Re: [CentOS] Strange NTP problem

[Jason Clark]

I had a similar problem on a different server that I fixed last night.
Evidently it had a BIOS level feature that tried to modify the CPU clock
rate, much like cpu-freq does within the kernel, and was doing so by
messing with the system clock impacting the RTC.   I was drifting all
over the place until I found and disabled that feature (foxcon board,
something like foxstep I believe is what it is called in BIOS). Not sure
if your lenovo boards have that feature, but i know that some ASUS
boards do.


Jason
www.cyborgworkshop.org


Paul Heinlein wrote:
> On Tue, 20 May 2008, Alfred von Campe wrote:
> 
>> I have 30 identical Lenovo desktop systems running CentOS 5.1.  On one
>> of those systems the clock is running slow (5+ minutes from yesterday
>> to this morning and another minute since this morning) despite the
>> fact that NTP is running on all of them and they all have the exact
>> same /etc/ntp.conf file (I compared the MD5 sums of that file on all
>> the systems).  Here is the output of "grep ntp /var/log messages" on
>> the system with the problem since I restarted the NTP daemon earlier
>> today:
> 
> A slew of 5 min/24 hrs should be in the range of fixable.
> 
>> May 20 11:35:38 hepdsw03 ntpd[31792]: frequency initialized 0.000 PPM
>> from /var/lib/ntp/drift
> 
> This is very suspect. Are there any SELinux or other log messages
> suggesting that ntpd isn't able to write to its drift file? Your local
> clock is definitely drifting, so a 0.000 value is bogus. It may indicate
> that there's a disconnect between ntpd and the filesystem.
> 
> I'd be interested in the output of "ntpdc -c kerninfo"; on most systems
> the 'pll frequency' value is a close match to the figure in the drift file.
> 
>> May 20 11:38:55 hepdsw03 ntpd[31792]: synchronized to LOCAL(0),
>> stratum 10
>> May 20 11:38:55 hepdsw03 ntpd[31792]: kernel time sync disabled 0001
>> May 20 11:39:59 hepdsw03 ntpd[31792]: synchronized to 10.101.32.104,
>> stratum 3
> 
> This is ungood. Sync-ing to local before your network time server means
> that your machine doesn't want to believe your server -- and you should
> see a "kernel time sync enabled" message once the machine has sync-ed
> with the time server.
> 
> You said the machines are identical. Could there be any variation in the
> BIOS revision level or its settings? Sometimes ACPI stuff can mess up ntp.
> 
> Also -- the log messages you provide have no "step time server"
> reference. Do you have a valid /etc/ntp/step-tickers file?
> 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] RAID5 or RAID50 for database?

[Jason Clark]

You're going to need two RAID controllers and 6 drives to do RAID 50.
RAID 50  will be faster, but costs more in drives and controllers.



Jason
www.cyborgworkshop.org


mcclnx mcc wrote:
> we have DELL 6800 server with 12 internal disks in it.  O.S. is CENTOS
> 4.6 and SCSI control card is PERC 4e/di.
> 
> We plan to configure 4 disks (5,8,9,10) as RAID5 or RAID50.  This
> logical volume will be use as file systems and store database backup files.
> 
> Can anyone tell me which one is better on performance?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 付費才容量無上限？Yahoo!奇摩電子信箱2.0免費給你，信件永遠不必刪！ - *馬
> 上體驗*
> 
> *！*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] I need storage server advice

[Jason Clark]

The point was, acceptable performance can be had without purchasing a
hardware controller. And for archival purposes on a tight budget $500 bucks
means one controller for 3 more drives.

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 6:17 PM, John R Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
>
> >
> > Take these benchmarks with a grain of salt.
> >
> >
> and, more importantly, for the thread at hand, this guy wants an ARCHIVE
> server, where performance is quite secondary, reliablity and data retention
> are more important.
>
> If he had the budget, I'd be suggesting looking at something like Copan's
> MAID system.
>
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



-- 
Jason
Luck favors the prepared.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Live CD Planning systems

[Jason Clark]

Not to pitch another distro, but knoppix and dsl do pretty much what are
looking for ,minus the xen.  What I would propose though is to run vmware
P2V (now called converter) on your XP machine. It will export a vmware image
of that drive, then just format that sucker, install centos and vmware and
run your corp image inside of that. It's what I do at work and it has always
worked splendidly.

On 1/5/08, Robert Moskowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My company supplies me with a very nice HP nc2400.  Much faster, more
> memory, etc than my old HP nc4010.
>
> Problem is the drive is not swappable, and they encrypt the drive (the
> OS is XP).
>
> The nc2400 has a DVD/CDRW and 2 USB 2.0 ports so I was thinking.
>
> Make a Live DVD with everything I need but map
>
> /etc /root /home and /var/log (and what else?) to a USB flash drive
> (16Gb are available and I was just sent a PR on a 32Gb, maybe I can get
> an eval device :) ).
>
> So first I would want a bootable DVD that would have everything I want
> to have running on the cd2400.  And of course, everytime one of the
> components get updated, I will have to build a new DVD.
>
> Then I would like to run within XEN my company's XP image on that
> encrypted drive.  Is this possible.  If I could do this, I can move the
> nc2400 as my 'workhorse', downgrade my nc4010 to my test box, and
> reallocate the Toshiba 3490 to the family  And more importantly one
> less box to carry when traveling!
>
> I guess one thing in this whole equation will I be able to repartition
> the USB flash drive with a swap partition (will probably never use, as
> there is 1.5Gb memory in the nc2400. Twice as much as the nc4010), and
> an ext3 data partition?  Or should I use LVM on it?
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



-- 
Jason
Luck favors the prepared.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos