Yes, we thought the fact that it has to be Glued may be an issue, so it sounds like the Dell would be a better option. Since it is in the same data center, you can simply have it until it dies. It still has to maintain our asset tag for inventory purposes, but for actual use, you can do with it what you please.
Very Best Regards, Emery Rudolph, MS Manager IT-ETI-PS Enterprise UNIX Services University of Maryland (301) 405-9379 http://www.umd.edu -----Original Message----- From: Timothy Mattausch Creech Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 10:36 AM To: Emery Rudolph Cc: um-linux Subject: Re: [UM-LINUX] Mirror.umd down? Hi Emery, Wow -- thanks for the kind offers. 10TB would certainly be enough space. If we go the VM route, would the system have to be "GLUEd"? We're a bit worried about the loss of administrative control that might come along with the benefits of a DIT-maintained/patched system. If we instead opt for the Dell 2950, would we be allowed to simply move it to our spot in the RDC and run our current OS/installation/disks on it? This would likely be the fastest way to get the mirror running on solid hardware again. Do you know how much memory and which CPU(s) the 2950 has? Many thanks, Tim On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 13:30:41 +0000 Emery Rudolph <erudo...@umd.edu> wrote: > I am going to have the VM created so that it is ready. We can try it > out and if it doesn’t work, resort to reinstating the current system. > No harm, no foul. ☺ > > Very Best Regards, > > Emery Rudolph, MS > Manager > IT-ETI-PS Enterprise UNIX Services > University of Maryland > (301) 405-9379 > http://www.umd.edu > > [University of Maryland] > > From: UM Linux User's Group [mailto:UM-LINUX@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On > Behalf Of Emery Rudolph Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 9:25 AM > To: um-linux > Subject: Re: [UM-LINUX] Mirror.umd down? > > My apologies – I meant to say 10TB. I am fairly certain the EMC Isilon > storage is fast enough. If not, as an alternative, I can offer the use > of a Dell 2950 with a raid controller (without drives!) if that helps. > > I was under the impression that Peter Teuben was the moderator, but I > could be wrong. > > Very Best Regards, > > Emery Rudolph, MS > Manager > IT-ETI-PS Enterprise UNIX Services > University of Maryland > (301) 405-9379 > http://www.umd.edu > > [University of Maryland] > > From: Yehuda Katz [mailto:yeh...@ymkatz.net] > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:58 PM > To: Emery Rudolph > Cc: um-linux > Subject: Re: [UM-LINUX] Mirror.umd down? > > If you have VM storage that can approach the sustained performance of > physical storage, then it might work. That said, 10 GB is definitely > not enough space. Most projects require that you mirror the entire > repository (including packages and isos). > > - Y > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 4:05 PM, erudolph > <erudo...@umd.edu<mailto:erudo...@umd.edu>> wrote: Hi group, > > So what's the verdict? I am ready to create the VM with storage if > needed. It would be Redhat if that is of concern. > > > > On 08/01/2014 11:55 AM, Ken Tossell wrote: > DivIT is waiving the charges ($23/month for the network port and the > IP address, plus installation costs). > > Ken > > On 07/31/2014 05:50 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote: > Corollary to that: If it is in the RDC, who is paying for the IP > charges? I have been dealing with another group on campus who's > network was disconnected because someone in DivIT realized that they > were not being charged for at least a year (and possibly more). > > - Y > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Emery Rudolph > <erudo...@umd.edu<mailto:erudo...