martin f krafft said on Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 12:30:06PM +0100:
also sprach Mark Ferlatte [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.11.06.0123 +0100]:
Do you really want your user's crontabs to run on every host in your
cluster?
They are mounted from master:/srv/var/spool/crontabs/${HOSTNAME}, so
Rodney Richison said on Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 09:19:40PM -0600:
Are most of you using exim or postfix? Just curious. I've never tried
exim.
Don't know about most; I use Postfix. I don't think exim is a bad choice,
though; I just liked Postfix better, and it performs well enough to meet my
martin f krafft said on Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 02:43:02PM +0100:
I am trying to set up persistent crontabs in a FAI cluster by using
NFS to export /var/spool/cron/crontabs to the clients, thus
effectively storing the crontabs on the server. I further would like
to use root_squash.
Do you
martin f krafft said on Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 10:38:39AM +0200:
In /etc/resolv.conf, the search parameter can take multiple values.
However, when using DHCP, this field is populated by 'option
domain-name', which lists the domain name only, and must not do
anything else, or headless clients
Martin F Krafft said on Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 07:03:02PM +0200:
As far as I can tell, there remains one problem: we use SSH
hostbased authentication between the nodes, and while I finally got
that to work, every machine gets a new host key on every
reinstallation, requiring the global database
martin f krafft said on Sat, Oct 30, 2004 at 01:35:33AM +0200:
FWIW, there is no cfengine host (yet). I am still somewhat taken
aback by its complexity. Just reinstalling the machines with FAI
seems simpler and cleaner.
Yeah, I haven't gotten around to using it in production either. :)
Simon Buchanan said on Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 08:20:15AM +1300:
Hi There, I am looking to deploy some 1U rack servers based on the Intel
Entry Server Platform SR1325TP1-E, but using a 3ware Escalade 9500S-4LP
hardware raid with 3 x SATA 200GB drives (RAID 5) instead of the onboard
stuff (as i
Fred Whipple said on Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 01:24:24PM -0500:
I see that Debian 3.0r2 includes a nicely aged (like fine cheese) Linux
2.2 kernel. While I'm certain the aging process only makes its flavour
stronger and more delectable, I'm afraid it's going to choke at the
thought of 10,000
Daniel Erat said on Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 08:08:49AM -0800:
I was the poster who initiated the previous thread on this subject. The
problem disappeared here after we went down to 2 GB of memory (although
we physically removed it from the server rather than passing the arg to
the kernel...
Daniel Erat said on Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 08:08:49AM -0800:
I was the poster who initiated the previous thread on this subject. The
problem disappeared here after we went down to 2 GB of memory (although
we physically removed it from the server rather than passing the arg to
the kernel...
Benjamin Sherman said on Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 03:49:24PM -0600:
So, I have a couple of questions because this box made it to production
before the problem was discovered and I can't test as I'd like.
* If I were to use 64GB HIGHMEM support. Would this problem go away?
Nope.
* Is the I/O
Benjamin Sherman said on Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 03:49:24PM -0600:
So, I have a couple of questions because this box made it to production
before the problem was discovered and I can't test as I'd like.
* If I were to use 64GB HIGHMEM support. Would this problem go away?
Nope.
* Is the I/O
Benjamin Sherman said on Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 03:16:56PM -0600:
I've got some machines in nearly the same configuration. What I ended up
doing was to put an `append=mem=1G' in the lilo.conf boot stanza for the
kernel I was using, and rebooted the machine in question.
This does reduce the
Fred Whipple said on Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 09:56:35AM -0500:
1.) One of the biggest reasons we went with Red Hat many years ago was
RPM. Of course I know that Debian has a package system, and there're
constant arguments about which is better, if either. What I wonder,
though, is how they
Fred Whipple said on Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 09:56:35AM -0500:
1.) One of the biggest reasons we went with Red Hat many years ago was
RPM. Of course I know that Debian has a package system, and there're
constant arguments about which is better, if either. What I wonder,
though, is how they
Dave Watkins said on Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 06:38:39PM +1300:
Mark Ferlatte wrote:
Which lists? I've had a hell of a time with SCSI SCA connected disks; a
single bad SCSI disk can wipe out the whole chain, whereas with SATA that
seems to be less likely. I'd be interested in hearing about SATA
Dave Watkins said on Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 06:38:39PM +1300:
Mark Ferlatte wrote:
Which lists? I've had a hell of a time with SCSI SCA connected disks; a
single bad SCSI disk can wipe out the whole chain, whereas with SATA that
seems to be less likely. I'd be interested in hearing about SATA
Nate Duehr said on Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 09:13:48AM -0700:
Agreed on the as fast a CPU as you can afford and the 10K RPM disk
comments. However I'm not a huge fan of SATA yet. There's been quite a
bit of discussion on various mailing lists of people having trouble with
them. I'm
18 matches
Mail list logo
