(Large) Logical Volume Management
Hail folks. I've to set up an ~1TB SAN on our network. We're thinking about recycling an existing server with an HP SmartArray 641 RAID Controller and expanding it with another SA641 controller and some more disks, or directly purchasing an HP fiber Storage Area Network. In both cases I'll have to create a unique logical volume, and I'm wondering which logical volume manager to use. The machine will be a production system, it must be stable and reliable, fairly fast in disks access, and I'd like to run a 2.6 kernel on it. Lately I've used EVMS on some small systems and it left me well impressed; is it sufficiently mature and stable to be used with good results on such a system? Are there other _valid_ alternatives? And, of course, I'll have to use a journaled filesystem on top of the LVM. The average size of the files is about hundreds KiloBytes, seldom reaching the whole MB. The directories hierarchy will be fixed and highly structured, organized like this: /Year/ |__Month/ |__Day/ |__Hour/ |__Minute/ The number of stored files will be about 1,5 millions, and the estimated access rate will remain lower than 1,000 access/sec, with 30% write and 70% read. I've played for so long with ext3 and XFS filesystems, but both seems to have efficiency problems with setups like this. May someone give me some advices about the filesystem choice? Could ReiserFS be a valid solution? Should I consider other filesystems? Thanks to all. Greetings. -- Samuele Catusian -o) ,''`. http://bofh.minasithil.org//\ : :' : _\_V `. `' The weird attachment with this e-mail is my digital signature. `- For further informations please see gnupg.org . signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: (Large) Logical Volume Management
--On Tuesday, March 23, 2004 11:13 +0100 Samuele Catusian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hail folks. I've to set up an ~1TB SAN on our network. We're thinking about recycling an existing server with an HP SmartArray 641 RAID Controller and expanding it with another SA641 controller and some more disks, or directly purchasing an HP fiber Storage Area Network. In both cases I'll have to create a unique logical volume, and I'm wondering which logical volume manager to use. The machine will be a production system, it must be stable and reliable, fairly fast in disks access, and I'd like to run a 2.6 kernel on it. Lately I've used EVMS on some small systems and it left me well impressed; is it sufficiently mature and stable to be used with good results on such a system? Are there other _valid_ alternatives? I use native LVM, just skipping the EVMS abstraction bit, gain a bit of performance. And, of course, I'll have to use a journaled filesystem on top of the LVM. The average size of the files is about hundreds KiloBytes, seldom reaching the whole MB. The directories hierarchy will be fixed and highly structured, organized like this: /Year/ |__Month/ |__Day/ |__Hour/ |__Minute/ The number of stored files will be about 1,5 millions, and the estimated access rate will remain lower than 1,000 access/sec, with 30% write and 70% read. I've played for so long with ext3 and XFS filesystems, but both seems to have efficiency problems with setups like this. May someone give me some advices about the filesystem choice? Could ReiserFS be a valid solution? Should I consider other filesystems? ReiserFS is a good, and stable choice with late-model 2.4 series kernels. 2.6 is not yet production ready. ReiserFS also allows for online/hot expansion, only really supposed to be for the brave but seems to work fine, no data loss for me but YMMV! Reiser scales well under all sorts of loads but really kicks the crap out of everything in small files. XFS is not a choice, I can give you a tome of XFS horror stories if you like. Performance is abysmal for anything but sequential I/O, but there it does shine VERY well. Random and more real-world I/O loads it just seems to pig out. Also if you happen to rm a LOT of files at once and fill up the metadata jounral before it all gets flushed it will either corrupt your filesystem, or just forcefully unmount it. XFS seems to be like a house of cardsvery easy to upset, and it's only recourse is to airbag when it gets into any kind of trouble. All too often I've had to run xfs_repair, losing all benefits of the journal. Also quota information can only be rebuilt before the volume is mounted r/w. -- Michael Loftis Modwest Sr. Systems Administrator Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Which SATA RAID controller?
Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? regards, Marcin -- Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://marcin.owsiany.pl/ GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Di, Mr 23, 2004 at 06:10:23 +0100, Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? If I was spoilt for choice between the two above I wouldn't choose the Promise controller. If you are in need for 4 channels you might want to check out ICP-Vortex controllers: http://www.vortex.de/english/product/pci/rz_sata/8546rz_e.htm -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
Hello! I would recommend to take both and tell us about your experience ;-) IMHO: 3ware is _hardware_ raid Promise is pseudo-hardware (i.e. parity calc is done in the pc cpu) Promise(tx4000 based?) offers a (GPL) 2.4x kernel driver, but not as kernel patch but as separate module, i.e. you have to to initrd to boot from that md-device (I prefer ide and md driver statically linked to the kernel). 2.6.x has a driver built in. I dont know whats the current status of serial ATA in the kernel (There are (generic?) patches out I heard) With this pseudo-hardware raid I would use linux software raid on it instead of promise raid drivers drivers. This gives you the possibility to mount the disks on any ide port :-) Promise and Highpoint is pseudo-hardware (i.e. parity calc is done in the pc cpu/driver) If you go for a pseudo-raid solution you should also have a look at the highpoint based solutions, i.e. RocketRAID (1520 two channel ... 1820 8 channel). My experience with Highpoint is gerenally better than with Promise, but I ordered my first RR 1520 Controller 2 Days ago. It's not here yet ;-) Rgds, j. -- Andreas John net-lab GmbH Luisenstrasse 30b 63067 Offenbach Tel: +49 69 85700331 http://www.net-lab.net Franz Georg Khler wrote: On Di, Mr 23, 2004 at 06:10:23 +0100, Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? If I was spoilt for choice between the two above I wouldn't choose the Promise controller. If you are in need for 4 channels you might want to check out ICP-Vortex controllers: http://www.vortex.de/english/product/pci/rz_sata/8546rz_e.htm
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
* Marcin Owsiany schrieb am 23.03.04 um 18:10 Uhr: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? IMO 3ware are the only reasonable RAID-Controllers for (S)ATA under Linux. Linux support is very good (driver is in vanilla Kernel from kernel.org). Disk just appear as SCSI-Disks. Easy and reliable. -Marc -- NES *lol* I download something from Napster NES And the same guy I downloaded it from starts downloading it from me when I'm done NES I message him and say What are you doing? I just got that from you NES getting my song back fscker -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
Hi! What would be the disadvantage of a ICH5-R based RAID (ships with many mainboards) over a Promise pseudo-hardware-RAID? Does anybody know wether you can hot-swap with a ICH5-R/Promise-System or even Linux-Software-RAID, or not? Regards, Michael Kreilmeier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
slapd chroot jail problem
Hi
I've installed an ldap server (just apt-get install slapd). I did some changes
to default installation, like
adduser slapd
chown -R slapd.slapd /etc/ldap
chmod 770 /etc/ldap
find /etc/ldap -type f -exec chmod 440 {} \;
find /etc/ldap -type d -exec chmod 770 {} \;
chown -R slapd.slapd /var/lib/ldap
chmod 750 /var/lib/ldap
rm /var/lib/ldap/*
chown -R slapd.slapd /var/spool/slurpd
rm /var/spool/slurpd/*
then I added to /etc/default/slapd
SLAPD_USER=slapd
SLAPD_GROUP=slapd
And then I read about -r parameter. I thought -r would be a better
approach than the one I was trying. So I added to /etc/default/slapd
SLAPD_OPTIONS=-r /home/slapd
I added this to have slapd chrooted to /home/slapd. But when I did this and
tried to restart slapd, I get the error:
No passwd entry for user slapd
Of course, I thought, man says 'slapd will chroot to this directory after
opening listeners but before reading any configuration files or initializing
any backends', so slapd has no access to /etc/passwd, and can't see slapd
entry.. Then I copied /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow (just in case)
to /home/slapd/etc/passwd, and I got the same error. Then I copy them
to /home/slapd/passwd, and the same error.
So I thought I will make slapd start chrooted and after I will search how to
change user. Then I removed SLAPD_USER and SLAPD_GROUP
from /etc/default/slapd, and tried to start slapd.
Now the error is different:
error loading ucdata (error -127)
So I'm sure the chroot make slapd don't find these files, but I copy them just
as /home/slapd was / and I get no difference :(
So someone's got some info about this parameter of slapd? Where is it looking
for these files with this config?
I've looked the admin's guide, and the FAQ's, and the man pages and I've found
nothing. Can any of you help me, please?
