So, I successfully demultihomed all servers in the cell in question.
Unfortunately the random blocking still seems to be happening. The one
shown below was particularly nasty: it did not resolve after any
reasonable approximation to the timeout value (stayed stuck for well
over 30 minutes
Hello all,
Is everybody still writing their own SMF bits to start OpenAFS on
Solaris 10 without /etc/init.d bits, or is there already a Received
Way of doing this?
--
Atro Tossavainen (Mr.) / The Institute of Biotechnology at
Systems Analyst, Techno-Amish / the University of
On 1/29/10 5:02 AM, Atro Tossavainen
atro.tossavainen+open...@helsinki.fi wrote:
Is everybody still writing their own SMF bits to start OpenAFS on
Solaris 10 without /etc/init.d bits, or is there already a Received
Way of doing this?
It's bothered me for some time that a basic
On 1/29/10 6:33 AM, Harald Barth h...@kth.se wrote:
It's bothered me for some time that a basic infrastructure item like AFS is
distributed in a way that bypasses the OS software management system on most
platforms. I guess it's a time/resources thing, but still -- seems wrong,
somehow.
On 1/29/10 6:31 AM, Simon Wilkinson s...@inf.ed.ac.uk wrote:
Ultimately this is the key issue. Until it becomes a high priority for
someone, and that person publishes the necessary configuration, this isn't
going to improve. Equally critically, we need people to take responsibility
for
On 1/29/2010 7:18 AM, David Boyes wrote:
On 1/29/10 6:31 AM, Simon Wilkinson s...@inf.ed.ac.uk wrote:
Ultimately this is the key issue. Until it becomes a high priority for
someone, and that person publishes the necessary configuration, this isn't
going to improve. Equally critically, we
On Jan 29, 2010, at 5:56 AM, David Boyes dbo...@sinenomine.net wrote:
On 1/29/10 5:02 AM, Atro Tossavainen
atro.tossavainen+open...@helsinki.fi wrote:
Is everybody still writing their own SMF bits to start OpenAFS on
Solaris 10 without /etc/init.d bits, or is there already a Received
Way
Transarc paths continue to be used in Solaris packaging for consistency
with prior releases.
A new packaging format could be an appropriate signal for the people
who install the packages to read the installation notes and notice
about path changes (yes, I can dream ;)
We are conservative
On Jan 29, 2010, at 7:57 AM, Harald Barth h...@kth.se wrote:
Transarc paths continue to be used in Solaris packaging for
consistency
with prior releases.
A new packaging format could be an appropriate signal for the people
who install the packages to read the installation notes and
** Cache entry @ 0x45e0f004 for 1.1.1.1 [dynroot]
locks: (writer_waiting, write_locked(pid:2870 at:54), 2 waiters)
I don't even have to look at this one. 54 is FetchStatus. Oddly, it's
dynroot, so there's something off here.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 3:39 AM, Adam Megacz a...@megacz.com
Hi Andrew,
partly good news: I have it working now using the ktutil method, at
least for one example user. However, in order to be useful for cron
jobs acessing OpenAFS file systems, I guess that the keytab file must
reside on either a non-AFS file system (e.g. native ext3, xfs, etc.)
in a
On 01/29/2010 05:56 AM, David Boyes wrote:
It's bothered me for some time that a basic infrastructure item like AFS is
distributed in a way that bypasses the OS software management system on most
platforms. I guess it's a time/resources thing, but still -- seems wrong,
somehow. It's not that
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:05:55 -0600
Holger Rauch holger.ra...@empic.de wrote:
partly good news: I have it working now using the ktutil method, at
least for one example user. However, in order to be useful for cron
jobs acessing OpenAFS file systems, I guess that the keytab file must
reside on
Andrew Deason wrote:
could protect the directory where the keytabs are under an IP ACL, but
IP ACLs don't always work so well, and you'd open up access to anyone
When do IP ACLs not work so well?
-- Ragge
___
OpenAFS-info mailing list
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:52:45 +0100
Anders Magnusson ra...@ltu.se wrote:
Andrew Deason wrote:
could protect the directory where the keytabs are under an IP ACL,
but IP ACLs don't always work so well, and you'd open up access to
anyone
When do IP ACLs not work so well?
Well, they are a
Hi Everyone,
I know this is bad practice to have the AFS cache folder on a shared
partition with the rest of the system, but what are the caveats of
having the AFS be on an ext3 filesystem in Linux, which is shared by the
rest of the system? I mean, besides filling the partition that AFS uses
There are a number of issues that you will encounter.
Firstly, as you note, there is a danger of the root disk filling. The reserved
percentage won't help with this - a user process could fill 95% of the disk,
and the remaining 5% still not be large enough for the AFS cache. Sadly, the
Unix
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 19:56:40 -0500
Jason Edgecombe ja...@rampaginggeek.com wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I know this is bad practice to have the AFS cache folder on a shared
partition with the rest of the system, but what are the caveats of
having the AFS be on an ext3 filesystem in Linux, which is
18 matches
Mail list logo
