From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id oAO6Gl7m070581 for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:16:47 -0600 Received: from mailsrv14.zmi.at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id CC0231C6CF9A for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 22:18:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailsrv14.zmi.at (mailsrv1.zmi.at [212.69.164.54]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id vBrpAuTCdeJKhRVC for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 22:18:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailsrv.i.zmi.at (h081217106033.dyn.cm.kabsi.at [81.217.106.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mailsrv2.i.zmi.at", Issuer "power4u.zmi.at" (not verified)) by mailsrv14.zmi.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30A24400 for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:18:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from saturn.localnet (saturn.i.zmi.at [10.72.27.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mailsrv.i.zmi.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 38359401C3A for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:18:20 +0100 (CET) From: Michael Monnerie Subject: Re: Xfs delaylog hanged up Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:18:19 +0100 References: <4CEAC412.9000406@shiftmail.org> <20101123234811.0ea3c41c@galadriel.home> <4CEC5E15.7080307@shiftmail.org> In-Reply-To: <4CEC5E15.7080307@shiftmail.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201011240718.19849@zmi.at> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7725974725873108283==" Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com --===============7725974725873108283== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart10687476.L6XcIqtAqJ"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --nextPart10687476.L6XcIqtAqJ Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mittwoch, 24. November 2010 Spelic wrote: > What would be the advantage of using hardware raid? Better broken drive detection (hw raid controllers are more picky than=20 linux), server CPU offload, out-of-band notification of problems, and=20 broken disks don't lead to a non-bootable system - what if your boot=20 disk crashes? =2D-=20 mit freundlichen Gr=FCssen, Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc it-management Internet Services: Prot=E9ger http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee] Tel: +43 660 / 415 6531 // ****** Radiointerview zum Thema Spam ****** // http://www.it-podcast.at/archiv.html#podcast-100716 //=20 // Haus zu verkaufen: http://zmi.at/langegg/ --nextPart10687476.L6XcIqtAqJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkzsrisACgkQzhSR9xwSCbSRfACeP4Uhbmwllu5A4wSInRbsNG1x KUsAoPJlmp0rig2DzGp8hlTlM5AlPed+ =WkfJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart10687476.L6XcIqtAqJ-- --===============7725974725873108283== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs --===============7725974725873108283==--