date:20131024

Hi, folks. This is, in fact, off-topic: I'm fighting a user's FC19 box. I
updated him, rebooted... and his ATI video card seems to not be supported
any more (and it's *not* that old - an RV620).

The thing that drives me crazy is, when I reinstalled the whole system,
whatever video driver the installer used for graphical install *worked*.
So: does anyone have any idea a) what driver that uses, and b) how to
force grub2 to use it (or do I also need to do this to the initrd)?

mark

--
grub2 must DIE!

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] baby blue screen of permanent death

2013-10-24 Thread Michael Hennebry

n Thu, 24 Oct 2013, Steve Clark wrote:

 Have you looked at /var/log/Xorg.0.log file - it sounds like there is a 
 problem with X.

Not yet, but I will.

 Also someone mentioned editing /etc/inittab and setting the run level to 3.
 id:5:initdefault:  - change the 5 to a 3.
 If it boots
 to a non-gui login prompt then the problem is definitely X related.

I get a non-gui login prompt on other virtual terminals,
so that would seem to be the case.

-- 
Michael   henne...@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu
On Monday, I'm gonna have to tell my kindergarten class,
whom I teach not to run with scissors,
that my fiance ran me through with a broadsword.  --  Lily
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] A last, desperate hope - video modes

2013-10-24 Thread Patrick Lists

On 10/24/2013 04:42 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Hi, folks. This is, in fact, off-topic: I'm fighting a user's FC19 box. I
updated him, rebooted... and his ATI video card seems to not be supported
any more (and it's *not* that old - an RV620).

Google says it's from 2007 which make it ancient in Internet years :)
Afaict it's a FirePro / Radeon HD 3000 series and one solution is to use
the proprietary Catalyst *Legacy* driver ( 13.1). The good folks over
at elrepo.org have created kmod-fglrx-legacy for these old cards. I
don't know if that's EL6 only or that they have one for F19 too.
Alternatively check rpmfusion.org.

Looking at the output of modinfo radeon the RV620 is mentioned. That
suggests that it should work with the radeon.ko kernel driver. Is the
PCI address of your card listed in the output of modinfo radeon? You can
find it with 'lspci'.

Maybe it was using the vesa video driver. Iirc you can force that by
booting the kernel with 'xdriver=vesa'. Or you could try 'xdriver=radeon'.

For more info see:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Installation_Guide/ch10s02.html#idm43623936

If the vesa driver works fine, if necessary, you could create an
xorg.conf which uses the vesa driver. Maybe you also need to blacklist
the radeon kernel module if that gets in the way.

Regards,
Patrick
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] htdocs on NFS share / any pitfalls?

2013-10-24 Thread Les Mikesell

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 5:15 AM, Leon Fauster
leonfaus...@googlemail.com wrote:

 What kind of throughput and latency are you talking about here?   NFS
 shouldn't add that much overhead to reads compared to disk head
 latency and if you enable client caching  might be considerably
 faster.   If you are writing over NFS you don't get the same options,
 though and sync mounts are going to be slow.



 bonded (just for failover) interface with speed: 1000Mb/s duplex: Full

 ping gives me a round-trip echo packet with ~ 0.139 ms

 writes ~ 57,9 MB/s (dd test)
 reads ~ 59,7 MB/s (uncached), 3,9 GB/s (cached) (dd test)

How do those compare to the native disk speed on your NFS server (if
it is a host where you can access the disks locally)?   And does the
dd speed improve it you use a very large block size?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] A last, desperate hope - video modes

2013-10-24 Thread Steve Clark

On 10/24/2013 11:17 AM, Patrick Lists wrote:
On 10/24/2013 04:42 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Hi, folks. This is, in fact, off-topic: I'm fighting a user's FC19 box. I
updated him, rebooted... and his ATI video card seems to not be supported
any more (and it's *not* that old - an RV620).
Google says it's from 2007 which make it ancient in Internet years :)
Maybe ancient to people that can afford to buy the latest and greatest every
couple of years
but to many that don't have that kind of money it is not that old.

Afaict it's a FirePro / Radeon HD 3000 series and one solution is to use
the proprietary Catalyst *Legacy* driver ( 13.1). The good folks over
at elrepo.org have created kmod-fglrx-legacy for these old cards. I
don't know if that's EL6 only or that they have one for F19 too.
Alternatively check rpmfusion.org.

The thing that drives me crazy is, when I reinstalled the whole system,
whatever video driver the installer used for graphical install *worked*.
So: does anyone have any idea a) what driver that uses, and b) how to
force grub2 to use it (or do I also need to do this to the initrd)?
Maybe it was using the vesa video driver. Iirc you can force that by
booting the kernel with 'xdriver=vesa'. Or you could try 'xdriver=radeon'.

For more info see:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Installation_Guide/ch10s02.html#idm43623936

If the vesa driver works fine, if necessary, you could create an
xorg.conf which uses the vesa driver. Maybe you also need to blacklist
the radeon kernel module if that gets in the way.

Regards,
Patrick
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

--
Stephen Clark
*NetWolves*
Director of Technology
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: steve.cl...@netwolves.com
http://www.netwolves.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] A last, desperate hope - video modes

2013-10-24 Thread SilverTip257

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Patrick Lists 
centos-l...@puzzled.xs4all.nl wrote:

 On 10/24/2013 04:42 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
  Hi, folks. This is, in fact, off-topic: I'm fighting a user's FC19 box. I
  updated him, rebooted... and his ATI video card seems to not be supported
  any more (and it's *not* that old - an RV620).


I have a system running Fedora 19 that has a RV620 video card in it.  It is
using the radeon video driver and working just fine.

