On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 09:57:33PM -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 06/28/12 8:56 PM, Luke S. Crawford wrote:
> > The problem with supermicro is that the end user assembles them;
> > If you use ESD protection, this is fine. If you dont? go buy a dell
> > or something.
>
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 03:03:23PM -0400, Steve Thompson wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
> > We've had a number of servers fail, and it *seems* to be related to the
> > motherboard.
>
> I too have had bad experiences with SuperMicro motherboards; never had one
> last more
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 03:10:30AM +0800, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
> On 6/25/12, Warren Young wrote:
> > Then there's the LVM option, but I can't immediately come up with a
> > one-liner that tells you whether a given LVM disk set is equivalent to
> > software RAID.
>
> LVM has a mirroring optio
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 03:46:43PM -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> A late reply, but hopefully a useful set of feedback for the archives:
>
> On 04/20/2012 05:59 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote:
> > Key factors from my opint of view are:
> > - stability (which one runs more smoothly on CentOS?)
>
> I foun
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 04:49:26PM -0500, Tim Nelson wrote:
> Am I overthinking this? Does the kernel handle the mirror/stripe
> configuration under the hood, simply presenting me with a magical RAID10
> array? Or, is this something different and I really should be performing the
> RAID creation
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 02:51:58PM -0500, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> John R Pierce wrote:
> > On 03/08/12 6:33 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> >>> > ok, so 3 x 48/64 core servers uses the same power as 6 x 4/8 core ?
> >>> > thats still major win.
> >> Um, no - that's what I'm saying is*not* the ca
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 06:12:52PM -0500, Ross Walker wrote:
> Technically if the data portion is a true RAID10 you would only need to
> mirror /boot to sdb, cause if both sda AND sdb are out then the whole RAID10
> is SOL and there would be no need to boot off of sdc or sdd.
> Having said that
> Right. I was referring to RAID 1. For a RAID 10, you would have to
> find the proper drive to boot from. This is why I tend to limit myself
> to RAID 1 in software. If I need something more complex than that, I
> get a hardware card so the OS just sees it as a single drive and you
> don't hav
g on one of the servers. When a raid
edition/enterprise drive fails, I get an email, but I can deal with
that in the morning. The RAID continues chugging along as long as
I have enough good drives left.
--
Luke S. Crawford
http://prgmr.com/xen/ - Hosting for the technically adept
http://nostarch.com/xen.htm - We don't assume you are stupid.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:27:53AM +1100, Kahlil Hodgson wrote:
> Now I start to get I/O errors on printed on the console. Run 'mdadm -D
> /dev/md1' and see the array is degraded and /dev/sdb2 has been marked as
> faulty.
what I/O errors?
> So I start again and repeat the install process very c
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 11:30:14PM -0600, Frank Cox wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:26:59 -0500
> Luke S. Crawford wrote:
>
> > check out http://bandwidthd.sourceforge.net/ - It only supports IPv4,
> > but it's pretty convenient, as you can define what 'local&
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 02:21:09PM -0600, Frank Cox wrote:
> It looks like it does pretty much the same thing as several other monitoring
> tools that I've looked at. However, none of them separate local traffic from
> external traffic.
check out http://bandwidthd.sourceforge.net/ - It only sup
is happening. It can be a great help with hardware problems.
--
Luke S. Crawford
http://prgmr.com/xen/ - Hosting for the technically adept
http://nostarch.com/xen.htm - We don't assume you are stupid.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@ce
"Jason Pyeron" writes:
> > Everyone's pushing you to one of the VPS providers because
> > that's what all the cool kids are doing now that VM
> > technology is commoditized.
> >
>
> I do not have an opinion on this.
I think people are pushing the VPS service because people who are intereste
Les Mikesell writes:
> If you get a service contract on any piece of Cisco equipment, you
> typically get download access to all of the firmware updates.
Yeah, but the problem for me is that for my frontend network, 100M is just
fine. A used cisco 3548 is going to set me back around $200. Fo
Rob Townley writes:
> i would like to see real performance data via something like netperf
> with client machines booted from a standardized LiveCD, then
> peformance under their Linux Distribution and performance under
> Windows.
Performance data is not the most important metric, at least for
Bill Campbell writes:
> I usually go to the Kingston site to find the proper memory for
> specific main boards, and get most of our RAM from newegg.com.
