Re: F33 install minimum memory requirements?

[Ed Greshko]

On 2020-08-26 02:27, Chris Murphy wrote:
> It's getting clobbered by earlyoom. It really doesn't have enough
> memory if it's swapping out 892M. If that were on disk, it'd be kindof
> a dreadful experience performance wise, but yeah it would eventually
> succeed if big enough.

I'm not concerned with performance.  The F32 installs took time too.  But it 
isn't as if
I was in a hurry.  These VM's are mostly only used to duplicate issues others 
are having
on the users list.  So, install time and user experience are irrelevant, to me.

> Another test would be to use Custom partitioning to create disk-based
> swap equal to the amount of memory. To do that: keep the btrfs scheme
> and have it create the layout for you, then reduce the Btrfs partition
> (click on / or /home, and on the right side UI find 'Volume' and click
> the Modify button, use fixed size and set a value - now you can create
> swap same size as RAM).

I performed the above after assigning 1248mb and the install completed fine.

My suggestion would be that if the install process could detect/know that it is 
below the limits
needed it would notify the user and not proceed.  That is, not just crash.

> I'm curious how much swap it ends up using but it'll probably be more
> than 800M in which case, it's just seriously under resourced.
>
> Still another test, you can keep increasing the zram device size up to
> 2x memory, i.e. ' zram-fraction=2.0' That has its own consequences but
> will still be way faster than disk based swap.

Speed isn't the issue, for me.  It is crashing v.s. not crashing


-- 
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora-33-20200825.n.1 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Failed openQA tests: 8/181 (x86_64)

Old failures (same test failed in Fedora-33-20200824.n.0):

ID: 647962  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_background
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647962
ID: 647968  Test: x86_64 KDE-live-iso desktop_notifications_postinstall
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647968
ID: 648000  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/648000
ID: 648010  Test: x86_64 universal install_mirrorlist_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/648010
ID: 648011  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_server_domain_controller
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/648011
ID: 648041  Test: x86_64 universal install_cyrillic_language
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/648041
ID: 648068  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_realmd_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/648068
ID: 648069  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_realmd_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/648069

Soft failed openQA tests: 92/181 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-33-20200824.n.0):

ID: 647891  Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647891
ID: 647892  Test: x86_64 Server-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647892
ID: 647894  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_hd_variation
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647894
ID: 647895  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647895
ID: 647896  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfs_graphical
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647896
ID: 647897  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfs_variation
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647897
ID: 647898  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_repository_nfsiso_variation
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647898
ID: 647899  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647899
ID: 647902  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_updates_nfs
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647902
ID: 647903  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647903
ID: 647904  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647904
ID: 647905  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vncconnect_server
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647905
ID: 647920  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso server_realmd_join_kickstart
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647920
ID: 647926  Test: x86_64 Server-dvd-iso install_vnc_client
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647926
ID: 647931  Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647931
ID: 647932  Test: x86_64 Everything-boot-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647932
ID: 647936  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647936
ID: 647937  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso install_default_upload
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647937
ID: 647949  Test: x86_64 Workstation-live-iso desktop_printing
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647949
ID: 647972  Test: x86_64 Silverblue-dvd_ostree-iso install_default@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647972
ID: 647983  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647983
ID: 647990  Test: x86_64 universal install_kickstart_firewall_configured
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647990
ID: 647991  Test: x86_64 universal install_blivet_with_swap
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647991
ID: 647992  Test: x86_64 universal install_kickstart_user_creation
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647992
ID: 647994  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_desktop_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647994
ID: 647995  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_desktop_encrypted_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647995
ID: 647997  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_minimal_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647997
ID: 647998  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_minimal_uefi@uefi
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647998
ID: 647999  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_2_server_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647999
ID: 648001  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/648001
ID: 648002  Test: x86_64 universal upgrade_desktop_encrypted_64bit
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/648002
ID: 648004  Test: x86_64 

Fedora 33 compose report: 20200825.n.1 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-33-20200824.n.0
NEW: Fedora-33-20200825.n.1

