From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 10 08:32:32 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFB12106564A for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:32:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amvandemore@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bw0-f54.google.com (mail-bw0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 711E78FC13 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:32:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz12 with SMTP id 12so1665212bwz.13 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:32:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=gHmB9UgGDiQXWeh6yzygrDrEEIJNrEN1JxVbRSvBcIY=; b=LTQzvzzQOFZ60OWc7leKscxKaCDryuQYrh+zxc0n39ICjvVDBb9ygjzkmITfme2TtP j/G9977C+CRkJXumR1V3andqHtQg1jjwW8u5tvvORPQjWr2AeCzRR4iwPzzsXIwhSxt+ 2/7i3YcXys83jVqvUiBZgm5iu7OGMIe39DSZw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=kfDtm/JjKccKW/5RSC/gz2Xxi63Op4GHZGSyNQcvzAtH7H4943v364RG5FL7o5JGSf 27wPlMW0vKtwclVTchUxX2f0mHiyOnYutai0DjhMyClNl9jk2vP6Tcd6MC77mxoTgQIh 1H/SB5dl08446eZQwVjAog7c6CTjzVPTEo9ac= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.29.21 with SMTP id o21mr1017307bkc.97.1299744106381; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:01:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.55.211 with HTTP; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:01:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 02:01:46 -0600 Message-ID: From: Adam Vande More To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: HAST documentation conflict X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:32:33 -0000 This would be easy enough to fix if I would actually try it out, but since I haven't I'll just point out the conflict. On the HAST wiki page it states that memsync is the default replication mode and full sync is not implemented. in the hast.conf man page it states that memsync is not implemented and fullsync is the default. They both agree that async is not implemented. Which is true? -- Adam Vande More