~]$ modinfo radeon | egrep -v 'firmware|alias|param'
filename:
/lib/modules/3.11.4-201.fc19.x86_64/kernel/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.ko
license:GPL and additional rights
description:ATI Radeon
author: Gareth Hughes, Keith Whitwell, others.
depends:drm,drm_kms_helper,ttm,i2c-core,i2c-algo-bit
intree: Y
vermagic:   3.11.4-201.fc19.x86_64 SMP mod_unload
signer: Fedora kernel signing key
sig_key:4D:B8:EE:F4:45:2A:F1:A1:6A:E4:A4:DE:A7:8E:84:F8:5D:B5:14:7F
sig_hashalgo:   sha256
parm:   no_wb:Disable AGP writeback for scratch registers (int)
parm:   modeset:Disable/Enable modesetting (int)
parm:   dynclks:Disable/Enable dynamic clocks (int)
parm:   r4xx_atom:Enable ATOMBIOS modesetting for R4xx (int)
parm:   vramlimit:Restrict VRAM for testing (int)
parm:   agpmode:AGP Mode (-1 == PCI) (int)
parm:   gartsize:Size of PCIE/IGP gart to setup in megabytes (32,
64, etc) (int)
parm:   benchmark:Run benchmark (int)
parm:   test:Run tests (int)
parm:   connector_table:Force connector table (int)
parm:   tv:TV enable (0 = disable) (int)
parm:   audio:Audio enable (1 = enable) (int)
parm:   disp_priority:Display Priority (0 = auto, 1 = normal, 2 =
high) (int)
parm:   hw_i2c:hw i2c engine enable (0 = disable) (int)
parm:   pcie_gen2:PCIE Gen2 mode (-1 = auto, 0 = disable, 1 =
enable) (int)
parm:   msi:MSI support (1 = enable, 0 = disable, -1 = auto) (int)
parm:   lockup_timeout:GPU lockup timeout in ms (defaul 1 = 10
seconds, 0 = disable) (int)
parm:   fastfb:Direct FB access for IGP chips (0 = disable, 1 =
enable) (int)
parm:   dpm:DPM support (1 = enable, 0 = disable, -1 = auto) (int)
parm:   aspm:ASPM support (1 = enable, 0 = disable, -1 = auto) (int)



 Google says it's from 2007 which make it ancient in Internet years :)
 Afaict it's a FirePro / Radeon HD 3000 series and one solution is to use
 the proprietary Catalyst *Legacy* driver ( 13.1). The good folks over
 at elrepo.org have created kmod-fglrx-legacy for these old cards. I
 don't know if that's EL6 only or that they have one for F19 too.
 Alternatively check rpmfusion.org.

 Looking at the output of modinfo radeon the RV620 is mentioned. That
 suggests that it should work with the radeon.ko kernel driver. Is the
 PCI address of your card listed in the output of modinfo radeon? You can
 find it with 'lspci'.


Here's what I've got on a system I'm running.

~]$ lspci -vv -s 01:00.0 | egrep 'VGA|Kernel'; xrandr -q
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI]
RV620 LE [Radeon HD 3450] (prog-if 00 [VGA controller])
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr-
Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+
 Kernel driver in use: radeon
Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1680 x 1050, maximum 8192 x 8192
DIN disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
DVI-0 connected primary 1680x1050+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y
axis) 473mm x 296mm
   1680x1050  60.0*+
   1280x1024  75.0 60.0
   1440x900   75.0 59.9
   1280x960   60.0
   1360x768   59.8
   1152x864   75.0
   1280x720   60.0
   1024x768   75.1 70.1 60.0
   832x62474.6
   800x60072.2 75.0 60.3 56.2
   640x48075.0 72.8 66.7 60.0
   720x40070.1
DVI-1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)




  The thing that drives me crazy is, when I reinstalled the whole system,
  whatever video driver the installer used for graphical install *worked*.
  So: does anyone have any idea a) what driver that uses, and b) how to
  force grub2 to use it (or do I also need to do this to the initrd)?


So you're seeing problems with the splash/loading screen?



 Maybe it was using the vesa video driver. Iirc you can force that by
 booting the kernel with 'xdriver=vesa'. Or you could try 'xdriver=radeon'.


 For more info see:

 http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/19/html/Installation_Guide/ch10s02.html#idm43623936

 If the vesa driver works fine, if necessary, you could create an
 xorg.conf which uses the vesa driver. Maybe you also need to blacklist
 the radeon kernel module if that gets in the way.

 Regards,
 Patrick
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos




--

Re: [CentOS] A last, desperate hope - video modes

Btw, one more note: taking out all kernel lines, blacklist, and just a
*real* basic xorg.conf, in Xorg.0.log, the very first thing I see is
X.Org X Server 1.14.3
Release Date: 2013-09-12
[56.756] X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0
[56.756] Build Operating System:  3.10.9-200.fc19.x86_64
  ^^
[56.756] Current Operating System: Linux ... 3.11.6-200.fc19.x86_64
#1 SMP Fri Oct 18 22:34:18 UTC 2013 x86_64
   ^^

So it's obviously not good.

mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] A last, desperate hope - video modes

SilverTip257 wrote:
 On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Patrick Lists 
 centos-l...@puzzled.xs4all.nl wrote:

 On 10/24/2013 04:42 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
  Hi, folks. This is, in fact, off-topic: I'm fighting a user's FC19
   box. I updated him, rebooted... and his ATI video card seems to not be
   supported any more (and it's *not* that old - an RV620).

 I have a system running Fedora 19 that has a RV620 video card in it.  It
 is using the radeon video driver and working just fine.

 ~]$ modinfo radeon | egrep -v 'firmware|alias|param'
 filename:
 /lib/modules/3.11.4-201.fc19.x86_64/kernel/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.ko
 license:GPL and additional rights

3.11.4-201? From my reinstall, I have 3.11.1-200 and 3.11.6-200. No 201,
and no new update (I just did that as I saw this).

 Here's what I've got on a system I'm running.

 ~]$ lspci -vv -s 01:00.0 | egrep 'VGA|Kernel'; xrandr -q
 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI]
 RV620 LE [Radeon HD 3450] (prog-if 00 [VGA controller])
 Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr-
 Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+
  Kernel driver in use: radeon
 Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1680 x 1050, maximum 8192 x 8192
 DIN disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
 DVI-0 connected primary 1680x1050+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y
 axis) 473mm x 296mm
1680x1050  60.0*+
1280x1024  75.0 60.0
1440x900   75.0 59.9
1280x960   60.0
1360x768   59.8
1152x864   75.0
1280x720   60.0
1024x768   75.1 70.1 60.0
832x62474.6
800x60072.2 75.0 60.3 56.2
640x48075.0 72.8 66.7 60.0
720x40070.1
 DVI-1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)

Ok, so two things: first, do you have an /etc/X11/xorg.conf? Second,
what's your kernel line in grub look like? Oh, and for the third of two
questions, do you have radeon blacklisted, or nomodeset, anywhere?

  The thing that drives me crazy is, when I reinstalled the whole
  system, whatever video driver the installer used for graphical install
  *worked*. So: does anyone have any idea a) what driver that uses, and
b) how to
  force grub2 to use it (or do I also need to do this to the initrd)?

 So you're seeing problems with the splash/loading screen?

You've added a ! where there was none. No, the graphical install displays
*perfectly*.

 mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] A last, desperate hope - video modes

2013-10-24 Thread Patrick Lists

On 10/24/2013 07:03 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 Btw, one more note: taking out all kernel lines, blacklist, and just a
 *real* basic xorg.conf, in Xorg.0.log, the very first thing I see is
 X.Org X Server 1.14.3
 Release Date: 2013-09-12
 [56.756] X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0
 [56.756] Build Operating System:  3.10.9-200.fc19.x86_64
^^
 [56.756] Current Operating System: Linux ... 3.11.6-200.fc19.x86_64
 #1 SMP Fri Oct 18 22:34:18 UTC 2013 x86_64
 ^^

 So it's obviously not good.

FWIW the latest kernel available in my local Fedora repos is also 
3.11.6-200.

What happens when you remove the xorg.conf and blacklisting and all 
other tweaks you tried and reboot? What does the Xorg.log say if 
something fails?

Regards,
Patrick

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] A last, desperate hope - video modes

Patrick Lists wrote:
 On 10/24/2013 07:03 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 Btw, one more note: taking out all kernel lines, blacklist, and just a
 *real* basic xorg.conf, in Xorg.0.log, the very first thing I see is
 X.Org X Server 1.14.3
 Release Date: 2013-09-12
 [56.756] X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0
 [56.756] Build Operating System:  3.10.9-200.fc19.x86_64
^^
 [56.756] Current Operating System: Linux ...
 3.11.6-200.fc19.x86_64
 #1 SMP Fri Oct 18 22:34:18 UTC 2013 x86_64
 ^^

 So it's obviously not good.

 FWIW the latest kernel available in my local Fedora repos is also
 3.11.6-200.

 What happens when you remove the xorg.conf and blacklisting and all
 other tweaks you tried and reboot? What does the Xorg.log say if
 something fails?

That was where I started, when I did a completely clean install

  mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] CentOS 6 kernel 2.6.32-279 won't boot on ABIT AB9

2013-10-24 Thread Tony Schreiner

I was trying to install CentOS 6.4 a workstation with an Abit AB9 motherboard 
on a machine that had been running 5.9

Installation completed, but upon boot, it hangs hard after

acpiphp: ACPI Hot Plug PCI Controller Driver version 0.5
ipmi message handler version 39.2
 …  then 3 attempts to locate an ipmi interface at different addresses ...
Refined TSC clocksource calibration: 2175.999 MHz
switching to clocksource TSC

Googling a bit, finds a few references to similar issues on gentoo and at lkml. 
There was a suggestion to boot with
clocksource=acpi_pm
but for me that hangs at the same location (minus the switching clock source 
message)

 I have updated the motherboard BIOS to latest.

I had used the the 6.3 net installer disk (and the 6.4 repo) which I noticed 
had kernel 2.6.32-279, so I retrieved that kernel from the vault and it works.

The  279 and earlier kernels don't display any ipmi messages during boot (in 
dmesg)
The system is not ipmi capable I don't believe, should I be looking there?

Regards
Tony Schreiner
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 kernel 2.6.32-279 won't boot on ABIT AB9

2013-10-24 Thread Akemi Yagi

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Tony Schreiner
anthony.schrei...@bc.edu wrote:

 I had used the the 6.3 net installer disk (and the 6.4 repo) which I noticed 
 had kernel 2.6.32-279, so I retrieved that kernel from the vault and it works.

 The  279 and earlier kernels don't display any ipmi messages during boot (in 
 dmesg)
 The system is not ipmi capable I don't believe, should I be looking there?

Try adding the following kernel parameters and see if the 6.4 kernel boots:

ipmi_si.tryacpi=0 ipmi_si.trydmi=0 ipmi_si.trydefaults=0

Akemi
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 kernel 2.6.32-279 won't boot on ABIT AB9

2013-10-24 Thread Tony Schreiner


On Oct 24, 2013, at 3:55 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Tony Schreiner
anthony.schrei...@bc.edumailto:anthony.schrei...@bc.edu wrote:

I had used the the 6.3 net installer disk (and the 6.4 repo) which I noticed 
had kernel 2.6.32-279, so I retrieved that kernel from the vault and it works.

The  279 and earlier kernels don't display any ipmi messages during boot (in 
dmesg)
The system is not ipmi capable I don't believe, should I be looking there?