= SUMMARY =
Added images:7
Dropped images:  0
Added packages:  6
Dropped packages:135
Upgraded packages:   251
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  4.27 MiB
Size of dropped packages:412.50 MiB
Size of upgraded packages:   3.43 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   -214.75 MiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: Mate live x86_64
Path: Spins/x86_64/iso/Fedora-MATE_Compiz-Live-x86_64-33-20200825.n.1.iso
Image: Server dvd s390x
Path: Server/s390x/iso/Fedora-Server-dvd-s390x-33-20200825.n.1.iso
Image: Xfce raw-xz armhfp
Path: Spins/armhfp/images/Fedora-Xfce-armhfp-33-20200825.n.1-sda.raw.xz
Image: LXDE raw-xz armhfp
Path: Spins/armhfp/images/Fedora-LXDE-armhfp-33-20200825.n.1-sda.raw.xz
Image: Mate raw-xz armhfp
Path: Spins/armhfp/images/Fedora-Mate-armhfp-33-20200825.n.1-sda.raw.xz
Image: Workstation raw-xz armhfp
Path: 
Workstation/armhfp/images/Fedora-Workstation-armhfp-33-20200825.n.1-sda.raw.xz
Image: KDE raw-xz armhfp
Path: Spins/armhfp/images/Fedora-KDE-armhfp-33-20200825.n.1-sda.raw.xz

= DROPPED IMAGES =

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: clevis-pin-tpm2-0.1.2-2.fc33
Summary: Clevis PIN for unlocking with TPM2 supporting Authorized Policies
RPMs:clevis-pin-tpm2
Size:1.95 MiB

Package: fcitx5-configtool-0-0.2.20200825gitecd16e5.fc33
Summary: Configuration tools used by fcitx5
RPMs:fcitx5-configtool
Size:1.61 MiB

Package: golang-github-mholt-certmagic-0.8-0.8.3-1.fc33
Summary: Automatic HTTPS for any Go program: fully-managed TLS certificate 
issuance and renewal
RPMs:golang-github-mholt-certmagic-devel-0.8
Size:66.11 KiB

Package: golang-github-prometheus-client-0.9-0.9.4-6.fc33
Summary: Prometheus instrumentation library for go applications
RPMs:golang-github-prometheus-client-devel-0.9
Size:125.69 KiB

Package: jakarta-saaj-1.4.2-1.fc33
Summary: SOAP with Attachments API for Java
RPMs:jakarta-saaj
Size:44.53 KiB

Package: python-pyro-4.71-12.fc33
Summary: PYthon Remote Objects
RPMs:python3-pyro
Size:487.28 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =
Package: aether-connector-okhttp-0.17.6-3.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: OkHttp Aether Connector
RPMs:aether-connector-okhttp aether-connector-okhttp-javadoc
Size:115.90 KiB

Package: antlr32-3.2-24.module_f33+8869+a0fd1c5c
Summary: ANother Tool for Language Recognition
RPMs:antlr32-java antlr32-javadoc antlr32-maven-plugin antlr32-tool
Size:1.56 MiB

Package: apache-commons-collections-3.2.2-15.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Provides new interfaces, implementations and utilities for Java 
Collections
RPMs:apache-commons-collections apache-commons-collections-javadoc 
apache-commons-collections-testframework
Size:1.12 MiB

Package: apache-commons-compress-1.19-1.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Java API for working with compressed files and archivers
RPMs:apache-commons-compress apache-commons-compress-javadoc
Size:1.05 MiB

Package: apache-commons-discovery-2:0.5-23.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Apache Commons Discovery
RPMs:apache-commons-discovery apache-commons-discovery-javadoc
Size:174.61 KiB

Package: apache-commons-jxpath-1.3-34.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Simple XPath interpreter
RPMs:apache-commons-jxpath apache-commons-jxpath-javadoc
Size:584.09 KiB

Package: apache-commons-lang-2.6-27.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Provides a host of helper utilities for the java.lang API
RPMs:apache-commons-lang apache-commons-lang-javadoc
Size:628.56 KiB

Package: apache-commons-validator-1.5.0-10.fc32
Summary: Apache Commons Validator
RPMs:apache-commons-validator apache-commons-validator-javadoc
Size:312.44 KiB

Package: apache-sshd-1:2.2.0-4.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Apache SSHD
RPMs:apache-sshd apache-sshd-javadoc
Size:3.07 MiB

Package: args4j-2.33-9.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Java command line arguments parser
RPMs:args4j args4j-javadoc args4j-parent args4j-tools
Size:292.40 KiB

Package: batik-1.11-3.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Scalable Vector Graphics for Java
RPMs:batik batik-css batik-demo batik-javadoc batik-rasterizer 
batik-slideshow batik-squiggle batik-svgpp batik-ttf2svg batik-util
Size:8.74 MiB

