Re: NFSv3 Problem

[brian moore]

On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 12:06:16AM -0500, Fraser Campbell wrote:
> Francis 'Dexter' Gois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > Not sure, but i think your problem is not with the NFS but with the ext2fs 
> > filesystem, which cannot handle files larger than 2gb. 
> 
> Yes, ext2's maximum file size is 1 byte less than 2 GB (2147483647 bytes.

Bzzt.  Wrong.  This is a limit of 2.2 and earlier kernels on 32 bit
hardware.  It has -NOTHING- to do with the file system per se: you will
see exactly the same situation on Reiserfs, NFS (exported from a 64 bit
machine even!), and every other file system.

Why?  Try 'man lseek' and note that the size of off_t, which is a 32 bit
number on 32 bit platforms.  There are lots and lots of library and system
calls that expect or return something of type off_t, which can not exceed
32 bits on a 32 bit machine without some hackery.  (See google for the
'large filesystem summit' for how ugly that hackery is.)

The exact same file systems -do- support huge files on 64 bit machines.
Why?  Again, off_t is a 64 bit number on a 64 bit machine.

> If the remote filesystem is ext2 then this is definitely the problem.   The
> 2.4 kernel gets around this problem at least with some filesystems (perhaps
> still not with ext2 though) ... if you really need to create files > 2GB then
> you should upgrade your kernel.  I've been running woody with 2.4 kernels
> (test and "stable") for months without any problems, YMMV.

Doesn't matter -what- the remote file system type is.

Neither NFS nor glibc supports large files on 2.2 kernels.  Period.  Not
with e2fs, not with nfs, not with anything.

If you need files >=2G, you need a newer kernel or a 64 bit machine.

Re: NFSv3 Problem

[brian moore]

On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 12:06:16AM -0500, Fraser Campbell wrote:
> Francis 'Dexter' Gois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > Not sure, but i think your problem is not with the NFS but with the ext2fs 
> > filesystem, which cannot handle files larger than 2gb. 
> 
> Yes, ext2's maximum file size is 1 byte less than 2 GB (2147483647 bytes.

Bzzt.  Wrong.  This is a limit of 2.2 and earlier kernels on 32 bit
hardware.  It has -NOTHING- to do with the file system per se: you will
see exactly the same situation on Reiserfs, NFS (exported from a 64 bit
machine even!), and every other file system.

Why?  Try 'man lseek' and note that the size of off_t, which is a 32 bit
number on 32 bit platforms.  There are lots and lots of library and system
calls that expect or return something of type off_t, which can not exceed
32 bits on a 32 bit machine without some hackery.  (See google for the
'large filesystem summit' for how ugly that hackery is.)

The exact same file systems -do- support huge files on 64 bit machines.
Why?  Again, off_t is a 64 bit number on a 64 bit machine.

> If the remote filesystem is ext2 then this is definitely the problem.   The
> 2.4 kernel gets around this problem at least with some filesystems (perhaps
> still not with ext2 though) ... if you really need to create files > 2GB then
> you should upgrade your kernel.  I've been running woody with 2.4 kernels
> (test and "stable") for months without any problems, YMMV.

Doesn't matter -what- the remote file system type is.

Neither NFS nor glibc supports large files on 2.2 kernels.  Period.  Not
with e2fs, not with nfs, not with anything.

If you need files >=2G, you need a newer kernel or a 64 bit machine.


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: NFSv3 Problem

[Roger Abrahamsson]

On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Francis 'Dexter' Gois wrote:

Hello.

As far as I know, to get 2GB+ file support you both need a 2.4.x kernel
and a libc6 that is compiled against 2.4.x headers. I do not know if
current debian unstable has this working, but that is what it takes to get
it running at least.

Regards
/Roger Abrahamsson


> Hi, 
> 
> Not sure, but i think your problem is not with the NFS but with the ext2fs 
> filesystem, which cannot handle files larger than 2gb. 
> 
> I think i read it in a howto.
> 
> Does anyone has a reference ?
> 
> 
> On Monday 05 February 2001 18:33, Massimiliano Mannozzi wrote:
> > hi
> >
> > I have a problem with NFSv3,
> >
> > I have correctly installed kernel 2.2.18 with the NFSv3 support and 
> > util-linux2-10s. I have put in /etc/fstab
> > 192.168.10.10:/vol/vol0/home /mnt nfs   
> > rsize=8192,wsize=8192,nfsvers=3,nolock,timeo=14,intr,bg 0   0
> >
> > and all it works normally, but it does not write file greater than 2Gb.
> > ulimit -a
> > core file size (blocks) 0
> > data seg size (kbytes)  unlimited
> > file size (blocks)  unlimited
> > max locked memory (kbytes)  unlimited
> > max memory size (kbytes)unlimited
> > 
> > 
> >
> >
> > why?
> >
> > thank's
> >
> > m.
> >
> > --
> 
> -- 
> Francis "Dexter" Gois- mailto : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> System & Network Administrator   -  Tiscali Belgium NV/SA
> Keep the Internet Free with Tiscalinet   - phone: +3224000839 
> http://www.tiscalinet.be/-   fax: +3224000899
> 
> 
> --  
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

Re: Managing a mail/web server without Unix accounts

[Hirling Endre]

Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> I am looking for a documentation, as much detailed as possible,
> on the setup of an Internet server (mail, several domains, POP
> and IMAP, a Web server with FTP and DAV upload by customers,
> may be Zope), *without* Unix accounts. The actual database
> should be a DBMS (possibly with three-tier architectures).