Try adding the following kernel parameters and see if the 6.4 kernel boots:

ipmi_si.tryacpi=0 ipmi_si.trydmi=0 ipmi_si.trydefaults=0

Akemi
__

Akemi

Awesome, that did the trick.
I do not see those parameters  in 
https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt

There is an error in the boot to 2.6.32.-358.23.2

irq 19: nobody cared (try booting with the irqpoll option)

I've added the irqpoll parameter and the message goes away.Is there any 
downside to using it?

Tony

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

We are a CentOS shop, and have the lucky, fortunate problem of having 
ever-increasing amounts of data to manage. EXT3/4 becomes tough to 
manage when you start climbing, especially when you have to upgrade, so 
we're contemplating switching to ZFS.

As of last spring, it appears that ZFS On Linux http://zfsonlinux.org/ 
calls itself production ready despite a version number of 0.6.2, and 
being acknowledged as unstable on 32 bit systems.

However, given the need to do backups, zfs send sounds like a godsend 
over rsync which is running into scaling problems of its own. (EG: 
Nightly backups are being threatened by the possibility of taking over 
24 hours per backup)

Was wondering if anybody here could weigh in with real-life experience? 
Performance/scalability?

-Ben

PS: I joined their mailing list recently, will be watching there as 
well. We will, of course, be testing for a while before making the 
switch.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

On 10/24/2013 1:41 PM, Lists wrote:
 Was wondering if anybody here could weigh in with real-life experience?
 Performance/scalability?

I've only used ZFS on Solaris and FreeBSD.some general observations...

1) you need a LOT of ram for decent performance on large zpools. 1GB ram 
above your basic system/application requirements per terabyte of zpool 
is not unreasonable.

2) don't go overboard with snapshots.   a few 100 are probably OK, but 
1000s (*) will really drag down the performance of operations that 
enumerate file systems.

3) NEVER let a zpool fill up above about 70% full, or the performance 
really goes downhill.

4) I prefer using striped mirrors (aka raid10) over raidz/z2, but my 
applications are primarily database.

(*) ran into a guy who had 100s of zfs 'file systems' (mount points), 
per user home directories, and was doing nightly snapshots going back 
several years, and his zfs commands were taking a long long time to do 
anything, and he couldn't figure out why.  I think he had over 10,000 
filesystems * snapshots.


-- 
john r pierce  37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

2013-10-24 Thread SilverTip257

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Lists li...@benjamindsmith.com wrote:

 We are a CentOS shop, and have the lucky, fortunate problem of having
 ever-increasing amounts of data to manage. EXT3/4 becomes tough to
 manage when you start climbing, especially when you have to upgrade, so
 we're contemplating switching to ZFS.


You didn't mention XFS.
Just curious if you considered it or not.



 As of last spring, it appears that ZFS On Linux http://zfsonlinux.org/
 calls itself production ready despite a version number of 0.6.2, and
 being acknowledged as unstable on 32 bit systems.

 However, given the need to do backups, zfs send sounds like a godsend
 over rsync which is running into scaling problems of its own. (EG:
 Nightly backups are being threatened by the possibility of taking over
 24 hours per backup)

 Was wondering if anybody here could weigh in with real-life experience?
 Performance/scalability?

 -Ben

 PS: I joined their mailing list recently, will be watching there as
 well. We will, of course, be testing for a while before making the
 switch.

 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos




-- 
---~~.~~---
Mike
//  SilverTip257  //
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 kernel 2.6.32-279 won't boot on ABIT AB9

2013-10-24 Thread Akemi Yagi

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Tony Schreiner
anthony.schrei...@bc.edu wrote:

 Try adding the following kernel parameters and see if the 6.4 kernel boots:

 ipmi_si.tryacpi=0 ipmi_si.trydmi=0 ipmi_si.trydefaults=0

 Akemi

 Awesome, that did the trick.
 I do not see those parameters  in 
 https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt

Those parameters are relatively new additions according to:

http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1212.1/02804.html

 There is an error in the boot to 2.6.32.-358.23.2

 irq 19: nobody cared (try booting with the irqpoll option)

 I've added the irqpoll parameter and the message goes away.Is there any 
 downside to using it?

I think it is OK to add it. If your BIOS is not up to date, you may
want to update it to see if that gets rid of the irq issue.

Akemi
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

On 10/24/2013 01:59 PM, John R Pierce wrote:


 1) you need a LOT of ram for decent performance on large zpools. 1GB ram
 above your basic system/application requirements per terabyte of zpool
 is not unreasonable.

That seems quite reasonable to me. Our existing equipment has far more 
than enough RAM to make this a comfortable experience.

 2) don't go overboard with snapshots.   a few 100 are probably OK, but
 1000s (*) will really drag down the performance of operations that
 enumerate file systems.

Our intended use for snapshots is to enable consistent backup points, 
something we're simulating now with rsync and its hard-link option. We 
haven't figured out the best way to do this, but in our backup clusters 
we have rarely more than 100 save points at any one time.

 3) NEVER let a zpool fill up above about 70% full, or the performance
 really goes downhill.

Thanks for the tip!

 (*) ran into a guy who had 100s of zfs 'file systems' (mount points),
 per user home directories, and was doing nightly snapshots going back
 several years, and his zfs commands were taking a long long time to do
 anything, and he couldn't figure out why.  I think he had over 10,000
 filesystems * snapshots.

Wow. Couldn't he have the same results by putting all the home 
directories on a single ZFS partition?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

2013-10-24 Thread Keith Keller

On 2013-10-24, SilverTip257 silvertip...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Lists li...@benjamindsmith.com wrote:

 We are a CentOS shop, and have the lucky, fortunate problem of having
 ever-increasing amounts of data to manage. EXT3/4 becomes tough to
 manage when you start climbing, especially when you have to upgrade, so
 we're contemplating switching to ZFS.

 You didn't mention XFS.
 Just curious if you considered it or not.

