> It would appear that the bus bandwidth is limited to about 10MB/sec
> (~80Mbps) which is well below the theoretical 400Mbps that 1394 is
> supposed to be able to handle. I know that these two disks can go
> significantly higher since I was seeing 30MB/sec when they were used on
> Macs previously
> "k" == Khyron writes:
k> FireWire is an Apple technology, so they have a vested
k> interest in making sure it works well [...] They could even
k> have a specific chipset that they exclusively use in their
k> systems,
yes, you keep repeating yourselves, but there are o
The point I think Bob was making is that FireWire is an Apple technology, so
they have a vested interest in making sure it works well on their systems
and
with their OS. They could even have a specific chipset that they
exclusively
use in their systems, although I don't see why others couldn't so
On 19 Mar 2010, at 15:30, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010, Khyron wrote:
>> Getting better FireWire performance on OpenSolaris would be nice though.
>> Darwin drivers are open...hmmm.
>
> OS-X is only (legally) used on Apple hardware. Has anyone considered that
> since Firewire is
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010, Khyron wrote:
Getting better FireWire performance on OpenSolaris would be nice though.
Darwin drivers are open...hmmm.
OS-X is only (legally) used on Apple hardware. Has anyone considered
that since Firewire is important to Apple, they may have selected a
particular Fire
Funny, I thought the same thing up until a couple of years ago when I
thought Apple should have bought Sun :-)
Cordialement,
Erik Ableson
+33.6.80.83.58.28
Envoyé depuis mon iPhone
On 19 mars 2010, at 09:41, Khyron wrote:
Of course, I'm the only person I know who said that Sun should have
I'm also a Mac user. I use Mozy instead of DropBox, but it sounds like
DropBox should get a place at the table. I'm about to download it in a few
minutes.
I'm right now re-cloning my internal HD due to some HFS+ weirdness. I
have to completely agree that ZFS would be a great addition to MacOS X
On Mar 18, 2010, at 14:23, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010, erik.ableson wrote:
Ditto on the Linux front. I was hoping that Solaris would be the
exception, but no luck. I wonder if Apple wouldn't mind lending
one of the driver engineers to OpenSolaris for a few months...
Per
>Apple users have different expectations regarding data loss than Solaris and
>Linux users do.
Come on, no Apple user bashing. Not true, not fair.
Scott
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.o
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010, erik.ableson wrote:
Ditto on the Linux front. I was hoping that Solaris would be the
exception, but no luck. I wonder if Apple wouldn't mind lending one
of the driver engineers to OpenSolaris for a few months...
Perhaps the issue is the filesyst
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010, erik.ableson wrote:
Ditto on the Linux front. I was hoping that Solaris would be the
exception, but no luck. I wonder if Apple wouldn't mind lending one
of the driver engineers to OpenSolaris for a few months...
Perhaps the issue is the filesystem rather than the drive
On 18 mars 2010, at 16:58, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> On Thu, March 18, 2010 04:50, erik.ableson wrote:
>
>> It would appear that the bus bandwidth is limited to about 10MB/sec
>> (~80Mbps) which is well below the theoretical 400Mbps that 1394 is
>> supposed to be able to handle. I know that thes
On Thu, March 18, 2010 04:50, erik.ableson wrote:
>
> It would appear that the bus bandwidth is limited to about 10MB/sec
> (~80Mbps) which is well below the theoretical 400Mbps that 1394 is
> supposed to be able to handle. I know that these two disks can go
> significantly higher since I was se
An interesting thing I just noticed here testing out some Firewire drives with
OpenSolaris.
Setup :
OpenSolaris 2009.06 and a dev version (snv_129)
2 500Gb Firewire 400 drives with integrated hubs for daisy-chaining (net: 4
devices on the chain)
- one SATA bridge
- one PATA bridge
Created a zp
14 matches
Mail list logo
