easy, Theo. I actually very much agree with you, and had not intended
to stir anything up here. If users wish to get involved in an attempt
(regardless of how hopeless) to encourage third parties to cooperate
with OpenBSD developers, then you can certainly abstain from enabling
that kind of help
I'm not one to condone shitty attitudes.
However, I think in this case it's unfair to claim that one can have
no expectations of OpenBSD with regards to security patches. If I
could have no such expectations, I would not use OpenBSD in the first
place. I have these expectations based on a very i
I have my OpenBSD 4.0 system setup with root on RAID-1 and every
mounted filesystem is also RAID-1 using the raidframe subsystem in the
OpenBSD kernel. THe major problem is that after booting from an
improper shutdown, the system will not attempt to mount any
filesystems until the RAID-1 parity is
Hi, I don't know if you eventually got an answer on this or not, but I
got bit by this with my upgrade to 2.6.17.7 on my linux workstation
and my pf firewall started blocking connections.
Turns out, that pf is not to blame, but a sloppy ruleset (at least in
my case). The thing to check for is to
Howdy folks,
I've been following an example in the Absolute OpenBSD book on how to
setup two separate child queues for traffic going to two different
networks over the same interface.
This server runs OpenBSD 3.8(Generic kernel with raidframe and MP),
has two NICs (internal/external) and serves
I've got a test server with OpenBSD-3.8 on it (GENERIC except with
RAIDFRAME support) and considering the hardware, it does pretty well
with NFS performance. However, I've noticed that when under heavy NFS
load, it becomes nearly unresponsive. Shell sessions take 2-6 seconds
to respond, and top u
this was exactly my thought. I was hoping someone would have some
'official' knowledge, or opinion. I still can't get over having to
wait several hours for my root partition to become available after an
improper shutdown.
On 3/18/06, Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 18,
On 3/17/06, John Eisenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ----- David Wilk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: -
> > Howdy all,
> >
> > I've been testing a 3.8 system with RAIDframe and root on raid in a
> > RAID1 configuration. Performance and stability are
Howdy all,
I've been testing a 3.8 system with RAIDframe and root on raid in a
RAID1 configuration. Performance and stability are quite good, but
there's one thing that's a bit irksome and I wonder if I might not be
doing something right.
I've had a couple crashes (potentially hardware related)
the drives I'm looking at.
thanks,
Dave
On 1/31/06, Tony Del Porto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 29, 2006, at 2:28 PM, David Wilk wrote:
>
> > Howdy all, I was just wondering what SATA support was like in 3.8.
> > Specifically, are there any promise controller a
what bigger isn't always better? how unamerican... : )
thanks alot guys, It's good to hear folks have had good experiences with
it. I've already been bitten with the ungraceful way RAIDframe deals with
misconfigs. man, it panics at the first sign of trouble!
On 1/30/06, Dave Diller <[EMAIL PRO
d-on SATA cards
(promise or otherwise) I'd love to hear it.
thanks!
On 1/29/06, Jonathan Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 04:43:18PM -0600, L. V. Lammert wrote:
> > At 03:28 PM 1/29/2006 -0700, David Wilk wrote:
> > >Howdy all, I was j
I know RAIDframe is not in GENERIC, but I was wondering if anyone could
speak to the stability and reliability of RAIDframe in 3.8. I find myself
really wanting to use software RAID 1 and haven't had any problems in
testing thus far.
Any experiences would be good to hear.
thanks!
Howdy all, I was just wondering what SATA support was like in 3.8.
Specifically, are there any promise controller add-in cards (as opposed to
built-in to mobo) that anyone would recommend? Or, are things as they were
in May of '05 when Theo was less than enthused with then-current SATA
support: ht
14 matches
Mail list logo