Package: bea-stax-1.2.0-20.fc32
Summary: Streaming API for XML
RPMs:bea-stax bea-stax-api bea-stax-javadoc
Size:307.14 KiB

Package: bouncycastle-1.63-2.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Bouncy Castle Cryptography APIs for Java
RPMs:bouncycastle bouncycastle-javadoc bouncycastle-mail bouncycastle-pg 
bouncycastle-pkix bouncycastle-tls
Size:9.73 MiB

Package: eclipse-egit-5.7.0-2.module_f33+8843+8a8e3dd8
Summary: Eclipse Git Integration
RPMs:eclipse-egit
Size:9.62 MiB

Package: eclipse-gef-3.11.0-12.module_f33+8406+feb0be7b
Summary: Graphical Editing Framework (GEF) Eclipse

Re: Release criteria proposal: networking requirements

[Michel Alexandre Salim]

On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 16:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 15:50 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > >  VPN connections 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Using the default network configuration tools for the console and
> > > for
> > > 
> > > release-blocking desktops, it must be possible to establish a
> > > working
> > > 
> > > connection to common OpenVPN, openconnect-supported and vpnc-
> > > supported
> > > 
> > > VNC servers with typical configurations.
> > 
> > VNC == VPN?
> 
> Oh, yes. Thanks.
> 
> > Also, should we add WireGuard to this list for future-proofing?
> 
> It doesn't really make sense to add things to the release criteria
> for
> future proofing. If it's important *now* we should add it. Otherwise,
> no.
> 
> Do NetworkManager and its current KDE and GNOME front ends support it
> currently?

IIRC not - wireguard-tools is available, but setting up a connection is
manual or needs to use the GUI/CLI from a VPN provider such as Mullvad

https://www.wireguard.com/quickstart/
https://mullvad.net/nl/help/install-mullvad-app-linux/
https://mullvad.net/en/help/how-use-mullvad-cli/

-- 
Michel Alexandre Salim
profile: https://keybase.io/michel_slm
chat via email: https://delta.chat/
GPG key: 5DCE 2E7E 9C3B 1CFF D335 C1D7 8B22 9D2F 7CCC 04F2


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Release criteria proposal: networking requirements

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 15:50 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >  VPN connections 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Using the default network configuration tools for the console and for
> > 
> > release-blocking desktops, it must be possible to establish a working
> > 
> > connection to common OpenVPN, openconnect-supported and vpnc-
> > supported
> > 
> > VNC servers with typical configurations.
> 
> VNC == VPN?

Oh, yes. Thanks.

> Also, should we add WireGuard to this list for future-proofing?

It doesn't really make sense to add things to the release criteria for
future proofing. If it's important *now* we should add it. Otherwise,
no.

Do NetworkManager and its current KDE and GNOME front ends support it
currently?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Release criteria proposal: networking requirements

[Michel Alexandre Salim]

On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  VPN connections 
> 
> 
> 
> Using the default network configuration tools for the console and for
> 
> release-blocking desktops, it must be possible to establish a working
> 
> connection to common OpenVPN, openconnect-supported and vpnc-
> supported
> 
> VNC servers with typical configurations.

VNC == VPN?

Also, should we add WireGuard to this list for future-proofing?

Thanks,

-- 
Michel Alexandre Salim
profile: https://keybase.io/michel_slm
chat via email: https://delta.chat/
GPG key: 5DCE 2E7E 9C3B 1CFF D335 C1D7 8B22 9D2F 7CCC 04F2


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F33 install minimum memory requirements?

[Chris Murphy]