XFS is better than ext3/4 for many applications, but it's still not as
powerful as ZFS, which basically combines RAID, filesystem, and LVM into
one.  It sounds like the OP is really looking to take advantage of the
extra features of ZFS.

 Was wondering if anybody here could weigh in with real-life experience?

I don't have my own, but I have heard of other shops which have had lots
of success with ZFS on OpenSolaris and their variants.  I know of some
places which are starting to put ZFS on linux into testing or
preproduction, but nothing really extensive yet.

--keith

-- 
kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] which kernel do people use?

2013-10-24 Thread Earl Ramirez

On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 19:44 -0700, Keith Keller wrote:
 Hi all,
 
 I'm doing a very informal and unscientific poll: which kernel do you use
 on your CentOS machines?  Not which version of the CentOS kernel, but
 which repository.  Here are some examples I can think of off the top of
 my head:
 
 ==CentOS stock
 ==build own from CentOS SRPMs
 ==kernel-ml (from ELRepo)
 ==kernel-lt (from ELRepo)
 ==OpenVZ kernel
 ==build own from kernel.org
 ==other?
 
 One reason I'm curious is that on occasion there are features that I
 would like to have from a newer kernel (e.g., --want-replacement from
 md) that (AFAICT) are not in the stock CentOS kernel.  I've been using
 kernel-ml for these but am curious what other folks do in these
 situations, or whether people default to a different kernel for whatever
 reason.
 
 (And as an aside, who remembers when moving even from, say, a 1.2 to a
 1.4 kernel, was an enormous amount of effort?  I'm so old.  Now anybody
 can go from a 2.6 to a 3.11 kernel in less than ten minutes!)
 
 --keith
 

I use ELRepo's Kernel-ml for an ASUS laptop and all servers and HP
laptops use the stock kernel.

-- 


Kind Regards
Earl Ramirez
GPG Key: http://trinipino.com/PublicKey.asc


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

On 10/24/2013 2:59 PM, Lists wrote:
 (*) ran into a guy who had 100s of zfs 'file systems' (mount points),
 per user home directories, and was doing nightly snapshots going back
 several years, and his zfs commands were taking a long long time to do
 anything, and he couldn't figure out why.  I think he had over 10,000
 filesystems * snapshots.
 Wow. Couldn't he have the same results by putting all the home
 directories on a single ZFS partition?

I believe he wanted quotas per user.   ZFS quotas were only implemented 
at the file system level, at least as of whatever version he was running 
(I don't know if thats changed, as I never mess with quotas).



-- 
john r pierce  37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] which kernel do people use?

2013-10-24 Thread Karanbir Singh

On 10/23/2013 10:30 AM, Morgan Cox wrote:
 If you want SSD + MDRAID you need to use a 3.8+ kernel to have TRIM.
 
 The speed difference between the stock 2.6.32 - 3.10 kernel with SSD +
 MDRAID is insane.
 

has someone quantified what this 'insane' amounts to ?


-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] baby blue screen of permanent death

2013-10-24 Thread Michael Hennebry

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013, Steve Clark wrote:

 Have you looked at /var/log/Xorg.0.log file - it sounds like there is a 
 problem with X.

I have now, but I do not know what to do with the information.
I understand line 15 and 111.
Any ideas?

[root@localhost log]# grep -n EE Xorg.0.log
15: (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown.
111:[57.736] Initializing built-in extension MIT-SCREEN-SAVER
692:[59.651] (EE) PreInit returned 8 for HDA ATI HDMI HDMI/DP,pcm=3
694:[59.651] (EE) config/hal: NewInputDeviceRequest failed (8)
[root@localhost log]#

[59.628] (**) HDA ATI HDMI HDMI/DP,pcm=3: always reports core events
[59.628] (**) evdev: HDA ATI HDMI HDMI/DP,pcm=3: Device: /dev/input/event6
[59.635] (--) evdev: HDA ATI HDMI HDMI/DP,pcm=3: Vendor 0 Product 0
[59.635] (WW) evdev: HDA ATI HDMI HDMI/DP,pcm=3: Don't know how to use 
device
[59.651] (EE) PreInit returned 8 for HDA ATI HDMI HDMI/DP,pcm=3
[59.651] (II) UnloadModule: evdev
[59.651] (EE) config/hal: NewInputDeviceRequest failed (8)
[59.661] AUDIT: Wed Oct 23 15:22:43 2013: 2401: client 1 connected from 
local host ( uid=0 gid=0 pid=2399 )
   Auth name: MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 ID: 364
[59.722] (II) RADEON(0): EDID vendor AOC, prod id 42881
[59.722] (II) RADEON(0): Using EDID range info for horizontal sync
[59.722] (II) RADEON(0): Using EDID range info for vertical refresh
[59.722] (II) RADEON(0): Printing DDC gathered Modelines:
[59.722] (II) RADEON(0): Modeline 1280x1024x0.0  135.00  1280 1296 1440 
1688  1024 1025 1028 1066 -hsync -vsync (80.0 kHz eP)
[59.722] (II) RADEON(0): Modeline 800x600x0.0   40.00  800 840 968 1056  
600 601 605 628 +hsync +vsync (37.9 kHz e)

The last three lines are:
[  1594.436] (II) evdev: ImPS/2 Generic Wheel Mouse: Close
[  1594.436] (II) UnloadModule: evdev
[  1594.487] Server terminated successfully (0). Closing log file.

The string ucc does not occur elsewhere in the file.

