On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> Nothing wrong with productive flaming for me,
>>> but it's just not typical code of conduct in FreeBSD
>>> mailing list at all.
>>>
>> Actually I can't remember any flame-war about system compilers - this i
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Lynn Steven Killingsworth <
blue.seahorse.syndic...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't seem to have generated much comment.
>
> I suspect you are thinking as I do that if your servers don't immediately
> download then their is a bandit on my Internet line??
>
>
>
>
>
New
On 21 jun. 2012, at 05:28, Waitman Gobble wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Matthias Gamsjager
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Lynn Steven Killingsworth <
>> blue.seahorse.syndic...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
> And it works fast.
>
>
The correct answer would be. I depends on the work load
___
freebsd-questions@freebs
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Hooman Fazaeli wrote:
> Dear community
>
> In the past, I built a 8TB ZFS log server on freebsd 7.4.
> However, the system experienced instablility after long up times.
> My main motive to use ZFS was UFS inability to support large
> file systems.
>
> Now, I want
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> For my various OpenSource projects, I have deployed a 36TB file system
>> which is fine and stable running 24/7. Additionally at home I use 4TB
>> (2x 2TB) + 8TB (2x 4TB) on a machine with 4GB RAM this
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> I really want to see your face when you fsck 48TB w/o ffs+j (since that is
>> so young must be immature :S ) of data with the phone ring non stop with
>>
>
> Even if ZFS would be the only filesystem in exis
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
>
>> answer yourself.
>>
>>
>> Sorry but I don;t follow you right there. with 48 disks you would not
>> mirror 24vs24.
>>
>
> if i wasn't clear enough then i would it like that (with UFS), and
> assuming disk
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> interesting idea but the options ZFS would give you are superior to this
>> setup.
>>
>
> Were you just unable to understand my setup or a reasons to do this?
>
> please reread former post and poss
On 21 jun. 2012, at 17:15, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
>>
>> I do understand your setup but I dont have too agree that it is a good
>
> so i would repeat my question.
> Assume you have 48 disks, in mirrored configuration (24 mirrors) and 480
> users with their data on them.
>
> Your solution wi
On 21 jun. 2012, at 18:07, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
>>> stupid answer to stupid question.
>>> You never seen - but they do happens.
>>
>> In other topic you hammerd on fact and if someone ask you to deliver them
>> its a stupid question.
> just a proof it is a waste of time to explain things
Offtopic but since when is it ok the behave like this in the freebsd
mailing list. Really no need to get personal...
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 8:50 AM, krad wrote:
> If you cant cope with multiple operating systems and their differences you
> are probably in the wrong job.
>
>
> On 10 September 2
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> Needing fsck because the drive is failing and not able to store and
>> retrieve data reliably any more is a whole different thing.
>>
>
> or bad data stored because of non-disk errors.
>
>
> in this case an
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 01:52:04AM -0500, Anonymous wrote:
> > We, the users of FreeBSD, *do hereby challenge* the FreeBSD project
> > to meet its future release dates.
>
> I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for 9.1-RELEASE to be finalized. I
Hey Nick
Have you read the handbook which is a good starting point for most questions:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:32 AM, Nick Mackowski wrote:
> Hi I have a Hp Pavillion dv8 with dual sata drives. What program do I need
Have you changed the cable?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
>
> The Supermicro controllers listed by FreeBSD as supported seem to be
> rebranded Adaptec controllers, and they are therefore also disqualified.
>
The supermicro usas-l8i
http://www.supermicro.com/products/accessories/addon/AOC-USAS-L8i.cfm
uses a LSI chip (LSISAS 1068E SAS controller ) and wor
>
> Unfortunately, these cards fit just in supermicro motherboards, since
> they have they are reversed/mirrored compared to normal PCIe cards.
>
> (I have a Tyan S8005.)
>
> --
> Torbjörn
Well it's just the bracket. You can unmount it and replace it with
another bracket. The card is up side down
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Matthias Gamsjager
wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately, these cards fit just in supermicro motherboards, since
>> they have they are reversed/mirrored compared to normal PCIe cards.
>>
>> (I have a Tyan S8005.)
>>
>> --
>>
>
> FYI, I bought one for my Supermicro X7SB3 motherboard and it didn't work.
> I had to end up buying an Intel SASUC8I which is just an OEM LSI
> SAS3081E-
hmm strange because I have one running right here with the MPT driver.
even mptutils works with it.
And if you google it then you will find c
> Don't know why they do that. But be careful because HTX/HNC
> (Hypertransport) connections are the same as PCIe but reversed
> and incompatible, check it before plugin anything.
>
> HTX is used to connect 2 motherboards via hypertransport (up to 51.2
> GB/sec for now), connect expansion cards, et
21 matches
Mail list logo