@umd.edu>> wrote: Question for the > group, given the significance of this service, would you like to move > this to DivIT systems which are patched and maintained? If so, I can > investigate. > > Very Best Regards, > > Emery Rudolph, MS > Manager > IT-ETI-PS Enterprise UNIX Services > University of Maryland > (301) 405-9379<tel:%28301%29%20405-9379> > http://www.umd.edu > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: UM Linux User's Group > [mailto:UM-LINUX@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU<mailto:UM-LINUX@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>] > On Behalf Of Ken Tossell Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 4:33 PM > To: um-linux > Subject: Re: [UM-LINUX] Mirror.umd down? > > The server had two 36 GB WD Raptors (10k, 3.5", SATA II), one of which > stopped working, for the OS, some static files and the mirroring > scripts. I think these disks were less than half full. > > There are four 2TB Seagate Barracuda XTs connected to the faulty SATA > controller (a 3ware 9650SE). We have about 1.8TB free (of 5.4TB). We > have two spare disks, but we're out of drive bays. > > I believe the SATA/RAID card needs PCI Express x4. Ideally we'd > replace that card with another SATA controller and either a) replace > the Raptors with SSDs or b) replace the Raptors with working magnetic > drives while adding a dedicated SSD for caching purposes. > > Ken > > On 07/31/2014 04:16 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote: > What is the current HD usage? > I am a current student (PhD, so I will be here for a while) and I have > some spare hardware if necessary that we could use to revive it. > Having a local mirror is really helpful. > > - Y > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Ken Tossell > <k...@tossell.net<mailto:k...@tossell.net>> wrote: The mirror server's > had a combination of a failed OS disk, some filesystem trouble and a > broken SATA controller. We're not sure why it locked up last Friday, > but it's down right now because the SATA controller had its very > frequent intermittent failure after the server was brought back up > yesterday. We hoped the controller would start working after a remote > reboot, but the machine never came back online. > Even after we get the server running, there's a good chance of > downtime with the current hardware. We are running with zero > redundancy in the / disk, and the remaining drive is identical to the > one that failed. Also, the SATA controller could break and disconnect > the main software storage disk array at any time. There's a ~90% > chance that the array won't come up after the next power outage. If > that happens, we'll need to manually disconnect and reconnect the > power several times in order to get the server going. > > I do some maintenance (adding mirrors, mostly), but since I'm no > longer at the university, other people have been taking care of all of > the issues that need local attention. > > Ken > > On 07/31/2014 01:33 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote: > I believe the mirror is run by Ken Tossell > (k...@tossell.net<mailto:k...@tossell.net>). > > - Y > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Moshe M. Katz > <mmk...@umd.edu<mailto:mmk...@umd.edu>> wrote: > Hello all, > > There's been very little traffic on this list recently (correction, > none at all), so I hope that people are still around. > > The mirror.umd.edu<http://mirror.umd.edu> server appears to be down, > and the only published email address is "mirror@hostname", which is, > of course, down with it. > Does anyone know who the current maintainer is and/or what the story > is here? > > Thanks, > Moshe > > -- > Moshe Katz > mmk...@umd.edu<mailto:mmk...@umd.edu> > (301) 867-3732<tel:%28301%29%20867-3732> > > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Jeff Stuckman > <stuck...@umd.edu<mailto:stuck...@umd.edu>> wrote: > Do you know who runs this mirror? > > > > *From:* Nicholas Rossomando > [mailto:nross...@terpmail.umd.edu<mailto:nross...@terpmail.umd.edu>] > *Sent:* Thursday, July 31, 2014 11:55 AM *To:* Jeff Stuckman > *Subject:* Re: Red Hat: What we've found so far > > > > Well, right now, zero data from UMD. The mirror is down and has been > for several days now. If it comes back up, it's definitely ideal for > however far back it goes. > > Noted, and will do. > > > > > > -- > Emery Rudolph, MS > Manager > IT-ETI-PS Enterprise UNIX Services > University of Maryland > (301)405-9379<tel:%28301%29405-9379> > > ________________________________ > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> > Version: 2014.0.4744 / Virus Database: 3986/7985 - Release Date: > 08/05/14 ________________________________ No virus found in this > message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> > Version: 2014.0.4744 / Virus Database: 3986/7985 - Release Date: > 08/05/14 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4744 / Virus Database: 3986/7992 - Release Date: 08/06/14
