Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 08:42:01AM +0100, Janne Johansson wrote: > 2013/2/19 Keith : > > Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding > > millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I won't > > get inode issues ? > > Since you probably aren't going to have 50G/2k number of files in a > single dir, then you'd be wise to make several filesystems for the > directories you have there, especially for the fsck reasons mentioned > by others in this thread. > Fsck'ing 10 5G fs:es with lots of inodes will be far more fun than one > of 50G in size. And chances are quite big that not all of those 10 A 50G filesysten created with defaults has more than 6 million inodes and on a system without a decent amount of memory checks pretty quick. If you run ffs2 with softdep, and optimization kicks in that will make the number of *used* inodes the driving factor, instead of the total number of inodes on a fs. > will have issues even on unclean shutdowns, so you would be able to > skip over a few in such an event. Likely all will be unclean and need to be checked. Anyway make sure the max number of files per directory doe not grow without bound. Use a max of a couple of 1 files per directory as a rule of thumb. -Otto
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 09:09:49AM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 08:42:01AM +0100, Janne Johansson wrote: > > > 2013/2/19 Keith : > > > Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding > > > millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I won't > > > get inode issues ? > > > > Since you probably aren't going to have 50G/2k number of files in a > > single dir, then you'd be wise to make several filesystems for the > > directories you have there, especially for the fsck reasons mentioned > > by others in this thread. > > Fsck'ing 10 5G fs:es with lots of inodes will be far more fun than one > > of 50G in size. And chances are quite big that not all of those 10 > > A 50G filesysten created with defaults has more than 6 million inodes > and on a system without a decent amount of memory checks pretty quick. ehh, *with* > > If you run ffs2 with softdep, and optimization kicks in that will make > the number of *used* inodes the driving factor, instead of the total > number of inodes on a fs. > > > will have issues even on unclean shutdowns, so you would be able to > > skip over a few in such an event. > > Likely all will be unclean and need to be checked. > > Anyway make sure the max number of files per directory doe not grow > without bound. Use a max of a couple of 1 files per directory as a > rule of thumb. > > -Otto
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files in a single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the right tool for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant to handle this problem because you need ZFS. What limits does ZFS have? --- The limitations of ZFS are designed to be so large that they will never be encountered in any practical operation. ZFS can store 16 Exabytes in each storage pool, file system, file, or file attribute. ZFS can store billions of names: files or directories in a directory, file systems in a file system, or snapshots of a file system. ZFS can store trillions of items: files in a file system, file systems, volumes, or snapshots in a pool. I'm not sure why ZFS hasn't yet been ported to OpenBSD, but if it were then that would pretty much eliminate the need for my one and only FreeBSD box ;-) On Feb 19, 2013, at 2:35 AM, Keith wrote: > Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding millions > of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I won't get inode > issues ? > > The problem is that my server has the default disk layout as I didn't expect > to have millions of files (I though they would be stored in the DB). When I > started the app it generated all the files and I got out of space warnings. I > tried moving the folder containing the files and making a symlink back but > that didn't work because nginx is in a chroot. > > The two option I think I have are. > > 1. Reinstall the OS and make a dedicated /var/www partition but how I > increase the inode limit I have no idea. > 2. Make a new partition, format it, copy the files from the original > partition and swap them around and restart nginx. ( Do i run newfs with some > option to make more inodes ?) > > Thanks > Keith.
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
Or you could just use ZFS, XFS, whateverFS in a separate unix/linux box and go NFS on it, simulating a true external storage appliance :) On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:47 AM, MJ wrote: > Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files in a > single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the right tool > for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant to handle this > problem because you need ZFS. > > > What limits does ZFS have? > --- > The limitations of ZFS are designed to be so large that they will never be > encountered in any practical operation. ZFS can store 16 Exabytes in each > storage pool, file system, file, or file attribute. ZFS can store billions > of names: files or directories in a directory, file systems in a file > system, or snapshots of a file system. ZFS can store trillions of items: > files in a file system, file systems, volumes, or snapshots in a pool. > > > I'm not sure why ZFS hasn't yet been ported to OpenBSD, but if it were > then that would pretty much eliminate the need for my one and only FreeBSD > box ;-) > > > > On Feb 19, 2013, at 2:35 AM, Keith wrote: > > > Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding > millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I won't > get inode issues ? > > > > The problem is that my server has the default disk layout as I didn't > expect to have millions of files (I though they would be stored in the DB). > When I started the app it generated all the files and I got out of space > warnings. I tried moving the folder containing the files and making a > symlink back but that didn't work because nginx is in a chroot. > > > > The two option I think I have are. > > > > 1. Reinstall the OS and make a dedicated /var/www partition but how I > increase the inode limit I have no idea. > > 2. Make a new partition, format it, copy the files from the original > partition and swap them around and restart nginx. ( Do i run newfs with > some option to make more inodes ?) > > > > Thanks > > Keith.
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
Hi, Or you could fix your application, to not do stupid things (like generating millions of files in a single directory) in the first place... ;-) On 2013-02-19 at 12:10 CET Paolo Aglialoro wrote: >Or you could just use ZFS, XFS, whateverFS in a separate unix/linux box and >go NFS on it, simulating a true external storage appliance :) > > >On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:47 AM, MJ wrote: > >> Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files in a >> single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the right tool >> for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant to handle this >> problem because you need ZFS. >> >> >> What limits does ZFS have? >> --- >> The limitations of ZFS are designed to be so large that they will never be >> encountered in any practical operation. ZFS can store 16 Exabytes in each >> storage pool, file system, file, or file attribute. ZFS can store billions >> of names: files or directories in a directory, file systems in a file >> system, or snapshots of a file system. ZFS can store trillions of items: >> files in a file system, file systems, volumes, or snapshots in a pool. >> >> >> I'm not sure why ZFS hasn't yet been ported to OpenBSD, but if it were >> then that would pretty much eliminate the need for my one and only FreeBSD >> box ;-) >> >> >> >> On Feb 19, 2013, at 2:35 AM, Keith wrote: >> >> > Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding >> millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I won't >> get inode issues ? >> > >> > The problem is that my server has the default disk layout as I didn't >> expect to have millions of files (I though they would be stored in the DB). >> When I started the app it generated all the files and I got out of space >> warnings. I tried moving the folder containing the files and making a >> symlink back but that didn't work because nginx is in a chroot. >> > >> > The two option I think I have are. >> > >> > 1. Reinstall the OS and make a dedicated /var/www partition but how I >> increase the inode limit I have no idea. >> > 2. Make a new partition, format it, copy the files from the original >> partition and swap them around and restart nginx. ( Do i run newfs with >> some option to make more inodes ?) >> > >> > Thanks >> > Keith. > -- Greetings Rafal Bisingier
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
On 19/02/2013 10:47, MJ wrote: Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files in a single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the right tool for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant to handle this problem because you need ZFS. What limits does ZFS have? --- The limitations of ZFS are designed to be so large that they will never be encountered in any practical operation. ZFS can store 16 Exabytes in each storage pool, file system, file, or file attribute. ZFS can store billions of names: files or directories in a directory, file systems in a file system, or snapshots of a file system. ZFS can store trillions of items: files in a file system, file systems, volumes, or snapshots in a pool. I'm not sure why ZFS hasn't yet been ported to OpenBSD, but if it were then that would pretty much eliminate the need for my one and only FreeBSD box ;-) On Feb 19, 2013, at 2:35 AM, Keith wrote: Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I won't get inode issues ? The problem is that my server has the default disk layout as I didn't expect to have millions of files (I though they would be stored in the DB). When I started the app it generated all the files and I got out of space warnings. I tried moving the folder containing the files and making a symlink back but that didn't work because nginx is in a chroot. The two option I think I have are. 1. Reinstall the OS and make a dedicated /var/www partition but how I increase the inode limit I have no idea. 2. Make a new partition, format it, copy the files from the original partition and swap them around and restart nginx. ( Do i run newfs with some option to make more inodes ?) Thanks Keith. It's a usenet indexing application called Newznab. It consists of two parts, some php scripts that do the indexing that are generating the pesky "nbz.gz" files and then there's the web front end. This running on my home server / firewall and I think it's almost working I just need to get the partitions sorted out and it should be fine. I don't want to switch to FreeBSD for ZFS or introduce another machine for a NFS Volume. To be honest I didn't think indexing usenet would be such a big deal, but it's a turning out to be quite a resource hog. Keith
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
On 19 Feb 2013, at 1:40 PM, Rafal Bisingier wrote: > Hi, > > Or you could fix your application, to not do stupid things (like > generating millions of files in a single directory) in the first > place... ;-) +1 > > > On 2013-02-19 at 12:10 CET > Paolo Aglialoro wrote: > >> Or you could just use ZFS, XFS, whateverFS in a separate unix/linux box and >> go NFS on it, simulating a true external storage appliance :) >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:47 AM, MJ wrote: >> >>> Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files in a >>> single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the right tool >>> for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant to handle this >>> problem because you need ZFS. >>> >>> >>> What limits does ZFS have? >>> --- >>> The limitations of ZFS are designed to be so large that they will never be >>> encountered in any practical operation. ZFS can store 16 Exabytes in each >>> storage pool, file system, file, or file attribute. ZFS can store billions >>> of names: files or directories in a directory, file systems in a file >>> system, or snapshots of a file system. ZFS can store trillions of items: >>> files in a file system, file systems, volumes, or snapshots in a pool. >>> >>> >>> I'm not sure why ZFS hasn't yet been ported to OpenBSD, but if it were >>> then that would pretty much eliminate the need for my one and only FreeBSD >>> box ;-) >>> >>> >>> >>> On Feb 19, 2013, at 2:35 AM, Keith wrote: >>> Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding >>> millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I won't >>> get inode issues ? The problem is that my server has the default disk layout as I didn't >>> expect to have millions of files (I though they would be stored in the DB). >>> When I started the app it generated all the files and I got out of space >>> warnings. I tried moving the folder containing the files and making a >>> symlink back but that didn't work because nginx is in a chroot. The two option I think I have are. 1. Reinstall the OS and make a dedicated /var/www partition but how I >>> increase the inode limit I have no idea. 2. Make a new partition, format it, copy the files from the original >>> partition and swap them around and restart nginx. ( Do i run newfs with >>> some option to make more inodes ?) Thanks Keith. >> > > > > > -- > Greetings > Rafal Bisingier
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
On 02/19/13 05:47, MJ wrote: > Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files > in a single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the > right tool for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant > to handle this problem because you need ZFS. > > > What limits does ZFS have? --- > The limitations of ZFS are designed to be so large that they will > never be encountered in any practical operation. ZFS can store 16 > Exabytes in each storage pool, file system, file, or file attribute. > ZFS can store billions of names: files or directories in a directory, > file systems in a file system, or snapshots of a file system. ZFS can > store trillions of items: files in a file system, file systems, > volumes, or snapshots in a pool. > > > I'm not sure why ZFS hasn't yet been ported to OpenBSD, but if it > were then that would pretty much eliminate the need for my one and > only FreeBSD box ;-) The usual stated reason is "license", it is completely unacceptable to OpenBSD. The other reason usually not given which I suspect would become obvious were the license not an instant non-starter is the nature of ZFS. As it is a major memory hog, it works well only on loaded 64 bit platforms. Since most of our 64 bit platforms are older, and Alpha and SGI machines with many gigabytes of memory are rare, you are probably talking an amd64 and maybe some sparc64 systems. Also...see the number of "ZFS Tuning Guides" out there. How...1980s. The OP here has a "special case" use, but virtually all ZFS uses involve knob twisting and experimentation, which is about as anti-OpenBSD as you can get. Granted, there are a lot of people who love knob-twisting, but that's not what OpenBSD is about. I use ZFS, and have a few ZFS systems in production, and what it does is pretty amazing, but mostly in the sense of the gigabytes of RAM it consumes for basic operation (and unexplained file system wedging). I've usually seen it used as a way to avoid good system design. Yes, huge file systems can be useful, but usually in papering over basic design flaws. Nick.