In case it helps:
[root@localhost log]# grep -n hal Xorg.0.log 
566:[59.462] (II) config/hal: Adding input device ImPS/2 Generic Wheel Mouse
585:[59.509] (**) Option config_info 
hal:/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/platform_i8042_i8042_AUX_port_logicaldev_input
592:[59.520] (II) config/hal: Adding input device Logitech Logitech 
Illuminated Keyboard
609:[59.525] (**) Option config_info 
hal:/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/usb_device_46d_c318_noserial_if1_logicaldev_input
623:[59.569] (II) config/hal: Adding input device Logitech Logitech 
Illuminated Keyboard
630:[59.573] (**) Option config_info 
hal:/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/usb_device_46d_c318_noserial_if0_logicaldev_input
638:[59.584] (II) config/hal: Adding input device Sleep Button
645:[59.589] (**) Option config_info 
hal:/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/computer_logicaldev_input_0
653:[59.600] (II) config/hal: Adding input device Power Button
660:[59.606] (**) Option config_info 
hal:/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/computer_logicaldev_input
668:[59.615] (II) config/hal: Adding input device Macintosh mouse button 
emulation
679:[59.619] (**) Option config_info 
hal:/org/freedesktop/Hal/devices/computer_logicaldev_input_1
686:[59.628] (II) config/hal: Adding input device HDA ATI HDMI HDMI/DP,pcm=3
694:[59.651] (EE) config/hal: NewInputDeviceRequest failed (8)
[root@localhost log]#

Any ideas?

-- 
Michael   henne...@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu
On Monday, I'm gonna have to tell my kindergarten class,
whom I teach not to run with scissors,
that my fiance ran me through with a broadsword.  --  Lily
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] which kernel do people use?

On 10/24/2013 03:48 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
 On 10/23/2013 10:30 AM, Morgan Cox wrote:
 If you want SSD + MDRAID you need to use a 3.8+ kernel to have TRIM.

 The speed difference between the stock 2.6.32 - 3.10 kernel with SSD +
 MDRAID is insane.
 has someone quantified what this 'insane' amounts to ?

Going from HDD to SSD's gave us better than a 95% reduction in query 
times for complex queries using PostgreSQL on otherwise identical 
hardware. I wouldn't have believed it had I not seen it directly, for 
myself.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

On 10/24/2013 02:47 PM, SilverTip257 wrote:
 You didn't mention XFS.
 Just curious if you considered it or not.

Most definitely. There are a few features that I'm looking for:

1) MOST IMPORTANT: STABLE!

2) The ability to make the partition  bigger by adding drives with very 
minimal/no downtime.

3) The ability to remove an older, (smaller) drive or drives in order to 
replace with larger capacity drives without downtime or having to copy 
over all the files manually.

4) The ability to create snapshots with no downtime.

5) The ability to synchronize snapshots quickly and without having to 
scan every single file. (backups)

6) Reasonable failure mode. Things *do* go south sometimes. Simple is 
better, especially when it's simpler for the (typically highly stressed) 
administrator.

7) Big. Basically all filesystems in question can handle our size 
requirements. We might hit a 100 TB  partition in the next 5 years.

I think ZFS and BTRFS are the only candidates that claim to do all the 
above. Btrfs seems to have been stable in a year or so for as long as 
I could keep a straight face around the word Gigabyte, so it's a 
non-starter at this point.

LVM2/Ext4 can do much of the above. However, horror stories abound, 
particularly around very large volumes. Also, LVM2 can be terrible in 
failure situations.

XFS does snapshots, but don't you have to freeze the volume first? 
Xfsrestore looks interesting for backups, though I don't know if there's 
a consistent freeze point. (what about ongoing writes?) Not sure about 
removing HDDs in a volume with XFS.

Not as sure about ZFS' stability on Linux (those who run direct Unix 
derivatives seem to rave about it) and failure modes.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

2013-10-24 Thread Rainer Duffner


Am 25.10.2013 um 00:47 schrieb John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com:

 On 10/24/2013 2:59 PM, Lists wrote:
 (*) ran into a guy who had 100s of zfs 'file systems' (mount points),
 per user home directories, and was doing nightly snapshots going back
 several years, and his zfs commands were taking a long long time to do
 anything, and he couldn't figure out why.  I think he had over 10,000
 filesystems * snapshots.
 Wow. Couldn't he have the same results by putting all the home
 directories on a single ZFS partition?
 
 I believe he wanted quotas per user.   ZFS quotas were only implemented 
 at the file system level, at least as of whatever version he was running 
 (I don't know if thats changed, as I never mess with quotas).
 
 


User and group quotas have been possible for some time.

ZFS is cool. But there are a lot of issues and stuff that needs to be tuned but 
is difficult to find out if it needs to be tuned.


Especially, if you run into performance-problems.

Once you have some experience with it, I recommend reading this blog:
http://nex7.blogspot.ch

and of course, the FreeNAS forum, where you can read about stuff like that:

https://bugs.freenas.org/issues/1531

On the surface, ZFS is great. But god help you if you run into problems.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

2013-10-24 Thread George Kontostanos

We tested ZFS on CentOS 6.4 a few months ago using a descend Supermicro
server with 16GB RAM and 11 drives on RaidZ3. Same specs as a middle range
storage server that we build mainly using FreeBSD.

Performance was not bad but eventually we run into a situation were we
could not import a pool anymore after a kernel / modules update.

I would not recommend it for production...


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Lists li...@benjamindsmith.com wrote:

 On 10/24/2013 02:47 PM, SilverTip257 wrote:
  You didn't mention XFS.
  Just curious if you considered it or not.

 Most definitely. There are a few features that I'm looking for:

 1) MOST IMPORTANT: STABLE!

 2) The ability to make the partition  bigger by adding drives with very
 minimal/no downtime.

 3) The ability to remove an older, (smaller) drive or drives in order to
 replace with larger capacity drives without downtime or having to copy
 over all the files manually.

 4) The ability to create snapshots with no downtime.

 5) The ability to synchronize snapshots quickly and without having to
 scan every single file. (backups)

 6) Reasonable failure mode. Things *do* go south sometimes. Simple is
 better, especially when it's simpler for the (typically highly stressed)
 administrator.

