above.
Howe
Lee Fyock wrote:
> I didn't mean to kick up a fuss.
>
> I'm reasonably zfs-savvy in that I've been reading about it for a year
> or more. I'm a Mac developer and general geek; I'm excited about zfs
> because it's new and cool.
>
> At some point I'll replace my old desktop machine with something new
I didn't mean to kick up a fuss.
I'm reasonably zfs-savvy in that I've been reading about it for a
year or more. I'm a Mac developer and general geek; I'm excited about
zfs because it's new and cool.
At some point I'll replace my old desktop machine with something new
and better -- probab
On 5/4/07, Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes - I won't argue that ZFS can be applied exactly as you state above.
However, ZFS is no substitute for bad practices that include:
- not proactively replacing mechanical components *before* they fail
- not having maintenance policies in place
On Fri, 4 May 2007, mike wrote:
> Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most
> unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to
> corrupt your data?
Yes - I won't argue that ZFS can be applied exactly as you state above.
However, ZFS is no substitut
mike wrote:
> Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most
> unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to
> corrupt your data?
>
> To me it sounds like he is a SOHO user; may not have a lot of funds to
> go out and swap hardware on a whim like a com
Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most
unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to
corrupt your data?
To me it sounds like he is a SOHO user; may not have a lot of funds to
go out and swap hardware on a whim like a company might.
ZFS in my
On 4-May-07, at 6:53 PM, Al Hopper wrote:
...
[1] it continues to amaze me that many sites, large or small, don't
have a
(written) policy for mechanical component replacement - whether disk
drives or fans.
You're not the only one. In fact, while I'm not exactly talking
"enterprise" level
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Lee Fyock wrote:
> Hi--
>
> I'm looking forward to using zfs on my Mac at some point. My desktop
> server (a dual-1.25GHz G4) has a motley collection of discs that has
> accreted over the years: internal EIDE 320GB (boot drive), internal
> 250, 200 and 160 GB drives, and an ext
Hi--
I'm looking forward to using zfs on my Mac at some point. My desktop
server (a dual-1.25GHz G4) has a motley collection of discs that has
accreted over the years: internal EIDE 320GB (boot drive), internal
250, 200 and 160 GB drives, and an external USB 2.0 600 GB drive.
My guess is
18 matches
Mail list logo
