[vox-tech] SAMBA shares sluggish

2010-11-15 Thread Darth Borehd
I have an Ubuntu 10.04 machine that serves SAMBA file shares to other Ubuntu
(10.10 and 9.04) clients and to Windows XP clients.  All clients say that
just recently , the SAMBA shares have slowed down.  It takes longer to see
the list of directories and there is a lag of a few seconds when navigating
each level.  Once you actually get to the files and start working with or
copying them to and from the directory, everything runs fairly quickly.  Any
ideas on what I should check?
___
vox-tech mailing list
vox-tech@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech


Re: [vox-tech] Which distro for file/print/web server

2010-11-15 Thread Alex Mandel
On 11/10/2010 11:05 PM, Bill Broadley wrote:
> On 11/08/2010 07:33 PM, Rick Moen wrote:
>> Quoting Alex Mandel (tech_...@wildintellect.com):
>>
>>> Good Call, I did look a little at finding a drive case that was both
>>> eSata and usb. The drive case was the cheapest part by far but esata/usb
>>> isn't so common. I'm not sure if the board in between would still be an
>>> issue. If I happen to come upon a good deal on such a case I might try
>>> it. Anyone have an external eSata they could try to get SMART data on?
>>
>> All libata drivers support SMART -- which is what one would expect,
>> given that libata leverages the kernel's SCSI layers.
>> https://ata.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Libata_Feature_Table
>> (The particular SATA interface, internal vs. eSATA, is not an issue.)
> 
> While technically true, often eSATA is combined with a multidisk chassis
> and has a lame/broken chip that multiplexes a single SATA connection to
> multiple drives.  Said lame/broken chip often hides the SMART data.  I
> find is similarly frustrating when the RAID controller does the same
> thing.  It's really really annoying to have to pull a failed drive to
> get it's model and serial number so you can RMA it.
> 
> It's also worth mentioning while SMART is cool, I like the idea, and it
> sounds really useful.  The studies that I've seen show SMART is useless
> for predicting failures.  Sure you can get various interesting metrics
> but there's little relationship between any of the numbers it gives you
> and losing your entire disk in the near future.
> 
> The largest of said studies was the Google paper which covered an
> impressive number of disks across all major brands.
> 

Good news, that particular case does pass it through so yay SMART data
and HDDtemp. I think just knowing the temp on the drive is going to be
useful(and I can test if keeping the fan on is worth it) and getting a
report of how many bad sectors will give me a little piece of mind.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817173043

I also no longer have to use a custom udev rule to get the drive mounted
in the right spot. Downside being I'm not sure the eSata is
hot-swappable so I'll have to take the system down anytime I want to
hook the external up to something else.

Thanks,
Alex
___
vox-tech mailing list
vox-tech@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech