> > Starfox wrote:
>
> None of the scripts that I looked at seemed to
> offered any sort of error recovery. I think I'll be
> able to use this as a starting point (and maybe the
> man pages can be updated to include that you can use
> any common snapshot to send -i - that fact is not
> obvious t
This missed the group!
-- Forwarded message --
From: BVK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Jun 8, 2007 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Mac OS X "Leopard" to use ZFS
To: Rick Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 6/8/07, Rick Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm hoping for L4, myself.
On 6/8/07, Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
When should we expect Solaris kernel under OS X? 10.6? 10.7? :-)
I think its quite possible. I believe, very soon they will ditch their
Mach based (?) BSD and switch to solaris.
File based CDDL license seems like a right choice to a company li
My Solaris 10 box is exporting a ZFS filesystem over NFS. I'm accessing the
data with a NetBSD 3.1 client, which only supports NFS 3. Everything works
except when I look at the .zfs/snapshot directory. The first time I list out
the .zfs/snapshot directory, I get a correct listing of the conte
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 08:38:10PM -0300, Toby Thain wrote:
> When should we expect Solaris kernel under OS X? 10.6? 10.7? :-)
I'm hoping for L4, myself.
http://ertos.nicta.com.au/software/darbat/
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-dis
Just got the latest ;login: and Pawel has an article on "Porting the
Solaris ZFS File System to the FreeBSD Operating System".
Lots of interesting stuff in there, such as the differences between
OpenSolaris and FreeBSD, as well as getting ZFS to work with FreeBSD
jails (a new 'jailed' prope
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 08:38:10PM -0300, Toby Thain wrote:
> When should we expect Solaris kernel under OS X? 10.6? 10.7? :-)
I'm sure Jonathan will be announcing that soon. ;-)
Adam
--
Adam Leventhal, Solaris Kernel Development http://blogs.sun.com/ahl
__
On 7-Jun-07, at 8:13 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
On June 7, 2007 6:37:29 PM -0300 Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 7-Jun-07, at 6:28 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
On June 7, 2007 6:21:34 PM -0300 Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
In general, IMHO this will be good for ZFS: Apple won't s
On June 7, 2007 6:37:29 PM -0300 Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7-Jun-07, at 6:28 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
On June 7, 2007 6:21:34 PM -0300 Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
In general, IMHO this will be good for ZFS: Apple won't ship until
it's
shaken down and idiot proof.
Oh,
> Thanks Darren.
> let me try to put this in points -
>
> 1. ZFS atomic operation that commits data.
> 2. Writes come into the app.
> 3. The db put in hotbackup mode.
> 4. Snapshot taken on storage.
> 5. ZFS atomic operation that commits data.
>
> So if i do a snap restore, ZFS might revert to p
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 8339: stat(".", 0xFFBFF818) = 0
> 8339: d=0x03F50005 i=3 m=0040755 l=3 u=0 g=3 sz=3
> 8339: at = Jun 7 23:11:54 CEST 2007 [ 1181250714 ]
> 8339: mt = Jun 7 23:02:08 CEST 2007 [ 118
After one aborted ufsrestore followed by some cleanup I tried
to restore again but this time ufsrestore faultered with:
bad filesystem block size 2560
The reason was this return value for the stat of "." of the
filesystem:
8339: stat(".", 0xFFBFF818) = 0
8339:
On 7-Jun-07, at 6:28 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
On June 7, 2007 6:21:34 PM -0300 Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
In general, IMHO this will be good for ZFS: Apple won't ship until
it's
shaken down and idiot proof.
Oh, I dunno. Apple ships a lot of buggy stuff.
Not at this level. Rem
On June 7, 2007 6:21:34 PM -0300 Toby Thain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In general, IMHO this will be good for ZFS: Apple won't ship until it's
shaken down and idiot proof.
Oh, I dunno. Apple ships a lot of buggy stuff.
I expect this will result in substantial
quality feedback and patches fro
On 7-Jun-07, at 4:53 PM, Lee Fyock wrote:
Thanks, Chad.
