Juha Saarinen wrote:
>
> On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Bill Moran wrote:
>
> > I know my opinion of Wind River has been negatively impacted by
> > the numerous spelling errors I found on their web site the first
> > time I visited.
>
> That's different though -- one person rubbishes the product because t
On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Bill Moran wrote:
> I know my opinion of Wind River has been negatively impacted by
> the numerous spelling errors I found on their web site the first
> time I visited.
That's different though -- one person rubbishes the product because the
presentation uses a Politically Inc
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:35:35PM -0500, Dave Uhring wrote:
> You seem to have missed the critical point of that paper. When the
> system goes completely haywire and either crashes or locks up so hard
> that a manual reset is required, UFS/softupdates requires a substantial
> amount of time to
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
>
> Dave Uhring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I just took a look at www.sistina.com and a web site which has its font
> > set to Arial is suspect, IMHO. If they have to use Microsoft products
> > to produce a web site..
>
> Is that the best you could come up wit
On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:35:35PM -0500, Dave Uhring wrote:
>
> You seem to have missed the critical point of that paper. When the
> system goes completely haywire and either crashes or locks up so hard
> that a manual reset is required, UFS/softupdates requires a substantial
> amount of time to
> Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:50:21 +0200 (CEST)
> From: "A. L. Meyers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As far as I know, ReiserFS is GPL. What would porting it to
> FreeBSD be better or worse than other (newer and less stable)
> alternatives?
>
> Is this a technical issue or are politics involved?
AFAIK R
Juha Saarinen wrote:
>
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Dave Uhring wrote:
>
> > I use "logging" on Solaris and XFS on Linux and have tried reiserfs on
> > Linux. All are superior to UFS/softupdates when the going gets tough.
> > Disk access times may or may not be comparable with UFS/softupdates, but
> >
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Moran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: JFS
> Dave Uhring wrote:
> > You seem to have missed the critical point of that paper. When the
> > system goes
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Dave Uhring wrote:
> I use "logging" on Solaris and XFS on Linux and have tried reiserfs on
> Linux. All are superior to UFS/softupdates when the going gets tough.
> Disk access times may or may not be comparable with UFS/softupdates, but
> the integrity of my filesystems is
Dave Uhring wrote:
> You seem to have missed the critical point of that paper. When the
> system goes completely haywire and either crashes or locks up so hard
> that a manual reset is required, UFS/softupdates requires a substantial
> amount of time to run fsck. If you have a very large filesys
Hi again!
I'd like to see continuing cooperation amoung the various more or
less open source Unixes and their clones. If anyone is capable
and competent to port ReiserFS to FreeBSD, it would be Hans
Reiser himself and his friends.
Which is not at all stating or implying that UFS is not a very
go
On Wednesday, 4 July 2001 at 11:38:08 +0100, Antony T Curtis wrote:
> Greg Lehey wrote:
>>
>> On Tuesday, 12 June 2001 at 19:22:45 +0200, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 12:09:58 +0100
>>> Josef Karthauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 08:32:23AM -0
> Why logging filesystems don't work:
>
> You generally (with the hardware available in PCs now)
> can't tell the difference between:
>
> 1) loss of power (ok!)
> 2) crash where the filesystem datastructures weren't corrupted (ok!)
> 3) crash where the filesystem datastructures were corrupted (
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> Bad news: people running depending on _only_ logging are kidding themselves.
Yeah. Funny how they have been doing so without getting bitten, eh?
--
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"If you consider our help
Cy Schubert wrote:
>
> > > Due to the lack of interest, FreeBSD's LFS has fallen into disrepair
> > > over the years. With the implementation of softupdates in FreeBSD I
> > > don't think there is any need for LFS any more.
> >
> > Repeat that over and over the next time you wait fsck finish a 4
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Daniel C. Sobral" writes:
> Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group wrote:
> >
> > 4.4BSD has something like JFS, LFS (Log Structured Filesystem). LFS
> > developed from a paper by John Ousterhout, the same fellow who
> > developed Tcl & Tk. All other log structur
* Gary Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000130 22:55] wrote:
> Tom wrote in message ID
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Sun, 30 Jan 2000, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> >
> > > > Due to the lack of interest, FreeBSD's LFS has fallen into disrepair
> > > > over the years. With the implementation of softupdate
17 matches
Mail list logo