 7) Big. Basically all filesystems in question can handle our size
 requirements. We might hit a 100 TB  partition in the next 5 years.

 I think ZFS and BTRFS are the only candidates that claim to do all the
 above. Btrfs seems to have been stable in a year or so for as long as
 I could keep a straight face around the word Gigabyte, so it's a
 non-starter at this point.

 LVM2/Ext4 can do much of the above. However, horror stories abound,
 particularly around very large volumes. Also, LVM2 can be terrible in
 failure situations.

 XFS does snapshots, but don't you have to freeze the volume first?
 Xfsrestore looks interesting for backups, though I don't know if there's
 a consistent freeze point. (what about ongoing writes?) Not sure about
 removing HDDs in a volume with XFS.

 Not as sure about ZFS' stability on Linux (those who run direct Unix
 derivatives seem to rave about it) and failure modes.
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos




-- 
George Kontostanos
---
http://www.aisecure.net
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

On 10/24/2013 4:12 PM, Lists wrote:
 On 10/24/2013 02:47 PM, SilverTip257 wrote:
 You didn't mention XFS.
 Just curious if you considered it or not.
 Most definitely. There are a few features that I'm looking for:

 1) MOST IMPORTANT: STABLE!

XFS is quite stable in CentOS 6.4 64bit.
there was a flakey kernel issue circa 6.2.

 2) The ability to make the partition  bigger by adding drives with very
 minimal/no downtime.

XFS+LVM+mdraid does this, but it requires several manual steps...

I'd take the new drives, add them to a new md mirror, then add that md 
device to the volume group, then lvextend the logical volume, and 
finally xfs_grow the file system.  yes, thats a bunch more steps than 
the zpool/zfs commands, but in fact zfs is doing much the same thing 
internally.

I believe lvm also lets you replace pv's in the vg with new larger 
ones.   I haven't had to do this yet.


-- 
john r pierce  37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] which kernel do people use?

2013-10-24 Thread Jake Shipton

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 19:44:44 -0700
Keith Keller kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us wrote:

 Hi all,
 
 I'm doing a very informal and unscientific poll: which kernel do you
 use on your CentOS machines?
 You just got the snip

I use kernel-ml from elrepo for my Desktop due to hardware support as
my hardware fails to even try to boot with the stock kernel as it used
to just kernel-panic when I first got my new hardware, now on the most
recent stock kernel just dies with USB errors (Prior to even
attempting to start services etc.) 

kernel-ml works and boots just fine but it sure was fun and games
getting CentOS installed and working...

All of our servers run the stock CentOS kernel as all hardware
appears to be supported and we need the stability more so than a
desktop does.

Kind Regards, 
Jake Shipton (JakeMS)
GPG Key: 0xE3C31D8F
GPG Fingerprint: 7515 CC63 19BD 06F9 400A DE8A 1D0B A5CF E3C3 1D8F
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] problem in installation

2013-10-24 Thread Sam Suresh

as i was trying to install in my laptop , it was stuck will an problem, the
graphics was not seen on the display, means display goes black, when i look
into display closely negative images were seen, thought might be  a problem
in dispaly drivers , but other OS are installed properlly and working good,
except centos.kindly give me a solution.

 am using a DELL Inspiron 14 inch pc with 2 gb ram, core i3 processor haing
windows 7 and ubuntu on my pc
-- 
  Regards
   sam suresh.J
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

2013-10-24 Thread Warren Young

On 10/24/2013 17:12, Lists wrote:

 2) The ability to make the partition  bigger by adding drives with very
 minimal/no downtime.

Be careful: you may have been reading some ZFS hype that turns out not 
as rosy in reality.

Ideally, ZFS would work like a Drobo with an infinite number of drive 
bays.  Need to add 1 TB of disk space or so?  Just whack another 1 TB 
disk into the pool, no problem, right?

Doesn't work like that.

You can add another disk to an existing pool, but it doesn't instantly 
make the pool bigger.  You can make it a hot spare, but you can't tell 
ZFS to expand the pool over the new drive.

But, you say, didn't I read that   Yes, you did.  ZFS *can* do 
what you want, just not in the way you were probably expecting.

The least complicated *safe* way to add 1 TB to a pool is add *two* 1 TB 
disks to the system, create a ZFS mirror out of them, and add *that* 
vdev to the pool.  That gets you 1 TB of redundant space, which is what 
you actually wanted.  Just realize, you now have two separate vdevs 
here, both providing storage space to a single pool.

You could instead turn that new single disk into a non-redundant 
separate vdev and add that to the pool, but then that one disk can take 
down the entire pool if it dies.

Another problem is that you have now created a system where ZFS has to 
guess which vdev to put a given block of data on.  Your 2-disk mirror of 
newer disks probably runs faster than the old 3+ disk raidz vdev, but 
ZFS isn't going to figure that out on its own.  There are ways to 
encourage ZFS to use one vdev over another.  There's even a special 
case mode where you can tell it about an SSD you've added to act purely 
as an intermediary cache, between the spinning disks and the RAM caches.

The more expensive way to go -- which is simpler in the end -- is to 
replace each individual disk in the existing pool with a larger one, 
letting ZFS resilver each new disk, one at a time.  Once all disks have 
been replaced, *then* you can grow that whole vdev, and thus the pool.

But, XFS and ext4 can do that, too.  ZFS only wins when you want to add 
space by adding vdevs.

 3) The ability to remove an older, (smaller) drive or drives in order to
 replace with larger capacity drives without downtime or having to copy
 over all the files manually.

Some RAID controllers will let you do this.  XFS and ext4 have specific 
support for growing an existing filesystem to fill a larger volume.

 6) Reasonable failure mode. Things *do* go south sometimes. Simple is
 better, especially when it's simpler for the (typically highly stressed)
 administrator.

