Hi Jens,
> > what i was actually after was patchadd log (ie. the
> messages output to terminal)
>
> Up to now I thought, that stderr and stdout are
> redirected from patchadd
> to the patchlog, but never checked in detail, since
> the log always had
> the info I needed ...
>
messages from the u
Richard Elling wrote:
> Chris Gerhard wrote:
>> My home server running snv_94 is tipping with the same assertion when
>> someone list a particular file:
>>
>
> Failed assertions indicate software bugs. Please file one.
We learn something new every day!
Gavin
__
Peter Tribble wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Anyone who follows this list we have seen a number of issues with
>> Solaris 10 and ZFS from me this week.
>>
>> We deployed Solaris 10 for the usual conservative reasons, support and
>> stabilit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> I thought to look at df output before rebooting, and there are PAGES & PAGES
> like this:
>
>/var/run/.patchSafeModeOrigFiles/usr/platform/FJSV,GPUZC-M/lib/libcpc.so.1
7597264 85240 7512024 2%/usr/platform/FJSV,GPUZC-M/lib/libcpc.so.1
> . . .
> Hundreds of moun
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone who follows this list we have seen a number of issues with
> Solaris 10 and ZFS from me this week.
>
> We deployed Solaris 10 for the usual conservative reasons, support and
> stability. Most of my my ZFS experience
I noticed this while patching to 137137-09 on a UFS Sparc today:
Patch 137137-09 has been successfully installed.
See /var/run/.patchSafeMode/root/var/sadm/patch/137137-09/log for details
Executing postpatch script...
Detected SVM root.
Installing bootblk on /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0s0
Installing bootblk o
On 11/08/08 15:24, Jesus Cea wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Any advice?. Suggestions/alternative approaches welcomed.
One obvious question - why?
Two reasons:
The SXCE code base really only supports BEs that are
either all in one dataset, or have ever
Personally, I did ZFS Mirroring for the boot and RAID-Z2 for the data.
The primary reason I did ZFS Mirroring instead of HW Mirroring for the boot
is that my motherboard did the hybrid hw raid and required reboot to fix it
in case of failure. With ZFS mirroring, it's hot swappable.
Malachi
On Tu
On 11/18/2008 1:04 PM, Raymond Scott wrote:
> I'm very glad to see ZFS for boot available now. We have begun to use
> X4150 servers and had settled on using the built-in HW RAID for mirroring
> the drives in pairs. Two for Boot, two for data etc...
>
> Is it a good idea to first create a HW RAID mi
On 11/18/2008 12:14 PM, shanna wrote:
> hmm same problem with rsync occuring here (on sun os 5.10) : we tried
> using both rsync from sun freeware, and recompiling rsync from
> source.
>
> errors, e.g.: rsync: readlink_stat ("filename") failed: Value too
> large for defined data type (79)
>
> When
Miles Nordin wrote:
> mb> if I'm risking it more than usual when the procedure is done?
>
> yeah, that is my opinion: when the procedure is done, using ZFS
> without a backup is risking the data more than using UFS or ext3
> without a backup. Is that a clear statement?
>
>
> I can ramble on, b
I'm very glad to see ZFS for boot available now. We have begun to use
X4150 servers and had settled on using the built-in HW RAID for mirroring
the drives in pairs. Two for Boot, two for data etc...
Is it a good idea to first create a HW RAID mirror and then install the OS
using
ZFS on that RA
hmm same problem with rsync occuring here (on sun os 5.10) : we tried using
both rsync from sun freeware, and recompiling rsync from source.
errors, e.g.: rsync: readlink_stat ("filename") failed: Value too large for
defined data type (79)
When nfs mounting these files, fedora rsync handles th
> "ah" == Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
ah> If you want a small system that is pre-built, look at every
ah> possible permutation/combination of the Dell Vostro 200 box.
I guess Dell is backing out of this and a few other flashy bargains:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/technolog
Is the web interface on the appliance available for download or will it make it
to opensolaris sometime in the near future?
thanks
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensola
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> >BTW: a lot of numbers in Solaris did not grow since a long time and
> >thus create problems now. Just think about the maxphys values
> >63 kB on x86 does not even allow to write a single BluRay disk sector
> >with a single transfer.
>
>
> Any "fixed value" will
16 matches
Mail list logo
