From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 24 05:12:41 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94AD7D62 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 05:12:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@deman.com) Received: from plato.corp.nas.com (plato.corp.nas.com [66.114.32.138]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 365761543 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 05:12:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by plato.corp.nas.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46CBA1314141D for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 21:02:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at corp.nas.com Received: from plato.corp.nas.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (plato.corp.nas.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NHhXPEVRRwKh for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 21:02:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.160] (mono-sis1.s.bli.openaccess.org [66.114.32.149]) by plato.corp.nas.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DBF4A13141412 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 21:02:36 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) Subject: Re: RFC: Suggesting ZFS "best practices" in FreeBSD From: Michael DeMan In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 21:02:36 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <314B600D-E8E6-4300-B60F-33D5FA5A39CF@sarenet.es> To: FreeBSD Filesystems X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 05:12:41 -0000 I have not a heard a word on this topic in a while and still think it is = a good idea. How can we move forward? How can I help? Would it be useful to have a = sharable space somewhere to discuss things so when a best practices = document that is available for all instead of the secret few - is = reliable? I am willing to put some effort in. Thanks, - Mike On Jan 22, 2013, at 5:27 PM, Michael DeMan wrote: > I think this would be awesome. Googling around it is extremely = difficult to know what to do and which practices are current or = obsolete, etc. > =