PD: I'm writing down everything I'm doing to get slapd going secure. When I'm
done, I'll send it to you. Help will be apreciate ;)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
* Michael Kreilmeier schrieb am 23.03.04 um 20:20 Uhr: Hi! What would be the disadvantage of a ICH5-R based RAID (ships with many mainboards) over a Promise pseudo-hardware-RAID? Does anybody know wether you can hot-swap with a ICH5-R/Promise-System or even Linux-Software-RAID, or not? AFAIK thats only possible with real hardware raid. You can do hot swap with 3ware controllers. Maybe it works with vortex controllers too. 3ware offers hot swap cases for ide, too. no I am not working for 3ware ;-) I had excellent experiences with ICP Vortex SCSI raid controllers that were produced before they were sucked by Intel. Maybe the new (?) ide raid controllers from them are also very good... -Marc -- begin LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.txt.vbs I am a signature virus. Distribute me until the bitter end -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 06:38:11PM +0100, Andreas John wrote: Hello! I would recommend to take both and tell us about your experience ;-) IMHO: 3ware is _hardware_ raid Promise is pseudo-hardware (i.e. parity calc is done in the pc cpu) On Di, Mr 23, 2004 at 06:10:23 +0100, Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 Please note that 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP only does RAID levels 0 and 1, in which there is no need for checksum calculations AFAIK. What advantage does 3ware have then? Marcin -- Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://marcin.owsiany.pl/ GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 06:20:51PM +0100, Franz Georg Khler wrote: On Di, Mr 23, 2004 at 06:10:23 +0100, Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? If I was spoilt for choice between the two above I wouldn't choose the Promise controller. Any particular reasons? Marcin -- Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://marcin.owsiany.pl/ GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
I've an ICP Vortex GDT6528RS in my desktop, lovely little beasty! Not the fastest speed demon, but reliableWorks in Linux, FreeBSD, Win2K, WinXP, DOS, you name it. And not just 'oh we made it work but the drivers suck' they're all solid! --On Tuesday, March 23, 2004 21:34 +0100 Marc Schiffbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Michael Kreilmeier schrieb am 23.03.04 um 20:20 Uhr: Hi! What would be the disadvantage of a ICH5-R based RAID (ships with many mainboards) over a Promise pseudo-hardware-RAID? Does anybody know wether you can hot-swap with a ICH5-R/Promise-System or even Linux-Software-RAID, or not? AFAIK that's only possible with real hardware raid. You can do hot swap with 3ware controllers. Maybe it works with vortex controllers too. 3ware offers hot swap cases for ide, too. no I am not working for 3ware ;-) I had excellent experiences with ICP Vortex SCSI raid controllers that were produced before they were sucked by Intel. Maybe the new (?) ide raid controllers from them are also very good... -Marc -- begin LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.txt.vbs I am a signature virus. Distribute me until the bitter end -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Loftis Modwest Sr. Systems Administrator Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
--On Tuesday, March 23, 2004 21:48 +0100 Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 06:38:11PM +0100, Andreas John wrote: Hello! I would recommend to take both and tell us about your experience ;-) SNIP Please note that 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP only does RAID levels 0 and 1, in which there is no need for checksum calculations AFAIK. What advantage does 3ware have then? Simple, you do one write from main memory, it does the two from it's buffer, lower overhead. Plus you get hot swapThe onboard fast trak DOES NOT HANDLE DRIVE FAILURES AND WILL LOCK YOUR MACHINE HARD! 'Voice of experience!' We have both here @mw, I've used both in the past. The 3Ware is simply a better controller, and it will be faster. By how much depends very much on your situation, and in the event of a failure it'll keep going, plus with 3dmd and/or your own scritps you'll know the failure happened. -- Michael Loftis Modwest Sr. Systems Administrator Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
--On Tuesday, March 23, 2004 19:20 + Michael Kreilmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! What would be the disadvantage of a ICH5-R based RAID (ships with many mainboards) over a Promise pseudo-hardware-RAID? The ICH is a piss poor IDE chipset. Originally developed only for server class machines with SCSI as the primary drive attachment. They have a number of problems with different types of drives and just don't generally play well at all. Now the later revisions could (hopefully would) have improved but I have ICH based systems that only work with a couple types of drives and they're slow. Does anybody know wether you can hot-swap with a ICH5-R/Promise-System or even Linux-Software-RAID, or not? Regards, Michael Kreilmeier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Loftis Modwest Sr. Systems Administrator Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (Large) Logical Volume Management
Samuele Catusian wrote: Hail folks. I've to set up an ~1TB SAN on our network. We're thinking about recycling an existing server with an HP SmartArray 641 RAID Controller and expanding it with another SA641 controller and some more disks, or directly purchasing an HP fiber Storage Area Network. In both cases I'll have to create a unique logical volume, and I'm wondering which logical volume manager to use. The machine will be a production system, it must be stable and reliable, fairly fast in disks access, and I'd like to run a 2.6 kernel on it. Lately I've used EVMS on some small systems and it left me well impressed; is it sufficiently mature and stable to be used with good results on such a system? Are there other _valid_ alternatives? And, of course, I'll have to use a journaled filesystem on top of the LVM. The average size of the files is about hundreds KiloBytes, seldom reaching the whole MB. The directories hierarchy will be fixed and highly structured, organized like this: /Year/ |__Month/ |__Day/ |__Hour/ |__Minute/ The