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 12:32 AM Ed Greshko  wrote:
>
> On 2020-08-25 13:58, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 11:30 PM Ed Greshko  wrote:
> >> With F32 and previous versions I've been able to install Workstation and 
> >> other spins in a QEMU VM
> >> with about 1200MB~1248MB of memory.  With F33 the install process crashes 
> >> during the "installing software"
> >> phase.
> >>
> >> Is this expected?
> >>
> >> FWIW, the "Everything-netinst" install of a KDE system did install just 
> >> fine with 1248MB assigned.
> >>
> >> Currently using...
> >>
> >> Fedora-Everything-netinst-x86_64-33-20200824.n.0.iso
> >> Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-33-20200824.n.0.iso
> >> Fedora-KDE-Live-x86_64-33-20200824.n.0.iso
> > Are there any hints why it crashed in the journal? That is pretty
> > tight memory wise. Minimum RAM 2G is what's listed on getfedora.org,
> > and 4G i s recommended. The biggest difference memory wise I can think
> > of between F32 and F33 is no disk based swap by default. It uses zram
> > based swap. And in such a tight case, only 50% may not be enough.
> >
> > Even before the zram change though, I'd see ~250M of swap used with a
> > 2G VM. So that means it's already under provisioned, and walking on
> > thin ice.
> >
> > But we should make sure we have a complete explanation before making
> > adjustments. You could see if zram set to 75% and 100% help, just as
> > an extra data point. Create /etc/systemd/zram-generator.conf and edit
> > to include
> >
> > [zram0]
> > zram-fraction=0.75
> >
> > and then 'systemctl restart swap-create@zram0'
> >
> > confirm with swapon and/or zramctl that its size is 75% that of totalmemory
> >
> > You can do this prior to beginning the installation.
> >
>
> OK, doing the above still resulted in a crash.  But, it happened later in the 
> process.  The
> journal did show
>
> Aug 25 02:27:15 localhost-live anaconda[2042]: program: stderr:
> Aug 25 02:27:14 localhost-live anaconda[2042]: program: Running... umount 
> /run/install/source
> Aug 25 02:27:13 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: sending SIGTERM to process 
> 2042 uid 0 "anaconda": ba
> dness 77, VmRSS 55 MiB
> Aug 25 02:27:12 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: low memory! at or below 
> SIGTERM limits: mem  4.00%,
> swap 10.00%
> Aug 25 02:27:12 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: mem avail:44 of  1191 MiB 
> ( 3.77%), swap free:
>   0 of  892 MiB ( 0.00%)
>
> So, it would seem, zram based swap is less forgiving than disk based swap.

It's getting clobbered by earlyoom. It really doesn't have enough
memory if it's swapping out 892M. If that were on disk, it'd be kindof
a dreadful experience performance wise, but yeah it would eventually
succeed if big enough.

Another test would be to use Custom partitioning to create disk-based
swap equal to the amount of memory. To do that: keep the btrfs scheme
and have it create the layout for you, then reduce the Btrfs partition
(click on / or /home, and on the right side UI find 'Volume' and click
the Modify button, use fixed size and set a value - now you can create
swap same size as RAM).

I'm curious how much swap it ends up using but it'll probably be more
than 800M in which case, it's just seriously under resourced.

Still another test, you can keep increasing the zram device size up to
2x memory, i.e. ' zram-fraction=2.0' That has its own consequences but
will still be way faster than disk based swap.

--
Chris Murphy
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F33 install minimum memory requirements?

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 13:30 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> With F32 and previous versions I've been able to install Workstation and 
> other spins in a QEMU VM
> with about 1200MB~1248MB of memory.  With F33 the install process crashes 
> during the "installing software"
> phase.
> 
> Is this expected?
> 
> FWIW, the "Everything-netinst" install of a KDE system did install just fine 
> with 1248MB assigned.
> 
> Currently using...
> 
> Fedora-Everything-netinst-x86_64-33-20200824.n.0.iso
> Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-33-20200824.n.0.iso
> Fedora-KDE-Live-x86_64-33-20200824.n.0.iso

So the 'official' doc on this, AFAIK, is
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/rawhide/release-notes/welcome/Hardware_Overview/
which still cites 1GB as the minimum for "the default installation"
(which is of course a fairly vague term).

We don't really do any checking/validation of low memory configs,
though, so when this changes we don't necessarily notice. openQA
install tests use 2GB RAM, so we would notice if things stopped working
with 2GB, but we don't test below that.

Running Workstation with less than 2GB is really not gonna give you a
great experience, though. If anything, I'd actually think we should
update the docs to specify 2GB minimum for GNOME and KDE.

Bottom line it's entirely possible this changed, but I don't think we'd
treat it as a significant issue because I suspect we wouldn't really
want to stand behind the experience of running Workstation or KDE in
less than 2GB of RAM anyway.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F33 install minimum memory requirements?

