Reco writes:
>> One of the disadvantages with mdadm is that it can severely impact
>> performance.
>
> Agreed. Still, I view RAID as a disaster prevention tool first, and any
> performance increases come only second if they do at all.
Yes --- disk failures are so frequent that there's no way to
On 19/10/14 00:14, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 12:06:17 +0400
> Reco wrote:
>
>> Hi.
>>
>> On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 18:24:16 -0400
>> Steve Litt wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 03:00:26 +0200
>>> lee wrote:
>>>
>>>
But when it eats files and is 10 years behind, why are people
>>>
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 12:06:17 +0400
Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 18:24:16 -0400
> Steve Litt wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 03:00:26 +0200
> > lee wrote:
> >
> >
> > > But when it eats files and is 10 years behind, why are people
> > > buying it?
> > >
> > > So how can we sa
Hi.
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 18:24:16 -0400
Steve Litt wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 03:00:26 +0200
> lee wrote:
>
>
> > But when it eats files and is 10 years behind, why are people buying
> > it?
> >
> > So how can we safely store large amounts of data?
>
> I thought Postgres was supposed to b
Hi.
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 03:00:26 +0200
lee wrote:
> Reco writes:
>
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 03:33:15AM +0200, lee wrote:
> >> > A correct guess. A recommended minimum is kernel 3.14 - [2].
> >>
> >> So this is a rather new feature. How reliable and how well does it
> >> work?
> >
> > I w
Steve Litt writes:
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 03:00:26 +0200
> lee wrote:
>
>
>> But when it eats files and is 10 years behind, why are people buying
>> it?
>>
>> So how can we safely store large amounts of data?
>
> I thought Postgres was supposed to be powerful, stable, reliable, and
> great for l
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 03:00:26 +0200
lee wrote:
> But when it eats files and is 10 years behind, why are people buying
> it?
>
> So how can we safely store large amounts of data?
I thought Postgres was supposed to be powerful, stable, reliable, and
great for lots of data.
SteveT
Steve Litt
John Holland writes:
> I don't see zfs as super fast, lvm based raid would be faster. But
> the snapshots and other features are awesome. I love cloning a vm
> instantly.
And not to forget the checksumming :)
The checksumming is the nicer the more data you store. But seriously
store large amo
John Holland writes:
> http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#WhatKernelVersionsAreSupported
"Debian 7.0 (Wheezy) - x86_64"
Unfortunately, that isn't sufficiently recent.
--
Again we must be afraid of speaking of daemons for fear that daemons
might swallow us. Finally, this fear has become reasonab
Reco writes:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 03:33:15AM +0200, lee wrote:
>> > A correct guess. A recommended minimum is kernel 3.14 - [2].
>>
>> So this is a rather new feature. How reliable and how well does it
>> work?
>
> I wouldn't trust my data to that feature :) It has 'experimental' and
> 'bi
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 03:33:15AM +0200, lee wrote:
> > A correct guess. A recommended minimum is kernel 3.14 - [2].
>
> So this is a rather new feature. How reliable and how well does it
> work?
I wouldn't trust my data to that feature :) It has 'experimental' and
'biohazard' labels strapped e
http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#WhatKernelVersionsAreSupported
On October 10, 2014 9:20:50 PM EDT, lee wrote:
>John Holland writes:
>
>> I'm having very good results using their repo and DKMS system to
>build
>> support into kernel modules. It's very easy to set up. I'm using it
>> with Linux 3.2
I've been running Zfsonlinux.org zfs on debian for maybe two years. I don't
have root fs on zfs. I keep a working copy of the system dirs I have mounted on
zfs on ext3. (Var and usr). ONE time, the dkms had problems and I was glad I
had those extra copies (rsync from the zfs ones in a cron job)
Reco writes:
> Hi.
>
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 03:20:50 +0200
> lee wrote:
>
>> > The license of ZFS makes it impossible to be part of
>> > the kernel per se. The DKMS system is well known for supporting kernel
>> > modules for video and wireless hardware among others.
>>
>> So there isn't really
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI writes:
> On 10/10/2014 10:20 PM, lee wrote:
>>> The license of ZFS makes it impossible to be part of
>>> the kernel per se. The DKMS system is well known for supporting kernel
>>> modules for video and wireless hardware among others.
>> So there isn't really any way to tell
Hi.
On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 03:20:50 +0200
lee wrote:
> > The license of ZFS makes it impossible to be part of
> > the kernel per se. The DKMS system is well known for supporting kernel
> > modules for video and wireless hardware among others.
>
> So there isn't really any way to tell whether it w
On 10/10/2014 10:20 PM, lee wrote:
>> The license of ZFS makes it impossible to be part of
>> the kernel per se. The DKMS system is well known for supporting kernel
>> modules for video and wireless hardware among others.
> So there isn't really any way to tell whether it works or not? Which
> ker
John Holland writes:
> I'm having very good results using their repo and DKMS system to build
> support into kernel modules. It's very easy to set up. I'm using it
> with Linux 3.2.0.
Does it work with Debians 3.16 kernels?
> The license of ZFS makes it impossible to be part of
> the kernel per
18 matches
Mail list logo