number of stored files will be about 1,5 millions, and the estimated access rate will remain lower than 1,000 access/sec, with 30% write and 70% read. I've played for so long with ext3 and XFS filesystems, but both seems to have efficiency problems with setups like this. May someone give me some advices about the filesystem choice? Could ReiserFS be a valid solution? Should I consider other filesystems? Thanks to all. Greetings. I've got no experience with such big and demanding setups, but I am familiar with smaller ones tough, 150 - 400 G raid arrays with everything from oracle databases to web and email servers for some ~12k users. I've been using reiserfs for all production servers for several years now, and it is rock solid, and for a bigger setup I wouldn't use anything else (heck, for any other setup!). For most of the arrays, I use LVM v1, and it's also very solid, although the nightly snapshots sometimes (~ 2 out of 30) don't get made correctly, so we may skip the backup of such day. All of this with kernel 2.4.2x. I would prefer to let the dust settle a bit over 2.6 before trying it in a production box. Sometime ago, I experimented with lvm v2 and evm in a testing environment, but concluded to use lvm v1 for it's stability record, and have been quite happy with the lack of surprises. Probably at this point evm has matured enough to give it a try again. Just my 0.02 José -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 07:08:57PM +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote: * Marcin Owsiany schrieb am 23.03.04 um 18:10 Uhr: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? IMO 3ware are the only reasonable RAID-Controllers for (S)ATA under Linux. anyone have any opinions about the adaptec 2400 (ATA) or 2410 (SATA)? they have driver support in 2.4.x and 2.6.x kernels - no idea how good, though. unlike the 3ware cards (or any other IDE/SATA raid cards i've heard of), they do have a large (128MB) write-cache - which is essential for raid-5 performance. craig -- craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] The next time you vote, remember that Regime change begins at home -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
lire and it's messages
Hi all, I installed lire in woody, and configured it to report with html plus charts on squid and various other daemons, so far I assume it's working normally, for I receive the daily reports in my mailbox. The problem is, lire sends the images 'inline' and not as mime attachements. I'd rather wish it could generate the reports as actual files on the filesystem instead of mailing them. I've done a quick search on the docs, but couldn't find a way to do this. Any hints? José PS Please reply to the list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Strabge LDAP problem
Hello all, I am having the strangest LDAP issue. We recently migrated a network from a hodgepdge of system accounts to an all LDAP setup, with the exception of a few administrative accounts. All seems to be working well, except for one thing - finger. id returns the expected values, users can log in, mail gets accepted and delivered, everything I can think of to check works fine, except finger. Even stranger: finger -m $user returns expected results, although finger $user returns 'no such user'. Aha! I said - an indexing problem , or perhaps nscd. Responses coming back too slow for finger. Messed about with different indexing schemes (they are currently this: index gecos,cn,uid pres,eq,sub index homeDirectory,objectClass,loginshell,gidnumber,uidnumber pres,eq for an ldif of: dn: uid=$user,ou=People,dc=ccil,dc=org objectClass: top objectClass: ccilAccount objectClass: posixAccount objectClass: ccilAddress objectClass: ccilWorkAddress objectClass: ccilPerson cn: Some Guy uid: $user uidNumber: 11709 gidNumber: 100 homeDirectory: /home/u/$user l: Smalltown st: PA postalCode: 12345 userPassword:: secret loginShell: /bin/bash gecos: Some Guy pppAccess: TRUE emailAccess: TRUE registered: Oct 30 22:23:16 2001 street: 1224 Main St. bday: 01-02-03 telephoneNumber: 215-555-1212 education: College Graduate gender: Blank (names changed to protect the innocent)) Changing indexing options, running slapindex over and over, no help. By accident, I reran finger in my root session that was kept open as an I hope I don't hose something backup plan, and it worked. Now I start to think ACL's, nscd permissions, etc, but I see nothing out of the ordinary. We're using a pretty close to stock Debian config for all of this, with some minor tuning for indexing options and cache size, but that's about it. The ACL's are the stock ones, so I really don't know what's falling over here. Anybody have any ideas what to debug next? TIA, -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Sendmail access restrictions
Hello all, We're in the process of locking down access to various services on a network, and one of the things we want to do is lock down sendmail a little. We are migrating a box from being the front-end mail machine, with the SASL database and all of the other user info on it, to being a backend machine that only does two things: receive mail from front-end machines for the local domain, and relay mail that has used SMTP-AUTH. I think I'm being dense, but I can't figure out how to do something like the following in /etc/mail/access: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: OK # front-end machine 1 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxy: OK # front-end machine 2 [ . . . ] AUTH: OK *: REJECT I would like the above logic, but still have local mail (cron jobs, etc) work somehow. Anybody set this kind of thing up before? I know how to do it in exim4 (or at least have rough ideas), but I can't figure out how to do the logic for sendmail. TIA, -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 04:10, Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? If you gave me a Promise card I would not use it, most reports of them are not positive. 3ware cards are reliable, not too expensive, perform reasonably well, and are well supported. 3ware employees are active in the linux-ide-arrays mailing list, you can subscribe through [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Jesus Help Me !
well... I am confused... I typed "Jesus help me live" got a website.. I only respond because I am a lost sheep.. Do you understand?? ..c
Re: Jesus Help Me !