[Ed Greshko]

On 2020-08-25 22:35, Kamil Paral wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 8:33 AM Ed Greshko  > wrote:
>
> Aug 25 02:27:15 localhost-live anaconda[2042]: program: stderr:
> Aug 25 02:27:14 localhost-live anaconda[2042]: program: Running... umount 
> /run/install/source
> Aug 25 02:27:13 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: sending SIGTERM to process 
> 2042 uid 0 "anaconda": ba
> dness 77, VmRSS 55 MiB
> Aug 25 02:27:12 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: low memory! at or below 
> SIGTERM limits: mem  4.00%,
> swap 10.00%
> Aug 25 02:27:12 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: mem avail:    44 of  1191 
> MiB ( 3.77%), swap free: 
>   0 of  892 MiB ( 0.00%)
>
> So, it would seem, zram based swap is less forgiving than disk based swap.
>
>
> It's not "less forgiving", it's just smaller. The log shows you're out of 
> memory and out of swap space. If you absolutely need to install on a system 
> with so little memory, configure a disk-based swap of appropriate size to 
> compensate for low available memory. Or you can also try to use a netinst 
> image which has lower memory requirements than a Live desktop image.
>

Right.  In my case I simply increased the memory allocated to the VM for the 
install process and then
lowered it for the running system.  These are just "test" VMs and won't have 
much of a workload.
I just need to be able to run multiple VMs at the same time on a host with 6GB.

I simply hadn't had an issue before.  Being a "long time" user I tend not to 
read release notes. (Shame, shame)
And even then I don't think there are F33 release notes available.

I feel the documentation of the F33 equivalent of
 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/f32/release-notes/welcome/Hardware_Overview/

should be more explicit in pointing out installs will fail on systems with less 
than 2GB.

-- 
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F33 install minimum memory requirements?

[Ed Greshko]

On 2020-08-25 22:38, Kamil Paral wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:08 AM Ed Greshko  > wrote:
>
> On reflection, I don't think that previous installs without zram used any 
> swap.
>
>
> That seems hardly possible, according to your logs. Anything is possible, but 
> it is very improbable that previously you'd be able to finish the 
> installation without using the disk swap. It's easy to test it. Take Fedora 
> 32 image of the same kind, and run an installation, but remove all swap-based 
> partitions in custom disk partitioning first. You'll see if it can finish or 
> not.
>

You're most likely correct.  I had not thought about that. 


-- 
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F33 install minimum memory requirements?

[Kamil Paral]

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:08 AM Ed Greshko  wrote:

> On reflection, I don't think that previous installs without zram used any
> swap.
>

That seems hardly possible, according to your logs. Anything is possible,
but it is very improbable that previously you'd be able to finish the
installation without using the disk swap. It's easy to test it. Take Fedora
32 image of the same kind, and run an installation, but remove all
swap-based partitions in custom disk partitioning first. You'll see if it
can finish or not.
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F33 install minimum memory requirements?

[Kamil Paral]

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 8:33 AM Ed Greshko  wrote:

> Aug 25 02:27:15 localhost-live anaconda[2042]: program: stderr:
> Aug 25 02:27:14 localhost-live anaconda[2042]: program: Running... umount
> /run/install/source
> Aug 25 02:27:13 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: sending SIGTERM to process
> 2042 uid 0 "anaconda": ba
> dness 77, VmRSS 55 MiB
> Aug 25 02:27:12 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: low memory! at or below
> SIGTERM limits: mem  4.00%,
> swap 10.00%
> Aug 25 02:27:12 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: mem avail:44 of  1191
> MiB ( 3.77%), swap free:
>   0 of  892 MiB ( 0.00%)
>
> So, it would seem, zram based swap is less forgiving than disk based swap.
>

It's not "less forgiving", it's just smaller. The log shows you're out of
memory and out of swap space. If you absolutely need to install on a system
with so little memory, configure a disk-based swap of appropriate size to
compensate for low available memory. Or you can also try to use a netinst
image which has lower memory requirements than a Live desktop image.
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Test-Announce] Bodhi Activation point

[Tomas Hrcka]

Hi all,

Today's an important day on the Fedora 33 schedule[1], with several
significant cut-offs. First of all, today is the Bodhi activation point
[2]. That means that from now on all Fedora 33 packages must be
submitted to updates-testing and pass the relevant requirements[3]
before they will be marked as 'stable' and moved to the fedora
repository.

Today is also the Beta freeze[4]. This means that only packages which
fix accepted blocker or freeze exception bugs[5][6] will be marked as
'stable' and included in the Beta composes. Other builds will remain
in updates-testing until the Beta release is approved, at which point
the Beta freeze is lifted and packages can move to 'stable' as usual
until the Final freeze.

Today is also the '100% code complete deadline' Change
Checkpoint[5], meaning that Fedora 33 Changes must now be code
complete, meaning all the code required to enable the new change is
finished. The level of code completeness is reflected as tracker bug
state ON_QA. The change does not have to be fully tested by this
deadline'.

