Daniel Eriksson wrote:
> Ivan Voras wrote:
>
>> GJournal aready is:
>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/geom/journal/g_j
>> ournal.c?rev=1.9&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
>
> Thank you for the info!
>
> zfs looks more interesting, but having gjournal in the tree makes it
> more
Ivan Voras wrote:
> GJournal aready is:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/geom/journal/g_j
> ournal.c?rev=1.9&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
Thank you for the info!
zfs looks more interesting, but having gjournal in the tree makes it
more convenient.
Any guess on when zfs will
Ivan Voras wrote:
> Daniel Eriksson wrote:
>
>> When will gjournal and zfs be committed to the CVS tree? Will either of
>> them be merged to STABLE?
>
> GJournal aready is:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/geom/journal/g_journal.c?rev=1.9&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
>
> It's
Daniel Eriksson wrote:
> When will gjournal and zfs be committed to the CVS tree? Will either of
> them be merged to STABLE?
GJournal aready is:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/geom/journal/g_journal.c?rev=1.9&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
It's unlikely they will be merged to 6
Is gjournal and/or zfs stable enough for production-like usage yet? I've
got a 3.5TB filesystem that I'd rather not have to fsck in case of a
crash or power outage.
I can live with running CURRENT on this box as long as I know the
filesystem is stable. (I'd rather run RELENG_6, but zfs is only fo