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Nick Holland
wrote:
> I use ZFS, and have a few ZFS systems in production, and what it does is
> pretty amazing, but mostly in the sense of the gigabytes of RAM it
> consumes for basic operation (and unexplained file system wedging).
> I've usually seen it used as a way to avoid good system design. Yes,
> huge file systems can be useful, but usually in papering over basic
> design flaws.
funnily enough, that "avoid[ing] good system design" is exactly what
makes it useful for desktop over server. i don't want to spend any
time figuring out how much gigs for /usr/{src,xenocara}. i also don't
want to partition /usr/ports only to find out later on that there's an
"object" or "tmp" sub-directory that i want on a different fs but i
can't because i've hit the 16 partition limit
if i ever install an application for experimental reasons, because
it's not a production machine, i don't want to rethink everything to
fit inside the disklabel constraints either. "good system design"
doesn't apply because it's a case where, gasp, the admin couldn't
possibly plan ahead
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
> On 02/19/13 05:47, MJ wrote: >> Which app are you running that is generating millions of tiny files >> in a single directory? Regardless, in this case OpenBSD is not the >> right tool for the job. You need either FreeBSD or a Solaris variant >> to handle this problem because you need ZFS. >> >> >> What limits does ZFS have? --- >> The limitations of ZFS are designed to be so large that they will >> never be encountered in any practical operation. ZFS can store 16 >> Exabytes in each storage pool, file system, file, or file attribute. >> ZFS can store billions of names: files or directories in a directory, >> file systems in a file system, or snapshots of a file system. ZFS can >> store trillions of items: files in a file system, file systems, >> volumes, or snapshots in a pool. >> >> >> I'm not sure why ZFS hasn't yet been ported to OpenBSD, but if it >> were then that would pretty much eliminate the need for my one and >> only FreeBSD box ;-) > > The usual stated reason is "license", it is completely unacceptable to > OpenBSD. > > The other reason usually not given which I suspect would become obvious > were the license not an instant non-starter is the nature of ZFS. As it > is a major memory hog, it works well only on loaded 64 bit platforms. > Since most of our 64 bit platforms are older, and Alpha and SGI machines > with many gigabytes of memory are rare, you are probably talking an > amd64 and maybe some sparc64 systems. > > Also...see the number of "ZFS Tuning Guides" out there. How...1980s. > The OP here has a "special case" use, but virtually all ZFS uses involve > knob twisting and experimentation, which is about as anti-OpenBSD as you > can get. Granted, there are a lot of people who love knob-twisting, but > that's not what OpenBSD is about. > > I use ZFS, and have a few ZFS systems in production, and what it does is > pretty amazing, but mostly in the sense of the gigabytes of RAM it > consumes for basic operation (and unexplained file system wedging). > I've usually seen it used as a way to avoid good system design. Yes, > huge file systems can be useful, but usually in papering over basic > design flaws. > > Nick. > > I feel anyone expecting to run any of the recently hatched filesystem on 10+ year old hardware falls into the design flaw category you mention. As for needing to turn nobs to get it to work properly this is not necessary if you use a modern 64bit box. Most of the tuning guides are written for the guys trying to use it on their old hardware. Or trying to reach "performance" numbers for whatever, usually misguided, reason. On a modern amd64 box it pretty much just works. As for a port to OpenBSD I'd love it, or port of LVM, but the biggest hurdle IMO is the same one that plagues so many other good potential OpenBSD ports. Getting someone competent and dedicated enough to do the work. I'm neither of those two things when it comes to porting, so I can only blame myself that I'm using FreeBSD on my file server and desktop instead of Open as I'd really like. However, I still have deep reservations about trusting ZFS long term since Oracle closed it off to the community again. I don't feel FreeBSD will be able to truly maintain the port over time. I hope I'm wrong but we will see. So it may be for the best that Open doesn't waste too much time on it. -- ESP
Re: intel 2000 failure
Hi Chris! > did you upgrade X as well? Did you wipe out the old /usr/x11r6 directory so > to guarantee you are not using any old drivers? I did upgrade X also. Directory /usr/X11R6 shows 14th february date. I didn't delete it previously, it was not a request on any tutorial on openbsd site. I'm puzzled since people report success with this kind of integ- rated hardware. Best regards Zoran
Re: Constant attacks and ISP's are ignoring them
Richard Thornton [rich...@thornton.net] wrote: > Linksys routers are defaulted to port forwarding NOT enabled, so check facts > before ranting. > Your routers are impervious to penetration.
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
Am 19.02.2013 18:01, schrieb Eric S Pulley: [snip] I feel anyone expecting to run any of the recently hatched filesystem on 10+ year old hardware falls into the design flaw category you mention. As for needing to turn nobs to get it to work properly this is not necessary if you use a modern 64bit box. Most of the tuning guides are written for the guys trying to use it on their old hardware. Or trying to reach "performance" numbers for whatever, usually misguided, reason. On a modern amd64 box it pretty much just works. Maybe I don't see the big picture, but I assume, if ZFS is opt in, and not the default FS, memory consumption would only hit those who *really* run ZFS on their boxes As for a port to OpenBSD I'd love it, or port of LVM, but the biggest hurdle IMO is the same one that plagues so many other good potential OpenBSD ports. Getting someone competent and dedicated enough to do the work. I have to confess /me is neither competent nor dedicated, but I assume ZFS support for OpenBSD hast to be rewritten fron scratch. And by talking of ZFS, why not consider ext3/4,reiser,xfs,jfs,ntfs,whatever-fs to be ported to OpenBSD? Don't get me wrong, I would *love* to see ZFS in OpenBSD...but done in an OpenBSD-worthy way! I'm neither of those two things when it comes to porting, so I can only blame myself that I'm using FreeBSD on my file server and desktop instead of Open as I'd really like. However, I still have deep reservations about trusting ZFS long term since Oracle closed it off to the community again. I don't feel FreeBSD will be able to truly maintain the port over time. I hope I'm wrong but we will see. So it may be for the best that Open doesn't waste too much time on it. Yupp, I think, that's (beside the CDDL part of ZFS) it the major turn-off in any kind of productive enviroment. At the moment I don't know how FreeBSD handles the ZFS development, but maintaining a not-really-fully-ZFS besides Oracle is a no-go, IMHO. Maybe forking it and calling it whatever-name-you-want-FS, would be better (but would violate CDDL, as far as I can see).. If you want to have ZFS, you will have to bite the bullet and throw some $$$ on Oracles hive and get a fully licensed ZFS alongside with Solaris. If thats not an option, move along and choose someting different. So, long story short, I do not see any option to use ZFS on a free system.
Re: Constant attacks and ISP's are ignoring them
Am 19.02.2013 18:34, schrieb Chris Cappuccio: Richard Thornton [rich...@thornton.net] wrote: Linksys routers are defaulted to port forwarding NOT enabled, so check facts before ranting. Your routers are impervious to penetration. I would not call those Linksys boxes _routers_ in the first place!
