Mark Linimon wrote:
But, in the real world of software engineering, He Who Breaketh It,
Must Fixeth It.
Your mileage may vary.
Yes it vaires. In the real world He Who Reaketh It, will hire
someone who known what he is doing to fix the problem...
___
[EMA
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> I think for now the important thing is to get the people interested
> on this collected on a mail-alias, and for them to discuss how the
> can work together to make something happen. After that, try to define
> "something" closer.
>
What about f
On Wednesday, 14 January 2004 at 22:32:32 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Lukas Ertl writes:
>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Robert Watson wrote:
>>
>>> I think the right strategy is to follow the minimalist approach now
>>> (adopt the disk(9) API, rather than having Vinum
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Lukas Ertl writes:
>On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Robert Watson wrote:
>
>> I think the right strategy is to follow the minimalist approach now
>> (adopt the disk(9) API, rather than having Vinum generate character
>> devices) so that swap works on Vinum again, and so that wh
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Robert Watson wrote:
> I think the right strategy is to follow the minimalist approach now
> (adopt the disk(9) API, rather than having Vinum generate character
> devices) so that swap works on Vinum again, and so that when UFS moves
> to speaking GEOM there's no loss of funct
Pawel Jakub Dawidek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I'm working on one geom class (called for now geom_raid) which will support
>transformations like: concatenation, stripe (raid0), mirror (raid1), raid4
>and raid5.
Isn't is more GEOMish to have a separate GEOM class for each transformation?
Tony.
On Monday 12 January 2004 07:33, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dag-Erling
> =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=
>
> writes:
> >"M. Warner Losh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Maybe this would be a good test-case for seeing how well it works?
> >> Maybe not. We do need to ru
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mark Linimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: > If nothing happens, vinum is going to break even more very soon.
:
: No ... if you do a commit that changes the code assumptions upon
: which vinum was built, vinum will break. vinum is not going to
: "magica
On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 11:32, Wes Peters wrote:
> A few years ago Perforce was working on a write-through cache so you could
> have a local duplicate of the server environment, but I haven't seen that
> work come out of the company. That would've rocked for our development
> model.
They release
On Sunday 11 January 2004 12:36 pm, Scott W wrote:
> David Gilbert wrote:
> >>"Poul-Henning" == Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >Poul-Henning> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >Poul-Henning> "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" writes:
> >
> >Poul-Henning> The reason I say this is that ne
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Mark Linimon wrote:
> > If nothing happens, vinum is going to break even more very soon.
>
> No ... if you do a commit that changes the code assumptions upon which
> vinum was built, vinum will break. vinum is not going to "magically"
> break by itself.
>
> This gets back
ver managed to check
into our CVS, then I think most people in this caliber can find
better things to use their spare time on.
Isolated features with a small user-communities, things like vinum,
raidframe, appletalk, bluetooth, MAC and similar, needs to come
with developer resources for its
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 11:00:34AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mark Linimon writes:
>
> >But, in the real world of software engineering, He Who Breaketh It,
> >Must Fixeth It.
>
> If we are talking paid jobs, yes, then you can make rules like that
> because w
> If vinum means a lot to you, you should do something to get it above
> that threshold: start debugging/coding, learn to code if need be,
> donate money so somebody else can code if you can't do anything
> else.
I don't use vinum so I have no stake in this.
OTOH I'm not announcing changes which
> I forgot to mention on rather important factor in this equation:
Er, this is the *only* important factor. IMHO, it made most of the
previous conversation be completely off-the-rails.
> If nothing happens, vinum is going to break even more very soon.
No ... if you do a commit that changes the
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 12:39:22PM +0100, Miguel Mendez wrote:
+> >I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
+> >and extensible RAID stack to FreeBSD. Unfortunately, while it was made
+> >to work pretty well on 4.x, it has never been viabl
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mark Linimon writes:
>But, in the real world of software engineering, He Who Breaketh It,
>Must Fixeth It.
If we are talking paid jobs, yes, then you can make rules like that
because with the salary you control resource allocation and
prioritization.