There's some debate in the Mac community about what the phrase "the
file system in Mac OS X" means. Does that mean that machines that
ship with Leopard will run on ZFS discs by default? Will ZFS be the
default file system when initi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it's been assigned CR 6566207 by Linda Bernal. Basically, if you look
at si_intr and read the comments in the code, the bug is pretty
obvious.
si3124 driver's interrupt routine is incorrectly coded. The ddi_put32
that clears the interrupts should be enclosed in an "
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 16:26 -0400, Francois Saint-Jacques wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 11:51:08PM -0700, Erast Benson wrote:
> > More details on NexentaCP will be available soon...
>
> Is it based on Alpha7?
Alpha7 is the Desktop-oriented ISO, however they share the same main APT
repository,
Thanks Darren.
let me try to put this in points -
1. ZFS atomic operation that commits data.
2. Writes come into the app.
3. The db put in hotbackup mode.
4. Snapshot taken on storage.
5. ZFS atomic operation that commits data.
So if i do a snap restore, ZFS might revert to point1, but from the
looks like you used 3 for a total of 15 disks, right?
I have a CM stacker too - I used the CM 4-disks-in-3-5.25"-slots
though. I am currently trying to sell it too, as it is bulky and I
would prefer using eSATA/maybe Firewire/USB enclosures and a small
"controller" machine (like a Shuttle) so it
Thanks, Chad.
There's some debate in the Mac community about what the phrase "the
file system in Mac OS X" means. Does that mean that machines that
ship with Leopard will run on ZFS discs by default? Will ZFS be the
default file system when initializing a new drive?
IMHO, that seems unlik
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 12:10:18PM -0700, eric kustarz wrote:
>
> There's going to be some very good stuff for ZFS in s10u4, can you
> please update the issues *and* features when it comes out?
Yes, and don't forget to add, that the POSIX ACL has been dropped/replaced by
the braindamaged NFS4 A
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Marko Milisavljevic wrote:
Al,
Do you know if this affects Sil3132 cards as well? According to this
I'm sure it would affect any hardware that uses the driver - because
it'll drop interrupts from the device. But I have not verified this
to be the case.
http://www.dan
On Jun 7, 2007, at 12:50 PM, Rick Mann wrote:
From Macintouch (http://macintouch.com/#other.2007.06.07):
---
On stage Wednesday in Washington D.C., Sun Microsystems Inc. CEO
Jonathan Schwartz revealed that his company's open-source ZFS file
system will replace Apple's long-used HFS+ in Ma
>From Macintouch (http://macintouch.com/#other.2007.06.07):
---
On stage Wednesday in Washington D.C., Sun Microsystems Inc. CEO Jonathan
Schwartz revealed that his company's open-source ZFS file system will replace
Apple's long-used HFS+ in Mac OS X 10.5, a.k.a. "Leopard," when the new
operati
> it's been assigned CR 6566207 by Linda Bernal. Basically, if you look
> at si_intr and read the comments in the code, the bug is pretty
> obvious.
>
> si3124 driver's interrupt routine is incorrectly coded. The ddi_put32
> that clears the interrupts should be enclosed in an "else" block,
>
Al,
Do you know if this affects Sil3132 cards as well? According to this
http://www.dansketcher.com/2006/12/09/solaris-sata-chipsets-i-can-run-zsf-with/Sil3124
driver can be persuaded to work with Sil3132 cards with change in
/etc/driver_aliases.
Marko
On 6/7/07, Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
On the third upgrade of the home nas, I chose
http://www.addonics.com/products/raid_system/ae4rcs35nsa.asp to hold the
disks. each hold 5 disks, in the space of three slots and 4 fit into a
http://www.google.com/search?q=stacker+810 case for a total of 20
disks.
But if given a chance to go back
On 6/7/07, Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Erast Benson wrote:
> Announcing new direction of Open Source NexentaOS development:
> NexentaCP (Nexenta Core Platform).
>
> NexentaCP is Dapper/LTS-based core Operating System Platform distributed
> as a single-CD ISO, integra
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Erast Benson wrote:
Announcing new direction of Open Source NexentaOS development:
NexentaCP (Nexenta Core Platform).
NexentaCP is Dapper/LTS-based core Operating System Platform distributed
as a single-CD ISO, integrates Installer/ON/NWS/Debian and provides
basis for Networ
Good news on the si3124 driver bug I mentioned:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2007-May/028487.html
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/storage-discuss/2007-May/001288.html
Roger Fujii, a long time contributor to the Solaris on x86 list
([EMAIL PROTECTED]), root caused the
30 matches
Mail list logo
