Timo wrote: >> From: <m.roth at 5-cent.us> >> Sent: 18.2.'10, 18:55 >> Timo wrote: >>> ------- Original message ------- >>>> From: <m.roth at 5-cent.us> >>>> Sent: 18.2.'10, 18:21 >>>>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Henry Ritzlmayr >>>>> <fedora-list at rc0.at>wrote: >>>>>> nate wrote: >>>>> > <snip> >> a) I'm talking about >> work; > > ..my systems at work. > >> b) My manager, my co-worker, and myself support nearly 200 servers, >> including 5 clusters. > > Roughly the same numbers here - and that's the CentOS boxen only, not to > mention xBSD, Solaris, and AIX machines. Yeah, we have a few Solaris boxes, a mind-boggler SGI, and (I kid you not) some VMS systems. > > IMHO one of the main reasons for running (Open)Solaris for most people > (read: those w/o having to run Solaris due to historical reasons) do so > because of ZFS. > > XFS has different feature sets, strenghts and weaknesses, but the > advantage of both XFS and ZFS is their total lack of fsck hassles, > compared to extN. > >> Some people that we support "only" run jobs that go >> for 2-4 days, but there was the guy who was running a job that I had to >> wait until it was finished to reboot the NFS server with his home >> directory... and I waited ->two weeks<-. > > So, where's exactly the connection to underlying file systems? It was dumping large amounts of data into his home directory... which was NFS mounted from the server I needed to reboot. > >> Then there's the question of how we'd migrate. >> >> Sorry, time for a real world check. > > One of my most favorite jokes is to begin IT related discussions with 'in > an ideal world'... ;) *chuckle* <snip> mark