Finally, today is also the Software String freeze[7], which means that
strings marked for translation in Fedora-translated projects should
not now be changed for Fedora 33.

Tomas Hrcka
jednorozec on FreeNode #fedora-releng #fedora-devel #fedora-cs

[1] https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-33/f-33-key-tasks.html
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Bodhi_enabling
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Branched_release
[4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Milestone_freezes
[5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process
[6] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process
[7] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ReleaseEngineering/StringFreezePolicy
___
test-announce mailing list -- test-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora-Cloud-31-20200825.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Passed openQA tests: 7/7 (x86_64)
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Fedora-Cloud-32-20200825.0 compose check report

[Fedora compose checker]

No missing expected images.

Soft failed openQA tests: 1/7 (x86_64)
(Tests completed, but using a workaround for a known bug)

Old soft failures (same test soft failed in Fedora-Cloud-32-20200824.0):

ID: 647295  Test: x86_64 Cloud_Base-qcow2-qcow2 cloud_autocloud
URL: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/647295

Passed openQA tests: 6/7 (x86_64)
-- 
Mail generated by check-compose:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/check-compose
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Preserving the home on btrfs

[Alessio]

On Mon, 2020-08-24 at 13:12 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> 1. Create /boot/efi or BIOS Boot mount point (can be reused or
> reformatted)
> 2. Create /boot mount point (can be reused or reformatted)
> 3. Create / mount point (this is required to be a new subvolume)

Ah. Ok, this is the point. I was trying to reuse the existing one,
thinking that creating a new / would have deleted the /home as well.

Thanks.
A.

___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F33 install minimum memory requirements?

[Ed Greshko]

On 2020-08-25 14:32, Ed Greshko wrote:
> So, it would seem, zram based swap is less forgiving than disk based swap.

That may have been silly statement. 

On reflection, I don't think that previous installs without zram used any swap.

-- 
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F33 install minimum memory requirements?

[Ed Greshko]

On 2020-08-25 13:58, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 11:30 PM Ed Greshko  wrote:
>> With F32 and previous versions I've been able to install Workstation and 
>> other spins in a QEMU VM
>> with about 1200MB~1248MB of memory.  With F33 the install process crashes 
>> during the "installing software"
>> phase.
>>
>> Is this expected?
>>
>> FWIW, the "Everything-netinst" install of a KDE system did install just fine 
>> with 1248MB assigned.
>>
>> Currently using...
>>
>> Fedora-Everything-netinst-x86_64-33-20200824.n.0.iso
>> Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-33-20200824.n.0.iso
>> Fedora-KDE-Live-x86_64-33-20200824.n.0.iso
> Are there any hints why it crashed in the journal? That is pretty
> tight memory wise. Minimum RAM 2G is what's listed on getfedora.org,
> and 4G i s recommended. The biggest difference memory wise I can think
> of between F32 and F33 is no disk based swap by default. It uses zram
> based swap. And in such a tight case, only 50% may not be enough.
>
> Even before the zram change though, I'd see ~250M of swap used with a
> 2G VM. So that means it's already under provisioned, and walking on
> thin ice.
>
> But we should make sure we have a complete explanation before making
> adjustments. You could see if zram set to 75% and 100% help, just as
> an extra data point. Create /etc/systemd/zram-generator.conf and edit
> to include
>
> [zram0]
> zram-fraction=0.75
>
> and then 'systemctl restart swap-create@zram0'
>
> confirm with swapon and/or zramctl that its size is 75% that of totalmemory
>
> You can do this prior to beginning the installation.
>

OK, doing the above still resulted in a crash.  But, it happened later in the 
process.  The
journal did show

Aug 25 02:27:15 localhost-live anaconda[2042]: program: stderr:
Aug 25 02:27:14 localhost-live anaconda[2042]: program: Running... umount 
/run/install/source
Aug 25 02:27:13 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: sending SIGTERM to process 2042 
uid 0 "anaconda": ba
dness 77, VmRSS 55 MiB
Aug 25 02:27:12 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: low memory! at or below SIGTERM 
limits: mem  4.00%,
swap 10.00%
Aug 25 02:27:12 localhost-live earlyoom[1015]: mem avail:    44 of  1191 MiB ( 
3.77%), swap free: 
  0 of  892 MiB ( 0.00%)

So, it would seem, zram based swap is less forgiving than disk based swap.



-- 
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org