Chris Samuel wrote:
- "Joe Landman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think I understand why they don't want benchmarks published.
:-)
Don't forget that FreeBSD 7 includes ZFS support, so
there's another option for you there.
Not sure we can do this, as the user is looking at Linux and Sola
- "Joe Landman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think I understand why they don't want benchmarks published.
:-)
Don't forget that FreeBSD 7 includes ZFS support, so
there's another option for you there.
http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFS
https://www.ish.com.au/solutions/articles/freebsdzfs
> I
Chris Samuel wrote:
Don't know if you realise this, but you have to get written
permission from Sun before being able to publish any Solaris
10 benchmarks..
http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/licensing/sla.xml
Ugh .. no I didn't. Thanks.
Posting of results removed from blog.
I think I und
- "Joe Landman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi folks:
Hi Joe,
>Investigating zfs on a Solaris 10 5/08 loaded JackRabbit for a
> customer. [...]
>
>I am looking for ways to tune zfs, or even Solaris so we can
> hopefully get to parity with Linux (less than 50% of Linux performance
On 4 Jul 2008, at 10:11 pm, R P Herrold wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008, Tim Cutts wrote:
If upgrading packages wrecks the system, then the package
installation scripts are broken. They should spot the upgrade in
progress and take appropriate action, depending on the previously
installed vers
Hi folks:
Investigating zfs on a Solaris 10 5/08 loaded JackRabbit for a
customer. zfs performance isn't that good relative to Linux on this
same hardware (literally a reboot between the two environments)
I am looking for ways to tune zfs, or even Solaris so we can
hopefully get to pari
In my data management exploits, I'm inclined to have first-tier (iSCSI)
disk, second-tier (AoE) disk, and third-tier (remote site) storage. If
I can manage the remote site as another storage server farm, with
rotating media, great. If I can manage it with robotic tape, great. I
still duplica
what i dont understand is why someone would want to invest in something that
is already quite expensive instead of using a method which is not expensive
and in a way provides double redundency.
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Chris Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - "John Hearns" <[EMAIL
- "John Hearns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - the smart thing being that any files which are unchanged since the
> last backup are links to the first copy of the file. So your vault
> size does not grow and grow endlessly. You can roll back to any given
> date.
FWIW BackupPC claims to do th
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 09:10 +0200, Geoff Galitz wrote:
> Backing up to tape allows you to go back to a specific point in
> history. Particularly useful if you need to recover a file that has
> become corrupted or you need to rollback to a specific stage and you
> are unaware of that fact for a few
- "Jon Aquilina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> would it be possible to back up to tape as well as raided hdd array?
Of course, this has been a feature of various backup
systems (free and proprietary) for many years.
cheers!
Chris
--
Christopher Samuel - (03) 9925 4751 - Systems Manager
The
- "Tim Cutts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> clusterssh gets a little unwieldy with more than 30 or so
> machines at a time, even if you set the xterm font to eye-wateringly
> small and have a monitor the size of a football pitch.
This was pretty much the conclusion of the folks who
were us
- "Joe Landman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah ... can't escape this. I like some of the elements of
> Ubuntu/Debian better than I do RHEL (the network configuration
> in Debian is IMO sane, while in RHEL/Centos/SuSE it is not).
> There are some aspects that are worse (no /etc/profile.d
- "Mark Hahn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I was hoping for some discussion of concrete issues. for
> instance,
> >> I have the impression debian uses something other than sysvinit -
> >> does that work out well?
> >>
> > Debian uses standard sysvinit-style scripts in /etc/init.d,
> /etc/
- "Jon Aquilina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> one thing must not be forgotten though. in regards to pkging stuff for
> the ubuntu variation once someone like you and me you upload it for
> someone higher up on the chain to check and upload to the servers. so
> basically someone is checking wh
resistance is futile :p
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Chris Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - "Joe Landman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > eeek!! something named local is shared???
>
> No, /usr/local is local to the cluster, the compute
> nodes are just drones in the Borg collecti
- "Joe Landman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> eeek!! something named local is shared???
No, /usr/local is local to the cluster, the compute
nodes are just drones in the Borg collective. ;-)
--
Christopher Samuel - (03) 9925 4751 - Systems Manager
The Victorian Partnership for Advanced Com
- "Robert G. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...and it can break the hell out of the elaborate
> dependency system if you go installing random libraries
> in e.g. /usr/local
Oh indeed, our current method is to use:
/usr/local/$package/$version
and then use Modules to let people set up
- "Jon Aquilina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> that also applies to the k/ubuntu as well it used to
> be you can edit the source list and do a complete
> dist upgrade. now that has change and requires the
> alternate installation cd.
Er, no it doesn't.
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Hardy
19 matches
Mail list logo