My real life
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Greg 'groggy' Lehey"
>> As much as I would hate to see RF and Vinum disappar from our
>> source tree, maybe what we need to do is to kick them both into
>> "training-camp" in p4 while you and Greg look the other way.
>
>Hmm. I can't see why they have to disappear
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=
writes:
>"M. Warner Losh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Maybe this would be a good test-case for seeing how well it works?
>> Maybe not. We do need to run a few more test-cases for things through
>> this scenario... I'm not
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Narvi writes:
>oh yes - and please fix disklabel to support an arbirtary number of file
>system per a "disk" or "slice" in the process, because otherwise it will
>not be converting many setups.
We need to move to a different labeling format because bsdlabel has
a n
David Gilbert wrote:
"Poul-Henning" == Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Poul-Henning> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Poul-Henning> "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" writes:
Poul-Henning> The reason I say this is that neither of you have the
Poul-Henning> time needed, and whoever pic
t in the perforce
> >repository. If I got this wrong, please tell me and everything is fine,
> >but if I got it right, do you (Greg) agree to remove it from -current?
>
> My proposal is to do just that with both vinum and raidframe until
> one or possibly both are up to full
"M. Warner Losh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Maybe this would be a good test-case for seeing how well it works?
> Maybe not. We do need to run a few more test-cases for things through
> this scenario... I'm not sure this one is well suited to it.
If we toss out Vinum, there's a significant ris
> -current?
> >
> > My proposal is to do just that with both vinum and raidframe until
> > one or possibly both are up to full strength again.
>
> and I'm pretty sure, that you'll provide means to migrate
> the vinum volumes on -current systems transparentl
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Gilbert writes:
: >That said, we need a strong and robust software raid.
:
: And as long as we have something which "mostly work" there seems to
: be insufficient mot
On 01/11/04 12:13:36 +0100 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alexander Leidinger writes:
fine, but if I got it right, do you (Greg) agree to remove it from
-current?
My proposal is to do just that with both vinum and raidframe until
one or possibly both are up t
David Gilbert wrote:
In the p4 tree, we can easier add new talent to our developer
force and I am pretty sure that some sort of merry band of
developers would form around both RF and vinum there.
... now I thought I followed this list relatively well, but can
someone point me at what 'p4' is?
p4 i
> "Poul-Henning" == Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Poul-Henning> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Poul-Henning> "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" writes:
Poul-Henning> The reason I say this is that neither of you have the
Poul-Henning> time needed, and whoever picks up may have ideas, even
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Gilbert writes:
>That said, we need a strong and robust software raid.
And as long as we have something which "mostly work" there seems to
be insufficient motivation to make that happen.
Therefore my proposal to send both RF and Vinum in training camp in p4.
>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Scott> Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
>> Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a
>>> proven and extensib
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:46:49 +1030
"Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm. I can't see why they have to disappear from the source tree, and
> I don't see why Scott or I should have to look the other way. I don't
> know about
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Greg 'groggy' Lehey"
writes:
>> As much as I would hate to see RF and Vinum disappar from our
>> source tree, maybe what we need to do is to kick them both into
>> "training-camp" in p4 while you and Greg look the other way.
>
>Hmm. I can't see why they have to d
At 3:30 PM -0700 2004/01/10, Scott Long wrote:
It will probably never be an LVM stack, but I've also always
believed that LVM and RAID are related but separate layers.
Having looked at the RAIDframe documentation you referenced, it
strikes me that it cannot really move towards LV
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 00:12:57 +0100
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As much as I would hate to see RF and Vinum disappar from our
> source tree, maybe what we need to do is to kick them both into
> "training-camp" in p4 while you and Greg look the other way.
[...]
> I'd say lets ki
fills the
LVM role, while RAIDframe handles the RAID side well.
--
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Long writes:
>All,
>
>I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
>and extensible RAID stack to FreeBSD. Unfortunately, while it was made
>to work pretty well on 4.x, it has never been viable on 5.x; i
Scott Long wrote:
I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
and extensible RAID stack to FreeBSD. Unfortunately, while it was made
to work pretty well on 4.x, it has never been viable on 5.x; it never
survived the introduction of GEOM and removal of the old disk
On Sunday, 11 January 2004 at 12:08:24 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:46:49 +1030
> "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [missing attribution to phk]
>>> I'd say lets kick them both into perforce and let whoever wants
>>> their hands have a go at them.