Re: Constant attacks and ISP's are ignoring them
Am 19.02.2013 05:53, schrieb Chris Cappuccio: Kevin Chadwick [ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk] wrote: Every firewall/router product that I have purchased has been compromised so far. I don't believe this at all. Not one bit. I could believe it but that doesn't mean that I do. 90% of the routers on my street will be insecure and even using old sps, upnp or wep. Common, mass attacks are becoming more sophisticated every day. All of them. The cat-and-mouse game is continually tilting against the vast majority who only take the most basic security measures. So it's typically a big problem when new major vulnerabilities are found in consumer grade equipment. If I buy a car, and don't know how to operate it, and cause harm, nobody would blame the manufacturer. But If john Doe buys a "firewall" (hey, it says so on the lable on the box, so it HAS to be a "firewall") and gets exploited by a drive-by-download, the "firewall" *has* to be bad. Here's a simple example from the past week: Someone just pointed out that most of the Linux UPNP routers out there listen to UPNP port forwarding requests FROM EXTERNAL SOURCES! So now everyone is releasing patches, and that's only IF the code on the router is still even maintained. And this new (and pretty fucking obvious) hole was just pointed out to the general public. To see that router vendors are mass producing junk that listens to a UPNP port forwarding request from the fucking INTERNET shows that anyone who doubts the security of their XYZ router is probably on to something. Yeah, you can parade the idea that "you should have disabled UPNP", and that is a smart choice. But very few UPNP routers will come with UPNP disabled. And the UPNP insecurity that is well known is at least supposed to have a basis in an already-compromised INSIDE host, not take port forwarding requests from the INTERNET. So if vast numbers of routers are listening to admin commands from 0.0.0.0/0, and you don't believe "at all" that "every router" this apparent troll has bought has been compromised, then you need to think more creatively. And this guy needs to disable UPnP, and maybe change his router admin password while he's at it. (And reflash the firmware, and reformat his computer, re-flash his DVD ROM, GPU, and so on.) Hey, we are talking about users having adobe reader and java on their systems (most of them not up-to-date) and you want them to secure their BRAND-X plastic crap, they bought for 9.99$ at XYZ-mart? If I don't know how to maintain my car (although I theoretically know how combustion engines work), I take it to someone who does! But when it comes to computers, everybody thinks "My name is Karl, ich bin expert!" (pun definitely intended). So, why not throw some bucks at somebody who, at least to some extent, knows what he is doing? Just go to the nearest university and look for some computer science students..chances are, that you find somebody who knows, what he is doing (and is willing to help you, if you give him some bucks). And back to OPI would love to see *all* of the compromised gear and do a forensic analysis...just for the fun of it! And I have seen some consumer grade equipment, and in recent times they *try* to secure their equipment (no WEP,randomized passphrases both for WPA and for admin accounts,no public acessible admin and so on). Yes, UPnP and those exploits of WPS (you definitely don't want to hear my opinion about this cumbersome piece of...well you know it), exist, but if you have somebody (see above) who knows what he is doing, he'll fix it for you (JUST BY TURNING IT OFF!) I tend to think OP was exploited from the inside, not by exploiting their "web sharing thingie" Just think about it...what is more likely...exploiting a reasonably up-to-date Linux/VmWorks "router" or hitting a vulnerable java/adobe/flash/windows/IE/whatever hastily-cobbled-together client application. so long, Matthias
Re: bootable OpenBSD USB stick from windows?
Am 13.02.2013 19:14, schrieb Hugo Osvaldo Barrera: $20 may sound cheap to you, but that's not cheap in every part of the world, especially for a device you'll use only ONCE to install the OS. It's 2013, and buying floppies/optical drives isn't the best of advices. What's wrong PXE? If 20$ is too much to spend for OP, I would like to donate a working USB slimline CD/DVD drive, which I don't use anymore(working, of course!). The only two conditions are: *Snail-mailing the drive does not cost a fortune. *If I am in his part of the world, or he is in my part of it, he has to pay me a pint of beer. *Only valid for OPdon't come knocking for free DVD drives ;-) I am not able to contribute very much to the OpenBSD community, but if this is what I can do to have another user using OpenBSD, I would be glad to do so! Regards, Matthias
Re: bootable OpenBSD USB stick from windows? [OT]
