Re: HAST, zfs and local mirroring
hi, another suggestion would be using mirrored zfsOnRoot on each host (out of the 2 local disks) and then use zrep to sync the pools. use with combination of carp to active/standby cluster. Sami בתאריך 3 ביוני 2016 11:11 PM, "Peter Jeremy" כתב: > On 2016-Jun-03 22:12:55 +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > >> all your media content is valid. I've also had bad experiences with > >> gmirror volumes silently getting out of sync on a crash. > > > > > >gmirror or (gmirror+gjournal) ones? > > Plain gmirror. > > -- > Peter Jeremy > ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mariadb/percona cluster choices
Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff [2016-06-06 13:11 +0200] : > Anyway, as the others I am quite interested in alternatives. Maybe > someone was able to configure Percona successfully..? FWIW, databases/percona56-server does not have built-in wsrep support. I just figured that out. Niklaas signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: unbound and ntp issuse
On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 09:33:02AM -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
> Slawa Olhovchenkov writes:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 02:34:18PM -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
> >
> >> Slawa Olhovchenkov writes:
> >>
> >> > Default install with local_unbound and ntpd can't be functional with
> >> > incorrect date/time in BIOS:
> >> >
> >> > Unbound requred correct time for DNSSEC check and refuseing queries
> >> > ("Jul 1 20:17:29 yellowrat unbound: [3444:0] info: failed to prime
> >> > trust anchor -- DNSKEY rrset is not secure . DNSKEY IN")
> >> >
> >> > ntpd don't have any numeric IP of ntp servers in ntp.conf -- only
> >> > symbolic names like 0.freebsd.pool.ntp.org, as result -- can't
> >> > resolve (see above, about DNSKEY).
> >>
> >> I can't see how this would happen. DNSSEC doesn't seem to be required in
> >> a regular install as far as I can see. Certainly I don't have any
> >
> > I don't know reasson for enforcing DNSSEC in regular install.
> > I am just select `local_unbound` at setup time and enter `127.0.0.1` as
> > nameserver address.
>
> That's not enough to configure unbound as a fully recursive DNS
> server.
What I am missing?
Need to fix unbound setup scripts? bsdinstall scripts?
As I see unbound setup scripts detects 127.0.0.1 in resolv.conf and
configured unbound as fully recursive DNS server.
> If your system gets its address through DHCP, it is probably
> getting DNS server addresses as well, and would work fine *without* your
> configuring any of the DNS state.
I am have static address and don't getting DNS server address.
> >> problem on any of my systems, and I've never configured an anchor on the
> >> internal systems.
> >>
> >> > IMHO, ntp.conf need to include some numeric IP of public ntp servers.
> >>
> >> Ouch; that's a terrible idea, for several different reasons.
> >
> > What else?
>
> All the normal reasons that hard-coding IP addresses is a bad idea; they
> can change, you're encouraging a lot of people to use the same ones, etc.
And how to resolve this issuse:
- default install with unbound as recursive DNS server (by default
enforcing DNSSEC)
- ntp time synchronisation
- stale CMOS time (2008 year)
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: unbound and ntp issuse
Slawa Olhovchenkov writes:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 02:34:18PM -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
>
>> Slawa Olhovchenkov writes:
>>
>> > Default install with local_unbound and ntpd can't be functional with
>> > incorrect date/time in BIOS:
>> >
>> > Unbound requred correct time for DNSSEC check and refuseing queries
>> > ("Jul 1 20:17:29 yellowrat unbound: [3444:0] info: failed to prime
>> > trust anchor -- DNSKEY rrset is not secure . DNSKEY IN")
>> >
>> > ntpd don't have any numeric IP of ntp servers in ntp.conf -- only
>> > symbolic names like 0.freebsd.pool.ntp.org, as result -- can't
>> > resolve (see above, about DNSKEY).
>>
>> I can't see how this would happen. DNSSEC doesn't seem to be required in
>> a regular install as far as I can see. Certainly I don't have any
>
> I don't know reasson for enforcing DNSSEC in regular install.
> I am just select `local_unbound` at setup time and enter `127.0.0.1` as
> nameserver address.
That's not enough to configure unbound as a fully recursive DNS
server. If your system gets its address through DHCP, it is probably
getting DNS server addresses as well, and would work fine *without* your
configuring any of the DNS state.
>> problem on any of my systems, and I've never configured an anchor on the
>> internal systems.
>>
>> > IMHO, ntp.conf need to include some numeric IP of public ntp servers.
>>
>> Ouch; that's a terrible idea, for several different reasons.
>
> What else?
All the normal reasons that hard-coding IP addresses is a bad idea; they
can change, you're encouraging a lot of people to use the same ones, etc.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mariadb/percona cluster choices
Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff [2016-06-05 15:11 +0200] : > Ganbold Tsagaankhuu [2016-06-05 21:29 +0900] : > > > I have tried Galera with MariaDB couple of months ago: > > > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208109 > > > > Please let me know how it works if you try. > > I just wanted to mention that I stumbled upon the same bug: > > https://lists.launchpad.net/maria-discuss/msg03615.html Anyway, as the others I am quite interested in alternatives. Maybe someone was able to configure Percona successfully..? Niklaas signature.asc Description: PGP signature
