similar to: ZFS but how?

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 4000 matches similar to: "ZFS but how?"

2007 Jun 09
41
zfs reports small st_size for directories?
Why does ZFS report such small directory sizes? For example, take a maildir directory with ten entries: total 2385 drwx------ 8 17121 vmail 10 Jun 8 23:50 . drwx--x--x 14 root root 14 May 12 2006 .. drwx------ 5 17121 vmail 5 May 25 18:16 .Trash drwx------ 5 17121 staff 6 Jun 9 00:01 .testing -rw------- 1 17121 staff 0 Jun
2008 Oct 01
2
Sidebar re ABI stability (was Segmentation fault / core dump)
Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote > Linux does not implement stable kernel interfaces. It may be that there is > an intention to do so but I''ve seen problems on Linux resulting from > self-incompatibility on a regular base. To be precise, Linus tries hard to prevent ABI changes in the system call interfaces exported from the kernel, but the glibc team had defeated
2005 Dec 21
6
Writting 0s
Hello zfs-discuss, When compression is set to on for a givef file system, then if block contains only 0s "nothing" is writen. I wonder if it would be beneficial if ZFS behaves that way not only for block which are going to be compressed but for all block regardless of compression. Or perhaps making this simple check would too much impact CPU for normal data? ? --
2007 Apr 13
57
ZFS for Linux (NO LISCENCE talk, please)
Hello. I''m a nobody. I use Linux. I have a hard-drive. I want the best / sexiest / what ever fs for my hard-drive, as it isn''t one of those flashy flash drives, which I presume don''t need an fs (???). I was THRILLED that the ZFS for Linux thread started. And, I was equally horrified (and sufficiently annoyed that I am starting this new thread) when it degraded in to
2008 Nov 06
45
''zfs recv'' is very slow
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 hi, i have two systems, A (Solaris 10 update 5) and B (Solaris 10 update 6). i''m using ''zfs send -i'' to replicate changes on A to B. however, the ''zfs recv'' on B is running extremely slowly. if i run the zfs send on A and redirect output to a file, it sends at 2MB/sec. but when i use ''zfs send
2008 Feb 21
37
Preferred backup s/w
Hi all, What is the current preferred method for backing up ZFS data pools, preferably using free ($0.00) software, and assuming that access to individual files (a la ufsbackup/ufsrestore) is required? TIA, -- Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member CEO, My Online Home Inventory URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer
2008 Dec 08
5
How to use mbuffer with zfs send/recv
>> How do i compile mbuffer for our system, Thanks to Mike Futerko for help with the compile, i now have it installed OK. >> and what syntax to i use to invoke it within the zfs send recv? Still looking for answers to this one? Any example syntax, gotchas etc would be much appreciated. -- Kind regards, Jules free. open. honest. love. kindness. generosity. energy. frenetic.
2013 Aug 17
6
k3b -> cddb doesn't work
Copying a CD with k3b is no problem, except I want to include on my copy the cbbd data (from freedb.org). I've configured k3b's cddb section according to instructions at <http://www.freedb.org/en/faq.3.html#15> and read every article google could find about "k3b cddb freedb.org config", but still k3b can't manage it. Grip handles getting the cddb data just fine.
2005 Nov 23
14
ACL issues with ZFS
ZFS introduces a new and incompatible ACL interface into Solaris and this seems to be not yet fully completed in addition to the fact that is causes a lot of problems for software that needs to be compatible with Solaris-2.5 like star. Proof for incompatibility: create a file on UFS and set an ACL for this file. Use Sun tar cpf out file to archive this file. Unpack this archive file on ZFS
2015 Apr 27
2
Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
<m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: > Ah. I don't remember if I was using csh, or ksh, and didn't realize about > bash. I *think* I vaguely remember that sh seemed to be more capable than > I remembered. If you like to check what the Bourne Shell did support in the late 1980s, I recommend you to fetch recent Schily tools from:
2015 Apr 27
4
Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > On Apr 27, 2015, at 4:38 AM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > > This is the SVr4 Bourne Shell, so you need to take into account what has been > > added with Svr4: > > Is there any difference between your osh and the Heirloom Bourne Shell? > >
2005 Nov 25
28
ZFS and memcntl(..., MC_SYNC, ...)
It wouldn''t be proper to start my first post here without congratulations and thanks to the ZFS team for such an impressive piece of work. Anyway, on to my query. I''ve been trying out ZFS, with a particular focus in reducing latency in a specific application. This application has a fair amount of random writing going on in the background (which, of course, ZFS will make
2009 Mar 11
2
ext4 bug & zfs handling of the very same situation
Hi, there was recently a bug reported against EXT4 that gets triggered by KDE: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/317781 Now I''d like to verify that my understanding of ZFS behavior and implementations is correct, and ZFS is unaffected from this kind of issue. Maybe somebody would like to comment on this. The underlying problem with ext4 is that some kde
2006 Apr 27
5
Porting ZFS to OSX
Here''s some exciting news! Chris Emura, the Filesystem Development Manager within Apple''s CoreOS organization is interested in porting ZFS to OS X. For more information, please e-mail him directly at cemura at apple.com. Speaking for the zfs team (at Sun), this is great news and we fully support the effort. my powerbook hungers for ZFS, eric This message posted from
2012 Aug 16
6
vi defaults in 6.x
When I use copy/paste text into a window running vi, if there is a single line starting with '#', in the pasted content, it adds a # to all subsequent lines and indents each an additional level. Is there some way to eliminate this bizarre behavior, preferably globally and permanently so I don't have to repeat some change for every machine/user where I might log in? -- Les
2008 Oct 31
14
questions on zfs backups
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:05 PM, Richard Elling <Richard.Elling at sun.com> wrote: > Philip Brown wrote: >> I''ve recently started down the road of production use for zfs, and am hitting my head on some paradigm shifts. I''d like to clarify whether my understanding is correct, and/or whether there are better ways of doing things. >> I have one question for
2015 Apr 24
2
Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:32:45AM -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: > Wasn't Solaris, which for awhile at least, was probably the most popular > Unix, using ksh by default? Solaris /bin/sh was a real real dumb version of the bourne shell. Solaris included /bin/ksh as part of the core distribution (ksh88 was a part of the SVr4 specification) and so many scripts were written with #!/bin/ksh at
2015 Apr 24
4
Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:38:25AM -0400, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Fascinating. As I'd been in Sun OS, and started doing admin work when it > became Solaris, I'd missed that bit. A question: did the license agreement > include payment, or was it just restrictive on distribution? In 1990, when I started using ksh88, it was totally commercial. Binaries were $$$ and source was
2015 May 29
7
Native ZFS on Linux
I have a question that has been puzzling me for some time ... what is the reason RedHat chose to go with btrfs rather than working with the ZFS-on-Linux folks (now OpenZFS)? Is it a licensing issue, political, etc? Although btrfs is making progress, ZFS is far more mature, has a few more stable features (especially Raid-z3) and has worked flawlessly for me on CentOS-6 and Scientific Linux-6.
2015 Apr 27
4
Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Always Learning <centos at u64.u22.net> wrote: > > > >> Yes, in english, 'work as a whole' does mean complete. And the normal > >> interpretation is that it covers everything linked into the same > >> process at runtime unless there is an alternate