Kip Macy wrote:
Please try applying this change to your tree and let me know.
I patch, I reboot 2 times without problem. I keep you posted is
I encounter a new crash.
Thanks
Henri
Thanks,
Kip
http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base?view=revision&revision=193110
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:11 AM
Please try applying this change to your tree and let me know.
Thanks,
Kip
http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base?view=revision&revision=193110
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:11 AM, Henri Hennebert wrote:
> Kip Macy wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
>>>
>>> I will be MFC'ing
Kip Macy wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
I will be MFC'ing the newer ZFS support some time this afternoon. Both
world and kernel will need to be re-built. Existing pools will
continue to work without upgrade.
If you choose to upgrade a pool to take advantage of new fea
Henri Hennebert wrote:
Kip Macy wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
I will be MFC'ing the newer ZFS support some time this afternoon. Both
world and kernel will need to be re-built. Existing pools will
continue to work without upgrade.
If you choose to upgrade a pool to t
Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 28/05/2009 16:26 Henri Hennebert said the following:
(gdb) bt
#0 0x0008012a6f22 in strlen () from /lib/libc.so.7
#1 0x0008012a0feb in open () from /lib/libc.so.7
#2 0x00080129ea59 in open () from /lib/libc.so.7
#3 0x0008012a1f2e in vfprintf () from /l
on 28/05/2009 16:26 Henri Hennebert said the following:
> (gdb) bt
> #0 0x0008012a6f22 in strlen () from /lib/libc.so.7
> #1 0x0008012a0feb in open () from /lib/libc.so.7
> #2 0x00080129ea59 in open () from /lib/libc.so.7
> #3 0x0008012a1f2e in vfprintf () from /lib/libc.so.7
>
Kip Macy wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Artem Belevich wrote:
I had the same problem on -current. Try attached patch. It may not
apply cleanly on -stable, but should be easy enough to make equivalent
changes on -stable.
--Artem
Adding to rw_init looks fine, but I'd rather find out
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Artem Belevich wrote:
> I had the same problem on -current. Try attached patch. It may not
> apply cleanly on -stable, but should be easy enough to make equivalent
> changes on -stable.
>
> --Artem
>
Adding to rw_init looks fine, but I'd rather find out why owner
Artem Belevich wrote:
Did you by any chance do that from single-user mode? ZFS seems to rely
on hostid being set.
Try running "/etc/rc.d/hostid start" and then re-try your zfs commands.
I was in multiuser with hostid set.
Henri
--Artem
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Henri Hennebert wro
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Artem Belevich wrote:
> Did you by any chance do that from single-user mode? ZFS seems to rely
> on hostid being set.
> Try running "/etc/rc.d/hostid start" and then re-try your zfs commands.
Yup. Your hostuuid has to match that in the pool.
Cheers,
Kip
>
> -
Did you by any chance do that from single-user mode? ZFS seems to rely
on hostid being set.
Try running "/etc/rc.d/hostid start" and then re-try your zfs commands.
--Artem
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Henri Hennebert wrote:
> Artem Belevich wrote:
>>
>> I had the same problem on -current.
Henri Hennebert wrote:
Artem Belevich wrote:
I had the same problem on -current. Try attached patch. It may not
apply cleanly on -stable, but should be easy enough to make equivalent
changes on -stable.
The patch is ok for stable.
now I get for the pool with my root:
[r...@morzine libzpool]#
Artem Belevich wrote:
I had the same problem on -current. Try attached patch. It may not
apply cleanly on -stable, but should be easy enough to make equivalent
changes on -stable.
The patch is ok for stable.
now I get for the pool with my root:
[r...@morzine libzpool]# zdb rpool
version=1
I had the same problem on -current. Try attached patch. It may not
apply cleanly on -stable, but should be easy enough to make equivalent
changes on -stable.
--Artem
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Henri Hennebert wrote:
> Kip Macy wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote
Kip Macy wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
I will be MFC'ing the newer ZFS support some time this afternoon. Both
world and kernel will need to be re-built. Existing pools will
continue to work without upgrade.
If you choose to upgrade a pool to take advantage of new fea
Kip Macy wrote:
I haven't looked at the panic yet, but adding a USB quirk (no
SYNCHRONIZE_CACHE) would certainly reduce the noise in your logs.
Thanks for this hint.
I patch usbdevs and umass.c. No more noise but more interesting, now I
can complete install on my usb key without deadlock or cr
I haven't looked at the panic yet, but adding a USB quirk (no
SYNCHRONIZE_CACHE) would certainly reduce the noise in your logs.
-Kip
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 4:16 AM, Henri Hennebert wrote:
> Kip Macy wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
>>>
>>> I will be MFC'ing the new
Kip Macy wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
I will be MFC'ing the newer ZFS support some time this afternoon. Both
world and kernel will need to be re-built. Existing pools will
continue to work without upgrade.