Am 20.02.2013 02:45, schrieb sven falempin: > If 20$ is too much to spend for OP, I would like to donate a working > USB slimline CD/DVD drive, which I don't use anymore(working, of course!). > > The only two conditions are: > > *Snail-mailing the drive does not cost a fortune. > *If I am in his part of the world, or he is in my part of it, he > has to pay me a pint of beer. > *Only valid for OPdon't come knocking for free DVD drives ;-) > > I am not able to contribute very much to the OpenBSD community, > but if this is what I can do to have another user using OpenBSD, I > would be glad to do so! > > > > Regards, > > Matthias > > i am pretty sure usb key cost less than beer somewhere :-) > Challenge accepted: http://www.e-tec.at/frame1/details.php?art=42888 http://www.josef.co.at/JosefNeu/Web/pdf/Getr%C3%A4nkeangebot.pdf (Just look beneath "OFFENE BIERE") And I am talking about *beer* not yellow coloured water :-P And yeah, OK...2nd condition of the deal is opt-out, of course (hence the low possibility of meeting somewhere, anyway) Cheers, Matthias
Re: bootable OpenBSD USB stick from windows? [OT]
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Matthias Appel wrote: > Am 20.02.2013 02:45, schrieb sven falempin: > > If 20$ is too much to spend for OP, I would like to donate a working USB > slimline CD/DVD drive, which I don't use anymore(working, of course!). > >> The only two conditions are: >> >> *Snail-mailing the drive does not cost a fortune. >> *If I am in his part of the world, or he is in my part of it, he has to >> pay me a pint of beer. >> *Only valid for OPdon't come knocking for free DVD drives ;-) >> >> I am not able to contribute very much to the OpenBSD community, but if >> this is what I can do to have another user using OpenBSD, I would be glad >> to do so! >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias >> >> > i am pretty sure usb key cost less than beer somewhere :-) > > > Challenge accepted: > > http://www.e-tec.at/frame1/details.php?art=42888 > > http://www.josef.co.at/JosefNeu/Web/pdf/Getr%C3%A4nkeangebot.pdf > (Just look beneath "OFFENE BIERE") > > And I am talking about *beer* not yellow coloured water :-P > > > And yeah, OK...2nd condition of the deal is opt-out, of course (hence the > low possibility of meeting somewhere, anyway) > > > > Cheers, > > > Matthias > > > 4 hours to go , place your bet (shipping is a pain though) http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Design-Handgun-Shaped-8GB-USB-2-0-Flash-Memory-Pen-Drive-Stick-Thumb-/330876107090?pt=US_USB_Flash_Drives&hash=item4d09c0b952 -- - () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\
httpd and php-mapi
Hi, I am trying to check the possibilities with Zarafa and installed OpenBSD 5.2 on an empty machine. Sadly, I spent the last hours trying to figure out the cause of the following messages in httpd's error log: '[...] child pid $x exit signal Segmentation fault (11)' I tried calling it with '-X' to make a ktrace but then it works(!) Also, I checked if it might not be caused by some library so I removed the mapi.ini file from php-5.3 folders and httpd gets fine but Zarafa cries about php-mapi not being loaded. In the end, I need php-mapi to use Zarafa but it crashes httpd. o Did someone else encountered that issue and got it resolved? o Is there some way I could ktrace httpd's child? Any help would be appreciated, thanks. P. Grégoire P.S. Is CoreDumpDirectory working? It does not here.
Re: Millions of files in /var/www & inode / out of space issue.
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 00:35, Keith wrote: > > Q. How do I make the default web folder /var/www/ capable of holding > > millions of files (say 50GB worth of small 2kb-12kb files) so that I > > won't get inode issues ? newfs defaults to -f 2k and -b 16k which is fine if you know in advance you will hold 2k-12k files. As for inodes, the default of -i is to create an inode for every 4 frags, that is 8192 bytes. So on a 50G filesystem this should give you over 6.1 millon inodes. What does df -hi say? But first of all, fix your crappy app to not do that.
Re: httpd and php-mapi
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 08:55:39PM -0500, Philippe Grégoire wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to check the possibilities with Zarafa and installed > OpenBSD 5.2 on an empty machine. Sadly, I spent the last hours > trying to figure out the cause of the following messages in > httpd's error log: > > '[...] child pid $x exit signal Segmentation fault (11)' > > I tried calling it with '-X' to make a ktrace but then it works(!) > Also, I checked if it might not be caused by some library so I > removed the mapi.ini file from php-5.3 folders and httpd gets fine > but Zarafa cries about php-mapi not being loaded. > > In the end, I need php-mapi to use Zarafa but it crashes httpd. > > o Did someone else encountered that issue and got it resolved? > o Is there some way I could ktrace httpd's child? > > Any help would be appreciated, thanks. $ sudo pkg_add -n zarafa-webaccess <...> Look in /usr/local/share/doc/pkg-readmes for extra documentation Seems to me you didn't do what pkg_add(1) advised you to do. -- Antoine