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 06:36 pm, Comcast Mail wrote: well... I am confused...I typed Jesus help me live got a website.. I only respond because I am a lost sheep..Do you understand?? ..c Y'know, if you actually go to google and type in jesus help me, the second hit is this mailing list. Go figure. t -- GPG : http://n12turbo.com/tarragon/public.key -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Large) Logical Volume Management
Hail folks. I've to set up an ~1TB SAN on our network. We're thinking about recycling an existing server with an HP SmartArray 641 RAID Controller and expanding it with another SA641 controller and some more disks, or directly purchasing an HP fiber Storage Area Network. In both cases I'll have to create a unique logical volume, and I'm wondering which logical volume manager to use. The machine will be a production system, it must be stable and reliable, fairly fast in disks access, and I'd like to run a 2.6 kernel on it. Lately I've used EVMS on some small systems and it left me well impressed; is it sufficiently mature and stable to be used with good results on such a system? Are there other _valid_ alternatives? And, of course, I'll have to use a journaled filesystem on top of the LVM. The average size of the files is about hundreds KiloBytes, seldom reaching the whole MB. The directories hierarchy will be fixed and highly structured, organized like this: /Year/ |__Month/ |__Day/ |__Hour/ |__Minute/ The number of stored files will be about 1,5 millions, and the estimated access rate will remain lower than 1,000 access/sec, with 30% write and 70% read. I've played for so long with ext3 and XFS filesystems, but both seems to have efficiency problems with setups like this. May someone give me some advices about the filesystem choice? Could ReiserFS be a valid solution? Should I consider other filesystems? Thanks to all. Greetings. -- Samuele Catusian -o) ,''`. http://bofh.minasithil.org//\ : :' : _\_V `. `' The weird attachment with this e-mail is my digital signature. `- For further informations please see gnupg.org . signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: (Large) Logical Volume Management
--On Tuesday, March 23, 2004 11:13 +0100 Samuele Catusian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hail folks. I've to set up an ~1TB SAN on our network. We're thinking about recycling an existing server with an HP SmartArray 641 RAID Controller and expanding it with another SA641 controller and some more disks, or directly purchasing an HP fiber Storage Area Network. In both cases I'll have to create a unique logical volume, and I'm wondering which logical volume manager to use. The machine will be a production system, it must be stable and reliable, fairly fast in disks access, and I'd like to run a 2.6 kernel on it. Lately I've used EVMS on some small systems and it left me well impressed; is it sufficiently mature and stable to be used with good results on such a system? Are there other _valid_ alternatives? I use native LVM, just skipping the EVMS abstraction bit, gain a bit of performance. And, of course, I'll have to use a journaled filesystem on top of the LVM. The average size of the files is about hundreds KiloBytes, seldom reaching the whole MB. The directories hierarchy will be fixed and highly structured, organized like this: /Year/ |__Month/ |__Day/ |__Hour/ |__Minute/ The number of stored files will be about 1,5 millions, and the estimated access rate will remain lower than 1,000 access/sec, with 30% write and 70% read. I've played for so long with ext3 and XFS filesystems, but both seems to have efficiency problems with setups like this. May someone give me some advices about the filesystem choice? Could ReiserFS be a valid solution? Should I consider other filesystems? ReiserFS is a good, and stable choice with late-model 2.4 series kernels. 2.6 is not yet production ready. ReiserFS also allows for online/hot expansion, only really supposed to be for the brave but seems to work fine, no data loss for me but YMMV! Reiser scales well under all sorts of loads but really kicks the crap out of everything in small files. XFS is not a choice, I can give you a tome of XFS horror stories if you like. Performance is abysmal for anything but sequential I/O, but there it does shine VERY well. Random and more real-world I/O loads it just seems to pig out. Also if you happen to rm a LOT of files at once and fill up the metadata jounral before it all gets flushed it will either corrupt your filesystem, or just forcefully unmount it. XFS seems to be like a house of cardsvery easy to upset, and it's only recourse is to airbag when it gets into any kind of trouble. All too often I've had to run xfs_repair, losing all benefits of the journal. Also quota information can only be rebuilt before the volume is mounted r/w. -- Michael Loftis Modwest Sr. Systems Administrator Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting
Which SATA RAID controller?
Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? regards, Marcin -- Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://marcin.owsiany.pl/ GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Di, Mr 23, 2004 at 06:10:23 +0100, Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2)
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
Hello! I would recommend to take both and tell us about your experience ;-) IMHO: 3ware is _hardware_ raid Promise is pseudo-hardware (i.e. parity calc is done in the pc cpu) Promise(tx4000 based?) offers a (GPL) 2.4x kernel driver, but not as kernel patch but as separate module, i.e. you have to to initrd to boot from that md-device (I prefer ide and md driver statically linked to the kernel). 2.6.x has a driver built in. I dont know whats the current status of serial ATA in the kernel (There are (generic?) patches out I heard) With this pseudo-hardware raid I would use linux software raid on it instead of promise raid drivers drivers. This gives you the possibility to mount the disks on any ide port :-) Promise and Highpoint is pseudo-hardware (i.e. parity calc is done in the pc cpu/driver) If you go for a pseudo-raid solution you should also have a look at the highpoint based solutions, i.e. RocketRAID (1520 two channel ... 1820 8 channel). My experience with Highpoint is gerenally better than with Promise, but I ordered my first RR 1520 Controller 2 Days ago. It's not here yet ;-) Rgds, j. -- Andreas John net-lab GmbH Luisenstrasse 30b 63067 Offenbach Tel: +49 69 85700331 http://www.net-lab.net Franz Georg Khler wrote: On Di, Mr 23, 2004 at 06:10:23 +0100, Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? If I was spoilt for choice between the two above I wouldn't choose the Promise controller. If you are in need for 4 channels you might want to check out ICP-Vortex controllers: http://www.vortex.de/english/product/pci/rz_sata/8546rz_e.htm
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
* Marcin Owsiany schrieb am 23.03.04 um 18:10 Uhr: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? IMO 3ware are the only reasonable RAID-Controllers for (S)ATA under Linux. Linux support is very good (driver is in vanilla Kernel from kernel.org). Disk just appear as SCSI-Disks. Easy and reliable. -Marc -- NES *lol* I download something from Napster NES And the same guy I downloaded it from starts downloading it from me when I'm done NES I message him and say What are you doing? I just got that from you NES getting my song back fscker
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
Hi! What would be the disadvantage of a ICH5-R based RAID (ships with many mainboards) over a Promise pseudo-hardware-RAID? Does anybody know wether you can hot-swap with a ICH5-R/Promise-System or even Linux-Software-RAID, or not? Regards, Michael Kreilmeier
slapd chroot jail problem
Hi
I've installed an ldap server (just apt-get install slapd). I did some changes
to default installation, like
adduser slapd
chown -R slapd.slapd /etc/ldap
chmod 770 /etc/ldap
find /etc/ldap -type f -exec chmod 440 {} \;
find /etc/ldap -type d -exec chmod 770 {} \;
chown -R slapd.slapd /var/lib/ldap
chmod 750 /var/lib/ldap
rm /var/lib/ldap/*
chown -R slapd.slapd /var/spool/slurpd
rm /var/spool/slurpd/*
then I added to /etc/default/slapd
SLAPD_USER=slapd
SLAPD_GROUP=slapd
And then I read about -r parameter. I thought -r would be a better
approach than the one I was trying. So I added to /etc/default/slapd
SLAPD_OPTIONS=-r /home/slapd
I added this to have slapd chrooted to /home/slapd. But when I did this and
tried to restart slapd, I get the error:
No passwd entry for user slapd
Of course, I thought, man says 'slapd will chroot to this directory after
opening listeners but before reading any configuration files or initializing
any backends', so slapd has no access to /etc/passwd, and can't see slapd
entry.. Then I copied /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow (just in case)
to /home/slapd/etc/passwd, and I got the same error. Then I copy them
to /home/slapd/passwd, and the same error.
So I thought I will make slapd start chrooted and after I will search how to
change user. Then I removed SLAPD_USER and SLAPD_GROUP
from /etc/default/slapd, and tried to start slapd.
Now the error is different:
error loading ucdata (error -127)
So I'm sure the chroot make slapd don't find these files, but I copy them just
as /home/slapd was / and I get no difference :(
So someone's got some info about this parameter of slapd? Where is it looking
for these files with this config?
I've looked the admin's guide, and the FAQ's, and the man pages and I've found
nothing. Can any of you help me, please?