I find it simpler to use ZFS to replace a failed disk than any RAID BIOS 
or RAID management tool I've ever used.  ZFS's command line utilities 
are quite simply slick.  It's an under-hyped feature of the filesystem, 
if anything.

A lot of thought clearly went into the command language, so that once 
you learn a few basics, you can usually guess the right command in any 
given situation.  That sort of good design doesn't happen by itself.

All other disk management tools I've used seem to have just accreted 
features until they're a pile of crazy.  The creators of ZFS came along 
late enough in the game that they were able to look at everything and 
say, No no no, *this* is how you do it.

 I think ZFS and BTRFS are the only candidates that claim to do all the
 above. Btrfs seems to have been stable in a year or so for as long as
 I could keep a straight face around the word Gigabyte, so it's a
 non-starter at this point.

I don't think btrfs's problem is stability as much as lack of features. 
  It only just got parity redundancy (RAID-5/6) features recently, for 
example.

It's arguably been *stable* since it appeared in release kernels about 
four years ago.

One big thing may push you to btrfs: With ZFS on Linux, you have to 
patch your local kernels, and you can't then sell those machines as-is 
outside the company.  Are you willing to keep those kernels patched 
manually, whenever a new fix comes down from upstream?  Do your servers 
spend their whole life in house?

 Not as sure about ZFS' stability on Linux (those who run direct Unix
 derivatives seem to rave about it) and failure modes.

It wouldn't surprise me if ZFS on Linux is less mature than on Solaris 
and FreeBSD, purely due to the age of the effort.

Here, we've been able to use FreeBSD on the big ZFS storage box, and 
share it out to the Linux and Windows boxes over NFS and Samba.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

2013-10-24 Thread Warren Young

On 10/24/2013 14:59, John R Pierce wrote:
 On 10/24/2013 1:41 PM, Lists wrote:

 1) you need a LOT of ram for decent performance on large zpools. 1GB ram
 above your basic system/application requirements per terabyte of zpool
 is not unreasonable.

To be fair, you want to treat XFS the same way.

And it, too is unstable on 32-bit systems with anything but smallish 
filesystems, due to lack of RAM.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

On 10/24/2013 5:31 PM, Warren Young wrote:
 To be fair, you want to treat XFS the same way.

 And it, too is unstable on 32-bit systems with anything but smallish
 filesystems, due to lack of RAM.

I thought it had stack requirements that 32 bit couldn't meet, and it 
would simply crash, so it is not built into 32bit versions of EL6.



-- 
john r pierce  37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?

On 10/24/2013 5:29 PM, Warren Young wrote:
 The least complicated*safe*  way to add 1 TB to a pool is add*two*  1 TB
 disks to the system, create a ZFS mirror out of them, and add*that*  
 vdev to the pool.  That gets you 1 TB of redundant space, which is what
 you actually wanted.  Just realize, you now have two separate vdevs
 here, both providing storage space to a single pool.

yeah, I guess I should have made that clearer, thats exactly what you do.


and, it doesn't restripe old files til they get rewritten.   new stuff 
will be striped across all the vdevs, old stuff stays where it is.



-- 
john r pierce  37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] which kernel do people use?

2013-10-24 Thread Keith Keller

On 2013-10-23, Keith Keller kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us wrote:

 I'm doing a very informal and unscientific poll: which kernel do you use
 on your CentOS machines?

Thanks to all for what was a surprisingly interesting thread!  Here are
my very informal and unscientific tallies.  This isn't actual systems,
of course; it's counting people's responses, so my ~10 vanilla kernels
count as one Stock in the tally below.

Stock: 16
CentOS Plus: 5
ELRepo -ml: 3
ELRepo unspecified: 2
Custom build: 2
ELRepo -lt: 1
Stock + ELRepo kmods: 1
Oracle: 1
OpenVZ: 1

No big surprise in the results; most people tend to stay with the stock
kernel, but quite a few people use one of the others.  I imagine that
more people who didn't respond would be more likely to be stock kernel
users, so the numbers are probably a bit skewed towards the tinkerers
and funky hardware or kernel feature requirements.

People's reasons for using a non-stock kernel were also not a huge
surprise.  I don't recall anyone saying that they use a different kernel
just to be recent; in the cases I remember everyone had a reasonably
specific reason to use a non-stock kernel.  That also makes sense here;
it stands to reason that CentOS users want stability, and stray from the
path only when stability is compromised by sticking with stock.

Thanks all for responding!

--keith

-- 
kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] which kernel do people use?


 Hi all,

 I'm doing a very informal and unscientific poll: which kernel do you
 use on your CentOS machines?
 You just got the snip

We're all stock, all the way. Figure 30 servers configured like this, 
including dev/test and embedded servers. We'll soon have a true 
Disaster Recovery setup with another 8 servers. Workstations run 
Fedora or Ubuntu.



[bens@hal ~]$ rpm -qi kernel-2.6.32-358.18.1.el6.x86_64
Name: kernel   Relocations: (not relocatable)
Version : 2.6.32Vendor: CentOS
Release : 358.18.1.el6  Build Date: Wed 28 Aug 2013 
06:28:07 PM UTC
Install Date: Sat 07 Sep 2013 12:38:03 AM UTC  Build Host: 
c6b10.bsys.dev.centos.org
Group   : System Environment/Kernel Source RPM: 
kernel-2.6.32-358.18.1.el6.src.rpm
Size: 121423079License: GPLv2
Signature   : RSA/SHA1, Wed 28 Aug 2013 07:02:55 PM UTC, Key ID 
0946fca2c105b9de
Packager: CentOS BuildSystem http://bugs.centos.org
URL : http://www.kernel.org/
Summary : The Linux kernel
Description :
The kernel package contains the Linux kernel (vmlinuz), the core of any
Linux operating system.  The kernel handles the basic functions
of the operating system: memory allocation, process allocation, device
input and output, etc.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] ZFS on Linux in production?