>
> http://www.kingston.com
>
> http://www.newegg.com
I second this, except that I find Kingston often has the best price for
ram,
Rick writes:
> Since memory has become quite cheap lately I decided to move from 2 GB
> to 6. When I installed the memory every thing was fine until I went to
> run level 5. At that point the screen turned to garbage and the system
> froze. Is there a way to fix this so I can use the memory I bou
Guy Boisvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Your %iowait seems high.
>
> I had %iowait comparable to you with a single 200 Gigs 7200 RPM IDE drive.
>
> Now we've upgraded this server: Opteron 2216 with 4 Gigs RAM, CentOS
> 64 v5.2) and an Adaptec 3405 plus 4 x 73 Gigs Seagate 15K RPM (RAID
> 10).
Ralph Angenendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I really don't understand why people just don't turn off their mailservers if
> they
> don't want mail from others.
Most of us have come close.I get north of 500 spams a day unprotected.
I've been using the same email since '01. I know many ot
Jerry Geis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In the event I have an important email and I want it try perhaps every
> minute (1minute)
> to send the email how do I accomplish this from the sendmail command line?
considering just how many people use greylisting, this is likely a
bad idea.Greylisti
"Gordon McLellan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm pulling my hair out trying to setup a mirrored logical volume.
>
> lvconvert tells me I don't have enough free space, even though I have
> hundreds of gigabytes free on both physical volumes.
your problem is that vg1 only has one PV. if you are
"Victor Padro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does anyone has implemented this sucessfully?
I have not used bonding with xen, but once you have a bonded interface in the
Dom0 it should be trivial. setup your bonded interface as usual, then in
/etc/xend-config.sxp where it says (network-script net
Ruslan Sivak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lanyon wrote:
> > On 24/06/2008, at 9:08 AM, Luke S Crawford wrote:
> >> We were discussing memory limits of the free (as in beer) closed source
> >> citrix xensource product- limits are added to the free product in
Tom Lanyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I haven't been following the thread, but has the discussion been about
> memory limits of Xen?
We were discussing memory limits of the free (as in beer) closed source
citrix xensource product- limits are added to the free product in order
to encourage peo
Ruslan Sivak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Luke S Crawford wrote:
> > It is PAE.
> If it's PAE, then I'm a bit confused, as they advertise it as "*Native
> 64-bit hypervisor:* Scalability and support for enterprise
> applications"
heh. looks like I
Ruslan Sivak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > running vmware under a xenU guest wouldn't lift any ram limit
> > imposed by the xen kernel or dom0.
...
> The 4GB limit is artificial, and only applies to the vm's started
> using their closed source XenSource. The host OS is most likely
> CentOS 5,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> If you only have 512mb of ram, there's almost no reason to virtualize.
> Windows needs a minimum of 128-512MB to run stable. I highly suggest that
> you get more RAM - its very cheap these days.
seconded. my standard server has 8G unbuffered ecc. Newegg sells
2x
"Filipe Brandenburger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My boss asked me to harden a CentOS box by removing "hacker" tools,
> such as nmap, tcpdump, nc (netcat), telnet, etc.
Removing network tools does not make it harder to break into the box,
however, it can make it harder to do something with it
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> ok..i can install dovecot+postfix+MYSQL..etc..and maybe the problem it's
> resolve.
> i don't have problem with the machines, the machines are goods, my problem
> is the tranparent receive e-mails to the users than are distributed in
> four machines with the same number
"Sergio Belkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> dd if=/dev/sdaX of=fedora6.img (on FC6)
of course, you can't do this if you are booting off /dev/sdaX- boot
into a rescue disk or something.
> and then on Centos 5.1
>
> dd if=fedora6.img of=/dev/sdaX
>
> Could I run this system into Xen?
assuming
Simon Jolle sjolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What are the advantages of building your own server comparing with
> products from HP, Dell and IBM? Is it cheaper?
I find that if you order the base package from Dell, you get a pretty
good deal. sometimes better than buying the parts alone. But
"Ryan Nichols" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Really? We bought that EXACT motherboard.. 10 to be exact and we've had 9
> fail and the 10th is on its way to major failure.. the odd thing is that
> 10th one was the first one purchased and that was 6 months ago.
Unless you have many hundreds of serve
33 matches
Mail list logo