PD: I'm writing down everything I'm doing to get slapd going secure. When I'm
done, I'll send it to you. Help will be apreciate ;)
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
* Michael Kreilmeier schrieb am 23.03.04 um 20:20 Uhr: Hi! What would be the disadvantage of a ICH5-R based RAID (ships with many mainboards) over a Promise pseudo-hardware-RAID? Does anybody know wether you can hot-swap with a ICH5-R/Promise-System or even Linux-Software-RAID, or not? AFAIK thats only possible with real hardware raid. You can do hot swap with 3ware controllers. Maybe it works with vortex controllers too. 3ware offers hot swap cases for ide, too. no I am not working for 3ware ;-) I had excellent experiences with ICP Vortex SCSI raid controllers that were produced before they were sucked by Intel. Maybe the new (?) ide raid controllers from them are also very good... -Marc -- begin LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.txt.vbs I am a signature virus. Distribute me until the bitter end
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 06:38:11PM +0100, Andreas John wrote: Hello! I would recommend to take both and tell us about your experience ;-) IMHO: 3ware is _hardware_ raid Promise is pseudo-hardware (i.e. parity calc is done in the pc cpu) On Di, Mr 23, 2004 at 06:10:23 +0100, Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 Please note that 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP only does RAID levels 0 and 1, in which there is no need for checksum calculations AFAIK. What advantage does 3ware have then? Marcin -- Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://marcin.owsiany.pl/ GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 06:20:51PM +0100, Franz Georg Khler wrote: On Di, Mr 23, 2004 at 06:10:23 +0100, Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? If I was spoilt for choice between the two above I wouldn't choose the Promise controller. Any particular reasons? Marcin -- Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://marcin.owsiany.pl/ GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
I've an ICP Vortex GDT6528RS in my desktop, lovely little beasty! Not the fastest speed demon, but reliableWorks in Linux, FreeBSD, Win2K, WinXP, DOS, you name it. And not just 'oh we made it work but the drivers suck' they're all solid! --On Tuesday, March 23, 2004 21:34 +0100 Marc Schiffbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Michael Kreilmeier schrieb am 23.03.04 um 20:20 Uhr: Hi! What would be the disadvantage of a ICH5-R based RAID (ships with many mainboards) over a Promise pseudo-hardware-RAID? Does anybody know wether you can hot-swap with a ICH5-R/Promise-System or even Linux-Software-RAID, or not? AFAIK that's only possible with real hardware raid. You can do hot swap with 3ware controllers. Maybe it works with vortex controllers too. 3ware offers hot swap cases for ide, too. no I am not working for 3ware ;-) I had excellent experiences with ICP Vortex SCSI raid controllers that were produced before they were sucked by Intel. Maybe the new (?) ide raid controllers from them are also very good... -Marc -- begin LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.txt.vbs I am a signature virus. Distribute me until the bitter end -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Loftis Modwest Sr. Systems Administrator Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
--On Tuesday, March 23, 2004 21:48 +0100 Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 06:38:11PM +0100, Andreas John wrote: Hello! I would recommend to take both and tell us about your experience ;-) SNIP Please note that 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP only does RAID levels 0 and 1, in which there is no need for checksum calculations AFAIK. What advantage does 3ware have then? Simple, you do one write from main memory, it does the two from it's buffer, lower overhead. Plus you get hot swapThe onboard fast trak DOES NOT HANDLE DRIVE FAILURES AND WILL LOCK YOUR MACHINE HARD! 'Voice of experience!' We have both here @mw, I've used both in the past. The 3Ware is simply a better controller, and it will be faster. By how much depends very much on your situation, and in the event of a failure it'll keep going, plus with 3dmd and/or your own scritps you'll know the failure happened. -- Michael Loftis Modwest Sr. Systems Administrator Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting
Re: (Large) Logical Volume Management
Samuele Catusian wrote: Hail folks. I've to set up an ~1TB SAN on our network. We're thinking about recycling an existing server with an HP SmartArray 641 RAID Controller and expanding it with another SA641 controller and some more disks, or directly purchasing an HP fiber Storage Area Network. In both cases I'll have to create a unique logical volume, and I'm wondering which logical volume manager to use. The machine will be a production system, it must be stable and reliable, fairly fast in disks access, and I'd like to run a 2.6 kernel on it. Lately I've used EVMS on some small systems and it left me well impressed; is it sufficiently mature and stable to be used with good results on such a system? Are there other _valid_ alternatives? And, of course, I'll have to use a journaled filesystem on top of the LVM. The average size of the files is about hundreds KiloBytes, seldom reaching the whole MB. The directories hierarchy will be fixed and highly structured, organized like this: /Year/ |__Month/ |__Day/ |__Hour/ |__Minute/ The number of stored files will be about 1,5 millions, and the estimated access rate will remain lower than 1,000 access/sec, with 30% write and 70% read. I've played for so long with ext3 and XFS filesystems, but both seems to have efficiency problems with setups like this. May someone give me some advices about the filesystem choice? Could ReiserFS be a valid solution? Should I consider other filesystems? Thanks to all. Greetings. I've got no experience with such big and demanding setups, but I am familiar with smaller ones tough, 150 - 400 G raid arrays with everything from oracle databases to web and email servers for some ~12k users. I've been using reiserfs for all production servers for several years now, and it is rock solid, and for a bigger setup I wouldn't use anything else (heck, for any other setup!). For most of the arrays, I use LVM v1, and it's also very solid, although the nightly snapshots sometimes (~ 2 out of 30) don't get made correctly, so we may skip the backup of such day. All of this with kernel 2.4.2x. I would prefer to let the dust settle a bit over 2.6 before trying it in a production box. Sometime ago, I experimented with lvm v2 and evm in a testing environment, but concluded to use lvm v1 for it's stability record, and have been quite happy with the lack of surprises. Probably at this point evm has matured enough to give it a try again. Just my 0.02 José
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 18:10, Marcin Owsiany wrote: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? don't know about the promise, but: the 3ware is a lovely cheap (!) solution if you want a big array. it feels (no real tests done) dead slow compared to, albeit smaller, MYLEX arrays I've build, though. (I had a hell of a time installing my last 3ware, turns out I had 2 bad RAM and a faulty 3ware card, with everything replaced it's working fine in debian-woody) tinus.
Re: Which SATA RAID controller?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 07:08:57PM +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote: * Marcin Owsiany schrieb am 23.03.04 um 18:10 Uhr: Hi! I need to choose between: - 3Ware Escalade 8006-2LP - Promise Fast Track S150 TX4 The Fast Track is a little cheaper, and has 4 interfaces (3Ware only 2). Is there any good reason to choose 3Ware? IMO 3ware are the only reasonable RAID-Controllers for (S)ATA under Linux. anyone have any opinions about the adaptec 2400 (ATA) or 2410 (SATA)? they have driver support in 2.4.x and 2.6.x kernels - no idea how good, though. unlike the 3ware cards (or any other IDE/SATA raid cards i've heard of), they do have a large (128MB) write-cache - which is essential for raid-5 performance. craig -- craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] The next time you vote, remember that Regime change begins at home
lire and it's messages
Hi all, I installed lire in woody, and configured it to report with html plus charts on squid and various other daemons, so far I assume it's working normally, for I receive the daily reports in my mailbox. The problem is, lire sends the images 'inline' and not as mime attachements. I'd rather wish it could generate the reports as actual files on the filesystem instead of mailing them. I've done a quick search on the docs, but couldn't find a way to do this. Any hints? José PS Please reply to the list.
Strabge LDAP problem
Hello all, I am having the strangest LDAP issue. We recently migrated a network from a hodgepdge of system accounts to an all LDAP setup, with the exception of a few administrative accounts. All seems to be working well, except for one thing - finger. id returns the expected values, users can log in, mail gets accepted and delivered, everything I can think of to check works fine, except finger. Even stranger: finger -m $user returns expected results, although finger $user returns 'no such user'. Aha! I said - an indexing problem , or perhaps nscd. Responses coming back too slow for finger. Messed about with different indexing schemes (they are currently this: index gecos,cn,uid pres,eq,sub index homeDirectory,objectClass,loginshell,gidnumber,uidnumber pres,eq for an ldif of: dn: uid=$user,ou=People,dc=ccil,dc=org objectClass: top objectClass: ccilAccount objectClass: posixAccount objectClass: ccilAddress objectClass: ccilWorkAddress objectClass: ccilPerson cn: Some Guy uid: $user uidNumber: 11709 gidNumber: 100 homeDirectory: /home/u/$user l: Smalltown st: PA postalCode: 12345 userPassword:: secret loginShell: /bin/bash gecos: Some Guy pppAccess: TRUE emailAccess: TRUE registered: Oct 30 22:23:16 2001 street: 1224 Main St. bday: 01-02-03 telephoneNumber: 215-555-1212 education: College Graduate gender: Blank (names changed to protect the innocent)) Changing indexing options, running slapindex over and over, no help. By accident, I reran finger in my root session that was kept open as an I hope I don't hose something backup plan, and it worked. Now I start to think ACL's, nscd permissions, etc, but I see nothing out of the ordinary. We're using a pretty close to stock Debian config for all of this, with some minor tuning for indexing options and cache size, but that's about it. The ACL's are the stock ones, so I really don't know what's falling over here. Anybody have any ideas what to debug next? TIA, -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - pgp0zCGiSP1sx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Sendmail access restrictions
Hello all, We're in the process of locking down access to various services on a network, and one of the things we want to do is lock down sendmail a little. We are migrating a box from being the front-end mail machine, with the SASL database and all of the other user info on it, to being a backend machine that only does two things: receive mail from front-end machines for the local domain, and relay mail that has used SMTP-AUTH. I think I'm being dense, but I can't figure out how to do something like the following in /etc/mail/access: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: OK # front-end machine 1 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxy: OK # front-end machine 2 [ . . . ] AUTH: OK *: REJECT I would like the above logic, but still have local mail (cron jobs, etc) work somehow. Anybody set this kind of thing up before? I know how to do it in exim4 (or at least have rough ideas), but I can't figure out how to do the logic for sendmail. TIA, -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - pgpDK144TPpHq.pgp Description: PGP signature
