On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 02:29:33PM +0300, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
> On 1/17/07, Josef Karthauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A poll for opinions if I may?
i suppose i'm asking the smae here as well ...
> > I've got a few gmirrors running on various machines, all of which
> > pair up two drive
- Vulpes Velox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 10:15:56 +0900
> "Adrian Chadd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 17/01/07, Andrew Pantyukhin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > [...after reading the slashdotter's piece of wisdom...]
> > >
> > > Yes, but that's the kind of
On Jan 19, 2007, at 12:42 AM, Vulpes Velox wrote:
When ZFS comes available, I plan to actually run it across multiple
mirrors. It has built in JBOD, but it does not do mirroring. It just
does stripping.
I think you misunderstand ZFS. It is robust against multiple disk
failures. It doesn'
Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
> Yes, but that's the kind of functionality I have always
> expected to be present in software raid solutions. I
> hope I'll live to see this implemented in geom.
For adding drives there's gconcat, for resizing (well, you currently
have to decide on the maximum size in ad
On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 10:15:56 +0900
"Adrian Chadd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 17/01/07, Andrew Pantyukhin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > [...after reading the slashdotter's piece of wisdom...]
> >
> > Yes, but that's the kind of functionality I have always
> > expected to be present in soft
On 17/01/07, Andrew Pantyukhin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...after reading the slashdotter's piece of wisdom...]
Yes, but that's the kind of functionality I have always
expected to be present in software raid solutions. I
hope I'll live to see this implemented in geom.
That made my eyes blee
On 1/18/07, Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
> On 1/17/07, Josef Karthauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> A poll for opinions if I may?
>>
>> I've got a few gmirrors running on various machines, all of which
>> pair up two drives at the physical level (i.e. mirror /d
Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
On 1/17/07, Josef Karthauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A poll for opinions if I may?
I've got a few gmirrors running on various machines, all of which
pair up two drives at the physical level (i.e. mirror /dev/ad0s1
with /dev/ad1s1). Of course there are other ways of
On Wednesday 17 January 2007 06:29, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
> On 1/17/07, Josef Karthauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A poll for opinions if I may?
> >
> > I've got a few gmirrors running on various machines, all of which
> > pair up two drives at the physical level (i.e. mirror /dev/ad0s1
> >
On 1/17/07, Matthew X. Economou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apart from potentially avoiding a whole disk from being copied
> during a resync after a crash, are there any other advantages to
> using partition level mirroring instead of drive level mirroring?
Joe,
Partition-level software RAID p
> Apart from potentially avoiding a whole disk from being copied
> during a resync after a crash, are there any other advantages to
> using partition level mirroring instead of drive level mirroring?
Joe,
Partition-level software RAID plus LVM is how the following Slashdot
poster manages extendab
On 1/17/07, Josef Karthauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A poll for opinions if I may?
I've got a few gmirrors running on various machines, all of which
pair up two drives at the physical level (i.e. mirror /dev/ad0s1
with /dev/ad1s1). Of course there are other ways of doing it to,
like mirrorin
12 matches
Mail list logo