>>
e,
>but if I got it right, do you (Greg) agree to remove it from -current?
My proposal is to do just that with both vinum and raidframe until
one or possibly both are up to full strength again.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP sin
Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> > I'm having trouble seeing what RF does that Vinum (or at least a
> > properly GEOMified Vinum) can't do...
> Please read the RAIDframe documents at http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/RAIDframe
> be
On Sunday, 11 January 2004 at 0:12:57 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Long writes:
>> All,
>>
>> I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
>> and extensible RAID stack to FreeBSD. Unfortunat
you, then show your support and say so.
On Saturday, 10 January 2004 at 16:44:10 -0700, Scott Long wrote:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
>> Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
>>>
Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 00:12:57 +0100
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As much as I would hate to see RF and Vinum disappar from our
source tree, maybe what we need to do is to kick them both into
"training-camp" in p4 while you and Greg look the other way.
[.
Scott Long wrote:
All,
I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
and extensible RAID stack to FreeBSD. Unfortunately, while it was made
to work pretty well on 4.x, it has never been viable on 5.x; it never
survived the introduction of GEOM and removal of the old disk
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
and extensible RAID stack to FreeBSD.
I'm having trouble seeing what RF does that Vinum (or at least a
properly GEOMified Vinum) can't do...
Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
> and extensible RAID stack to FreeBSD.
I'm having trouble seeing what RF does that Vinum (or at least a
properly GEOMified Vinum) can't do...
DES
--
Dag-Er
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Scott Long wrote:
> I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
> and extensible RAID stack to FreeBSD. Unfortunately, while it was made
> to work pretty well on 4.x, it has never been viable on 5.x; it never
> survived the introduc
All,
I started RAIDframe three years ago with the hope of bringing a proven
and extensible RAID stack to FreeBSD. Unfortunately, while it was made
to work pretty well on 4.x, it has never been viable on 5.x; it never
survived the introduction of GEOM and removal of the old disk layer.
I'm c
did not meet our needs.
>
> Alfred Perlsteing claims "Vinum comes from the universe where Spock
> has a beard" (sorry, Greg!).
Haha. :) I've had a similar love-hate relationship with vinum.
>> Scott Long had just about ported RAIDframe to FreeBSD, when the bits got
pock
has a beard" (sorry, Greg!).
> Scott Long had just about ported RAIDframe to FreeBSD, when the bits got
> lost in a disk crash. So the rumor goes.
I guess you are talking about a kernel version of the code. I did
the original port of the user space version of the code; the patche
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 02:18:40PM -0500, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
> If you really want to play with RAIDframe I'd guess you'll have a much
> easier time of it under NetBSD, where it is included with the operating
> system. Getting it working under FreeBSD could be a
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Miguel Mendez wrote:
>On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 01:15:10PM -0500, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
>
>> Is there a reason you can't use vinum(4)?
>
>Yes, sir, there is one, like I said before, I want to play with
>raidframe. Being a geek yourself you sho
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 01:15:10PM -0500, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
Hi,
> Is there a reason you can't use vinum(4)?
Yes, sir, there is one, like I said before, I want to play with
raidframe. Being a geek yourself you should understand that :-)
Cheers,
--
Miguel Mendez
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Miguel Mendez wrote:
>The latest raidframe patch seems to be a bit date now, I'd like to know
>if any of you has worked on getting it cleanly applying to a recent
>4.5-STABLE (4.6-RC indeed) system of even 5.0-CURRENT tree. I'd like to
>play with it and
Hi hackers,
The latest raidframe patch seems to be a bit date now, I'd like to know
if any of you has worked on getting it cleanly applying to a recent
4.5-STABLE (4.6-RC indeed) system of even 5.0-CURRENT tree. I'd like to
play with it and would like to know if someone has taken
55 matches
Mail list logo
