Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 00:29:09 -0400 From: Quartz <quartz@sneakertech.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Storage question Message-ID: <55F10715.3040508@sneakertech.com> In-Reply-To: <55F105B2.2080806@sneakertech.com> References: <55EF3D23.5060009@hiwaay.net> <20150908220639.20412cbd@gumby.homeunix.com> <55EF5409.8020007@yahoo.com> <55EFC2DA.3020101@hiwaay.net> <5EB5C2C2-575B-40BD-BF6A-85F396C058FE@kraus-haus.org> <55F058FC.6080204@hiwaay.net> <B737A47C-FECD-4882-9B57-DDF1B29FCDDF@kraus-haus.org> <55F09924.2000007@hiwaay.net> <67BE98EB-AD0F-46C2-AF26-02C65D828DCF@kraus-haus.org> <55F105B2.2080806@sneakertech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Note also the “dnr” datasets :-) > > Btw, you seem to be going with the 'dummy dataset' method for preventing > fs fillup. What's the advantage of doing it this way vs refreservation > or any other method? More specifically, dummy datasets strike me as kind of the ugly way of handling this issue. Isn't it better to just set parameters on your real datasets?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55F10715.3040508>