okay this was meant to go to the list... i thought i had, its a work
around to the problem.
that people can use untill Sun engineers fix it.
James
-- Forwarded message --
From: James Dickens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: May 27, 2006 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: Re: Life
Chris Csanady writes:
> On 5/26/06, Bart Smaalders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > There are two failure modes associated with disk write caches:
>
> Failure modes aside, is there any benefit to a write cache when command
> queueing is available? It seems that the primary advantage is i
Hi,
the current discussion on how to implement "undo" seems to circulate around
concepts and tweaks for replacing any "rm" like action with "mv" and then
fix the problems associated with namespaces, ACLs etc.
Why not use snapshots?
A snapshot-oriented implementation of undo would:
- Create a s
Hi,
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Over coffee with a colleague (cc'd) we were talking about the problem of
taking advantage of ZFS over NFS (or CIFS) from a non Solaris machine.
We already have the .zfs/snapshot dir and this is great. One of the
other areas was knowing the settings on your data set a
Hello Constantin,
On 5/29/06, Constantin Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
the current discussion on how to implement "undo" seems to circulate around
concepts and tweaks for replacing any "rm" like action with "mv" and then
fix the problems associated with namespaces, ACLs etc.
Why not
Hello Halstead:
I got the same error... however i tried to debug that jsp. but it seems not
work to me @_@
anyone knows how to solve this problem ?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
ht
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Segate has released the ST3750640AS 750 GB sata drive.
>> I would like to take two of these and plug in to a the Nvidia Nforce 4
>> Sata I/F an run Zfs on . ( I have installed SXCR build 40 on a shuttle
>> SNP25 PC last weekend with some install probl
Where are properties of a ZFS filesystem stored (e.g. non-default
mountpoints, quota, reservation,
compression, exported shares etc.)?
Do backup/restore mechanisms (zfs send/receive, Networker/NetBackup/TSM,
*tar etc.)
handle (save/restore) them automagically or are there additional
procedures
int sharing issues in bios 1.0c,
[XSDT] v1 OEM ID [A M I ] OEM TABLE ID [OEMXSDT ] OEM rev 9000514
[FACP] v3 OEM ID [A M I ] OEM TABLE ID [OEMFACP ] OEM rev 9000514
[DSDT](id5) - 859 Objects with 89 Devices 277 Methods 17 Regions
[APIC] v1 OEM ID [A M I ] OEM TABLE ID [OEMAPIC ] OEM
An earlier response from Matt Ahrens, to a similar question:
> 'zfs backup/restore' (now 'zfs send/receive') currently only sends the
> filesystem's contents, and not its settings. This is useful if, for
> example, you want to use different settings on the remote side (eg. turn
> on compression)
Jeff Victor wrote:
An earlier response from Matt Ahrens, to a similar question:
> 'zfs backup/restore' (now 'zfs send/receive') currently only sends the
> filesystem's contents, and not its settings. This is useful if, for
> example, you want to use different settings on the remote side (eg.
Yes, a trivial wrapper could:
1. Store all property values in a file in the fs
2. zfs send...
3. zfs receive...
4. Set all the properties stored in that file
Franz Haberhauer wrote:
Jeff Victor wrote:
An earlier response from Matt Ahrens, to a similar question:
> 'zfs backup/restore' (now 'zf
Jeff Victor wrote:
Yes, a trivial wrapper could:
1. Store all property values in a file in the fs
2. zfs send...
3. zfs receive...
4. Set all the properties stored in that file
IMHO 3. and 4. need to be swapped - otherwise e.g. files will
not be compressed when restored.
- Franz
Franz Habe
UNIX admin wrote:
>
> > There's still an opening in the shared filesystem
> > space (multi-reader
> > and multi-writer). Fix QFS, or extend ZFS?
>
> That one's a no-brainer, innit? Extend ZFS and plough on.
Uhm... I think this is not that easy. Based on IRC feedback I think it
may be difficult t
Hi!
Will the initial ZFS root filesystem putback include support for system
suspend (see sys-suspend(1M)) on SPARC ?
Bye,
Roland
--
__ . . __
(o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
\__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
/O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090
(;O/ \/ \
Yep, thanks for digging that up. FYI, this is RFE 6421959 "want zfs
send to preserve properties ('zfs send -p')".
--matt
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 02:21:44PM -0400, Jeff Victor wrote:
> An earlier response from Matt Ahrens, to a similar question:
>
> > 'zfs backup/restore' (now 'zfs send/receive'
Is the idea of 'zfs send -p' to only send the properities in addition to
the content or
without content? Actually I would expect sending the poperties as the
default for send
and an option for receive not to apply the properties - and have an
option (-p) for
send to send only the properties e.g.
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 04:11:13AM +0200, Franz Haberhauer wrote:
> Is the idea of 'zfs send -p' to only send the properities in addition
> to the content or without content? Actually I would expect sending the
> poperties as the default for send and an option for receive not to
> apply the propert
Constantin Gonzalez wrote On 05/29/06 02:50,:
Hi,
the current discussion on how to implement "undo" seems to circulate around
concepts and tweaks for replacing any "rm" like action with "mv" and then
fix the problems associated with namespaces, ACLs etc.
Why not use snapshots?
A snapshot-ori
On 5/23/06, Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 04:47:07PM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
> Now if what you really mean is snapshot on file closure I think you
> might well be on to something useful. Whats more NTFS has some cool
> stuff in this area for consolidat
>UNIX admin wrote:
>>
>> > There's still an opening in the shared filesystem
>> > space (multi-reader
>> > and multi-writer). Fix QFS, or extend ZFS?
>>
>> That one's a no-brainer, innit? Extend ZFS and plough on.
>
>Uhm... I think this is not that easy. Based on IRC feedback I think it
>may be
21 matches
Mail list logo