> I want free software, as much as possible, and I prefer it already
> packaged. (I *can* patch Qpopper and Zope but I prefer something
> which will not force me to manage a fork.)
> 
> Apparently, there are many parts of the complete solution: PAM
>  (any list of
> PAMified apps in Debian?), LDAP , but
> no comprehensive documentation discussing pros and cons, practical
> problems, lists of applications which support it, etc.

I use exim and courier-imap/pop3 for the mailserver. Neither of these needs
patching. For webhosting I use caudium (http://caudium.net) with a few
custom modules that I wrote. The backend database is mysql (could be
postgres too).

Re: Routing Question

[Andrea Glorioso]

> "nr" == Nathan Ridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

nr> Im setting a broadband Internet connection on a Debian box, I
nr> have the sat interface installed and working and can see the
nr> icmp packets coming in from a ping on the sat interface using
nr> tcpdump so im confident that side of things is working. I am
nr> having a bit of trouble with the dialup.  Lets say our network
nr> is 203.66.77.0, border gateway is 203.66.77.1 and have a Cisco
nr> access server on the 203.66.77.11 and radius server on
nr> 203.66.77.2.  Now if I assign a static ip from a dialup pool
nr> on our network, say 203.66.77.55 I can ping out from the
nr> dialup no problems, but the static needs to be that of the ip
nr> address that is attached to the mac ID of the sat card so when
nr> I change the static to 203.173.176.99, it connects to our
nr> network, authenticates ok but cannot ping any machine except
nr> for the access server 203.66.77.11.  I know I must just be
nr> missing a route somewhere, and I was assuming on the access
nr> server, but when I also setup a NT server with the same setup
nr> it seem to work fine, any ideas what I am doing wrong?

I'm not sure I've the picture completely clear (an ASCII scheme would
help); however, in my past experiences with satellite-based
connections, you have to make sure to disable the rp_filter on the
satellite interface:

echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/`your sat interface`/rp_filter

To see if this is necessary, try to:

echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/`your sat interface`/log_martians

and check your logs (on stock debian systems "martian" packets should
be logged in auth.log, I think).  If you see and martian packets being
blocked, I suggest you try to disable rp_filter on the sat interface.

By the way, what's your satellite provider?

Bye,

Andrea Glorioso
-- 
Non e' abbastanza fare dei passi che un giorno ci porteranno ad uno
scopo, ogni passo deve essere lui stesso uno scopo, nello stesso
tempo in cui ci porta avanti.


pgpygET2ChGsp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

The Next Yahoo

[launchmarch16]

*
Hi, debian-isp

What if Yahoo Paid You ? Now a reality !!!

World's first completely commissionable Portal just released.

Get paid as thousands search, email, or use any of our services.
14 months and 1.5 million dollars invested in the technology and
infrastructure.

We are going after Yahoo !

Imagine getting paid as others use eBay, Expedia, long distance,
cell phones, insurance, electricity, and much more.

We have solid long-term contracts with multi-million dollar companies.
They are knocking down our door to be a part of our amazing
viral customer acquisition model.

Get your FREE portal today and start making solid income on
thousands as they do what they normally do on the internet!

Email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  OR just reply to this email.

Include your phone number. We will call you back to let you in
on how to get a founders position and create massive wealth !

We have taken applications for only 1 month now and have already
paid out over $100,000 in commissions. Get your share !

We are set to have 1 million customers this year and launch globally
this summer. This is the time millionaires will be made with us !

We look forward to speaking with you.

( Trip Wakefield, Houston, TX, USA, 1.877.627.6669 ) 

P.S. Many of us have already replaced our JOB incomes in 1 month!
We have a simple, easy to follow, 3 step system for success !

Be sure to reply with your phone number.
If you are outside of the USA, reply with International and 
your phone number.

If you do not wish to correspond, reply with "remove" in the subject.
Thank You!

**

Re: NFSv3 Problem

[Roger Abrahamsson]

On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Francis 'Dexter' Gois wrote:

Hello.

As far as I know, to get 2GB+ file support you both need a 2.4.x kernel
and a libc6 that is compiled against 2.4.x headers. I do not know if
current debian unstable has this working, but that is what it takes to get
it running at least.

Regards
/Roger Abrahamsson


> Hi, 
> 
> Not sure, but i think your problem is not with the NFS but with the ext2fs 
> filesystem, which cannot handle files larger than 2gb. 
> 
> I think i read it in a howto.
> 
> Does anyone has a reference ?
> 
> 
> On Monday 05 February 2001 18:33, Massimiliano Mannozzi wrote:
> > hi
> >
> > I have a problem with NFSv3,
> >
> > I have correctly installed kernel 2.2.18 with the NFSv3 support and 
> > util-linux2-10s. I have put in /etc/fstab
> > 192.168.10.10:/vol/vol0/home /mnt nfs   
> > rsize=8192,wsize=8192,nfsvers=3,nolock,timeo=14,intr,bg 0   0
> >
> > and all it works normally, but it does not write file greater than 2Gb.
> > ulimit -a
> > core file size (blocks) 0
> > data seg size (kbytes)  unlimited
> > file size (blocks)  unlimited
> > max locked memory (kbytes)  unlimited
> > max memory size (kbytes)unlimited
> > 
> > 
> >
> >
> > why?
> >
> > thank's
> >
> > m.
> >
> > --
> 
> -- 
> Francis "Dexter" Gois- mailto : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> System & Network Administrator   -  Tiscali Belgium NV/SA
> Keep the Internet Free with Tiscalinet   - phone: +3224000839 
> http://www.tiscalinet.be/-   fax: +3224000899
> 
> 
> --  
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]