If you choose to upgrade a pool to take advantage of new fea
On 22.05.2009, at 11:45, Pertti Kosunen wrote:
Kirk Strauser wrote:
So far so good here (amd64, Core2 Duo, ICH9 SATA) but I'm too
chicken to upgrade the on-disk format yet.
Me too, upgraded pool to v13 yesterday and everything still ok.
Removed also all loader.conf tunables. Many thanks f
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Pertti Kosunen
wrote:
> Me too, upgraded pool to v13 yesterday and everything still ok. Removed also
> all loader.conf tunables. Many thanks for FreeBSD team.
what about i386? does it still need tunables?
--
Alberto Villa
___
Kirk Strauser wrote:
So far so good here (amd64, Core2 Duo, ICH9 SATA) but I'm too chicken to
upgrade the on-disk format yet.
Me too, upgraded pool to v13 yesterday and everything still ok. Removed
also all loader.conf tunables. Many thanks for FreeBSD team.
(Tyan Tank GT20, 2GB memory, ICH7
On 5/21/09 4:15 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
Your snapshots are using two thirds of your used capacity. 'df' only
knows about the mounted file system.
Cheers,
Kip
On that subject, if anyone isn't aware this version of zfs has nicer
space accounting.
you should check out the output of
zfs list -o
> I did an update on one of my less critical boxes today. I upgraded the
> version as well to lucky 13 :) So far so good! I am rsyncing a few hundred
> GB to it now. One thing I noticed, and not sure if this is normal because
> of the compression, the capacity shows 31%, df shows 13%
Your sna
At 03:35 PM 5/21/2009, Kirk Strauser wrote:
On Wednesday 20 May 2009 06:43:13 pm Kip Macy wrote:
> The MFC went in r192498. Please let me know if you have any problems.
So far so good here (amd64, Core2 Duo, ICH9 SATA) but I'm too chicken to
upgrade the on-disk format yet.
I did an update on
All looking good here - 3rd DNS server is now running new ZFS with an
upgraded pool, and I jsut did a server in the office which is running
a database and filesderver, also upgrading the pool. These are all amd64
systems, and the vm backpressure system seems to work nicely - in that
the kernel memo
On Wednesday 20 May 2009 06:43:13 pm Kip Macy wrote:
> The MFC went in r192498. Please let me know if you have any problems.
So far so good here (amd64, Core2 Duo, ICH9 SATA) but I'm too chicken to
upgrade the on-disk format yet.
--
Kirk Strauser
___
Henri Hennebert wrote:
Kip Macy wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
I will be MFC'ing the newer ZFS support some time this afternoon. Both
world and kernel will need to be re-built. Existing pools will
continue to work without upgrade.
If you choose to upgrade a pool to t
Kip Macy wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
I will be MFC'ing the newer ZFS support some time this afternoon. Both
world and kernel will need to be re-built. Existing pools will
continue to work without upgrade.
If you choose to upgrade a pool to take advantage of new fea
Navdeep Parhar wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
Not really a problem but a question: Is the v13 on-disk format
exactly the same as that used by Solaris/Opensolaris?
It is supposed to be. The sources are the same. However, I have not
tested interoperability.
Does this
2009/5/21 Kip Macy :
> The MFC went in r192498. Please let me know if you have any problems.
> - zfs boot for all types now works
Is it possible to boot from ZFS without ufs boot partition?
zfsboot was added but is not build, gptzfsboot is not in tree.
--
Artis Caune
Everything should
>> Please, fix 4 times repetition of all its content in
>> stable/7/cddl/compat/opensolaris/include/libshare.h.
>>
>
> The same:
> stable/7/sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris/sys/pathname.h
> stable/7/sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris/sys/kidmap.h
> stable/7/sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris/sys/file.h
>
fixed by r1
2009/5/21 pluknet :
> 2009/5/21 Kip Macy :
>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
>>> I will be MFC'ing the newer ZFS support some time this afternoon. Both
>>> world and kernel will need to be re-built. Existing pools will
>>> continue to work without upgrade.
>>>
>>>
>>> If you choo
2009/5/21 Kip Macy :
> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
>> I will be MFC'ing the newer ZFS support some time this afternoon. Both
>> world and kernel will need to be re-built. Existing pools will
>> continue to work without upgrade.
>>
>>
>> If you choose to upgrade a pool to take
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
>> Not really a problem but a question: Is the v13 on-disk format
>> exactly the same as that used by Solaris/Opensolaris?
>
> It is supposed to be. The sources are the same. However, I have not
> tested interoperability.
>
>
>> Does this make
>> i
> Not really a problem but a question: Is the v13 on-disk format
> exactly the same as that used by Solaris/Opensolaris?
It is supposed to be. The sources are the same. However, I have not
tested interoperability.
> Does this make
> it possible to have a ZFS-only dual boot system running FreeBS
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kip Macy wrote:
>> I will be MFC'ing the newer ZFS support some time this afternoon. Both
>> world and kernel will need to be re-built. Existing pools will
>> continue to work without upgrade.
>>
>>
>> If you choo
36 matches
Mail list logo
