Nux! wrote:
> On 04.08.2012 20:32, joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
> > Karanbir Singh wrote:
> >
> >> On 08/04/2012 05:06 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >> > Using BTRFS now is like using ZFS in 2005.
> >> > ZFS is adult now, BTRFS is not
> > ZFS is the best I know for filesystems >= 2
John R Pierce wrote:
>
> Theres one big issue with NFS that requires a workaround... XFS requires
> 64 bit inodes on a large file system ('inode64'), and by default, NFS
> wants to use the inode as the unique ID for the export, this doesn't
> work as that unique ID has to be 32 bits, so you ha
Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Joerg Schilling
> wrote:
> > What is the age of BTRFS?
>
> BTRFS presentation, mid-2007
> https://oss.oracle.com/projects/btrfs/dist/documentation/btrfs-ukuug.pdf
>
> That makes it 6 years in development. Next...
So BTRFS is 6 years young
Fernando Cassia wrote:
>
> "Possibly some. Samba has been asking for streams support for a while,
> and if reiser4 leads the way in an implementation that does not break
> unix file semantics, jfs (and possibly other file systems) may follow."
Microsoft tried to advertize their "stream" concept
John R Pierce wrote:
> integrated so growing a file system is a one step process that takes
> care of both the LVM and JFS online in a single command.
>
> # chfs -size=+10G /home
>
> hard to be much simpler than that!
>
>
ZFS is simpler than that ;-)
If you enabled the zpool autoexpand fea
On 08/04/2012 10:05 PM, Keith Keller wrote:
> On 2012-08-04, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> As Nux! initially said, ext4 is the OS that RHEL and Fedora support as
>> their main file system. I would (and do) use that. The 6.3 kernel does
>> support xfs and CentOS has the jfs tools in our extras director
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 12:32 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
> JFS is the primary file system for AIX on their big Power servers, and
> on those, it performs very very well. the utilities are are fully
> integrated so growing a file system is a one step process that takes
> care of both the LVM and JFS
On 08/05/12 3:40 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> ZFS is simpler than that ;-)
well aware, I run ZFS on Solaris.
> BTW: where do you expect the additional 10G to come from in your example?
from the LVM pool containing /home ... Linux LVM also came from IBM, and was
based on the LVM of AIX
--
2012/8/5 Johnny Hughes :
> On 08/04/2012 10:05 PM, Keith Keller wrote:
>> On 2012-08-04, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>> As Nux! initially said, ext4 is the OS that RHEL and Fedora support as
>>> their main file system. I would (and do) use that. The 6.3 kernel does
>>> support xfs and CentOS has the j
On 08/05/12 3:06 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Your claim is aproximately correct for NFSv2 (1988) but wrong for other NFS
> versions.
The server was using NFS V3/V4 in CentOS 6.2 earlier this year, and
various clients, including Solaris 10. The problems were reported from
our overseas manufact
On 08/05/2012 07:14 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> from the LVM pool containing /home ... Linux LVM also came from IBM, and
> was based on the LVM of AIX
AIX had a LogicalVolume Manager, sure - but I dont think thats where the
linux LVM came from - the Sistina guys had a fairly independent
impleme
On 08/05/2012 06:46 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> Yes, however my data loss experience was with IBM´s OS/2 port of JFS.
> Probably related to one of these
> http://www.os2voice.org/warpcast/1999-08/37CC5F9D.htm
I think its safe to assume that OS/2 experience from 1998 is pretty much
irrelevant to t
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> AIX had a LogicalVolume Manager, sure - but I dont think thats where the
> linux LVM came from - the Sistina guys had a fairly independent
> implementation. And the Linux LVM looks a lot more like the HP variant
> than the IBM one.
And all L
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>
> I think its safe to assume that OS/2 experience from 1998 is pretty much
> irrelevant to the conversation here, and JFS on linux
My data loss was in 2002. :-p
You are putting words in my mouth. Re-read what I posted before you
jump to con
On 08/05/12 11:33 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> And the Linux LVM looks a lot more like the HP variant
> than the IBM one.
ah, you're right, googing and wikipedia says, the linux implementation
was based on HPUX, I was mistaken thinking IBM had provided their LVM code.
--
john r pierce
On 08/04/2012 08:32 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> I would not call it a rant but a food for thought.
agreed!
> ZFS was distributed to the public after it turned 4.
> ZFS is now in public use since more than 7 years.
but ZFS has not had a stable release in Linux as yet, making it still be
negative
On 08/05/2012 07:40 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>> AIX had a LogicalVolume Manager, sure - but I dont think thats where the
>> linux LVM came from - the Sistina guys had a fairly independent
>> implementation. And the Linux LVM looks a lot more like the HP variant
>> than the IBM one.
>
> And all L
On 08/05/2012 04:05 AM, Keith Keller wrote:
> I've looked into ZFS on linux, but it still seems not quite ready for
> real production use. I'd love to test it on a less crucial server when
> I get the chance. Their FAQ claims RHEL 6.0 support:
Excellent! Do share your test / play experience.
-
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> you seem confused about what a filesystem and volume management is.
http://www.funtoo.org/wiki/BTRFS_Fun
Btrfs, often compared to ZFS, is offering some interesting features like:
(snip)
Built-in storage pool capabilities (no need f
John R Pierce wrote:
> On 08/05/12 3:06 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Your claim is aproximately correct for NFSv2 (1988) but wrong for other NFS
> > versions.
>
> The server was using NFS V3/V4 in CentOS 6.2 earlier this year, and
> various clients, including Solaris 10. The problems were re
On 08/05/12 3:18 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> John R Pierce wrote:
>
>> On 08/05/12 3:06 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>> Your claim is aproximately correct for NFSv2 (1988) but wrong for other NFS
>>> versions.
>> The server was using NFS V3/V4 in CentOS 6.2 earlier this year, and
>> various client
XFS: Recent and Future Adventures in Filesystem Scalability - Dave Chinner
Uploaded by linuxconfau2012 on Jan 19, 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=FegjLbCnoBw
---~~.~~---
Mike
// SilverTip257 //
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 5,
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, SilverTip257 wrote:
> Recent and Future Adventures in Filesystem Scalability - Dave Chinner
Thanks for that vid!
FC
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hi all,
I hope there is someone in Japan.
If we install Centos in Japanese, and then I ssh to it from an English
client. Will the SSH prompt be in Japanese?
How to make the SSH prompt in Japanese?
Thank you.
--
Fajar.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@cen
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 11:10:40AM +0800, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
> Hi all,
> I hope there is someone in Japan.
> If we install Centos in Japanese, and then I ssh to it from an English
> client. Will the SSH prompt be in Japanese?
My guess--it's a bit late to test it tonight---is that as long as you
Hi List
Just had one of my servers fail serving web pages and apache produced a
log file of nearly 1,000,000 lines and 130Mb in about 18 hours with the
following:
"SSL Library Error: -8181 Certificate has expired
Unable to verify certificate 'Server-Cert'. Add "NSSEnforceValidCerts
off" to nss
26 matches
Mail list logo
