Just a FYI folks ...
I am running OwnCloud 9.0.2 on CentOS 6.7 and php-7.0 with no issues.
I installed the Webtatic repo which has several versions of PHP
available for CentOS 6 and 7. I then used the official OwnCloud
ce:stable repo to add the cloud software.
In a leap of faith, and
I have a question that has been puzzling me for some time ... what is
the reason RedHat chose to go with btrfs rather than working with the
ZFS-on-Linux folks (now OpenZFS)? Is it a licensing issue, political, etc?
Although btrfs is making progress, ZFS is far more mature, has a few
more
On 2014-09-15 , kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us wrote:
So the ZoL folks want one more feature before calling it 1.0; otherwise
they believe it's production ready. Only your own testing can convince
you that it's truly production ready.
--keith
That's encouraging news, something I've
On 12/19/2013, 04:00 , li...@benjamindsmith.com wrote:
BackupPC is a great product, and if I knew of it and/or it was available
when I started, I would likely have used it instead of cutting code. Now
that we've got BackupBuddy working and integrated, we aren't going to be
switching as it
On 12/18/2013, 04:00 , li...@benjamindsmith.com wrote:
I may be being presumptuous, and if so, I apologize in advance...
It sounds to me like you might consider a disk-to-disk backup solution.
I could suggest dirvish, BackupPC, or our own home-rolled rsync-based
solution that works rather
On 12/14/2013, 04:00 , li...@benjamindsmith.com wrote:
We checked lsyncd out and it's most certainly an very interesting tool.
I*will* be using it in the future!
However, we found that it has some issues scaling up to really big file
stores that we haven't seen (yet) with ZFS.
For
On 04.12.2013 14:05, n...@li.nux.ro wrote:
On 04.12.2013 14:05, John Doe wrote:
From: Listsli...@benjamindsmith.com
Our next big test is to try out ZFS filesystem send/receive in
lieu
of
our current backup processes based on rsync. Rsync is a fabulous
tool,
but is beginning to show
On 04.12.2013 14:05, John Doe wrote:
From: Listsli...@benjamindsmith.com
Our next big test is to try out ZFS filesystem send/receive in lieu
of
our current backup processes based on rsync. Rsync is a fabulous
tool,
but is beginning to show performance/scalability issues dealing with
the
On 10/25/2013, 05:00 , centos-requ...@centos.org 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
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:54:33 -0700
From: John R Piercepie...@hogranch.com
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Failing Network card
To:centos@centos.org
Message-ID:4fe20e59.20...@hogranch.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 06/20/12 8:44 AM, Gregory P. Ennis wrote:
On 03/01/2012 09:00 AM, Mark Roth wrote:
Miguel Medalha wrote:
A few months ago I had an enormous amount of grief trying to understand
why a RAID array in a new server kept getting corrupted and suddenly
changing configuration. After a lot of despair and head scratching it
turned
On 01/20/2012 09:00 AM, Tait Clarridge wrote:
But a new problem arises ... one of the m0n0wall instances needs to use
DHCP to get a dynamic IP from my ISP (the others are static, so they're
ok). How do I get the bridge to proxy the DHCP request and forward the
response to the VM
On 01/19/2012 09:00 AM, Tait Clarridge wrote:
I've Googled until I'm blue in the face, but haven't found a clear
explanation of how I can assign each ethX device directly to the guest
OS rather than going thru the usual bridge configuration. I need to
allow the m0n0wall OS to
Hello CentOS gurus, and a belated Happy New Year (or an early Happy
Chinese New Year).
I'm in the process of building a CentOS-6 KVM host machine whose only
function will be to run four independent 'm0n0wall' firewall guest
instances. I have a couple of quad-port Intel NICs to provide four
On 05/07/2011 09:00 AM, Benjamin Smith wrote:
I was wondering what feedback might be offered by the CentOS community on
their
experiences using Scientific Linux?
I'm a long-time Centos user, and am basically happy with CentOS. I understand
there are delays getting EL 6 out. We have been
Hello All,
Just a short note to add my vote for a HUGE round of applause to the
CentOS team for their untiring efforts in getting releases out the door.
I've just upgraded several servers to 5.6 and it all just works.
None of the team's work is easy to accomplish, especially when
On 04/05/2011 09:00 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
AFAIK, no standard raid modes verify parity on reads, as this would
require reading the whole slice for every random read. Only raid
systems like ZFS that use block checksuming can verify data on reads.
parity (or mirrors) are verified by doing
On 04/05/2011 09:00 AM, rai...@ultra-secure.de wrote:
That is really a no-brainer.
In the time it takes to re-build such a RAID, another disk might just
fail and the R in RAID goes down the toilet. Your 19-disk RAID5 just
got turned into 25kg of scrap-metal.
As for ZFS - we're using it
On 04/04/2011 09:00 AM, compdoc wrote:
It's possible to set up guests to use a block device that will get you the
same disk I/O as the underlying storage.
Is that what you're seeing? What speed does the host see when benchmarking
the RAID volumes, and what speeds do the guests see?
Yes,
Hello all,
I'm having quite an interesting time getting up to speed with KVM/QEMU
and the various ways of creating virtual Guest VMs. But disk I/O
performance remains a bit of a question mark for me. I'm looking for
suggestions and opinions
This new machine has tons of disk space, lots
On 03/27/2011 09:00 AM, Jerry Franz wrote:
On 03/27/2011 02:57 AM, Jussi Hirvi wrote:
Some may be bored with the subject - sorry...
Still not decided about virtualization platform for my webhotel v2
(ns, mail, web servers, etc.).
KVM would be a natural way to go, I suppose,
On 03/12/2011 09:00 AM, compdoc wrote:
On the particular Supermicro motherboard I'm using, there is a very
long delay (10 or 15 sec) between power-on and initiation of visible
BIOS activity, so all disk drives have ample time to spin up and stabilize.
Yeah, I have used Supermicro in the
On 03/11/2011 09:00 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 3/10/11 9:25 PM, Chuck Munro wrote:
However, on close examination of dmesg, I found something very
interesting. There were missing 'bindsd??' statements for one or the
other hot spare drive (or sometimes both). These drives
This is a bit long-winded, but I wanted to share some info
Regarding my earlier message about a possible race condition with mdadm,
I have been doing all sorts of poking around with the boot process.
Thanks to a tip from Steven Yellin at Stanford, I found where to add a
delay in the
Hello folks,
I am experiencing a weird problem at bootup with large RAID-6 arrays.
After Googling around (a lot) I find that others are having the same
issues with CentOS/RHEL/Ubuntu/whatever. In my case it's Scientific
Linux-6 which should behave the same way as CentOS-6. I had the same
On 03/07/2011 09:00 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Charles Polishercpol...@surewest.net
wrote:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fakeraid#Firmware.2Fdriver-based_RAID
covers fake RAID.
Ouch. That was*precisely* why I used the 2410, not
On 03/06/2011 09:00 AM, compdoc wrote:
Regarding the Marvell drivers, I had good luck with the 'sata_mv' driver
in Scientific Linux 6 just yesterday, running a pair of 4-port PCIe-x4
Tempo 'Sonnet' controller cards.
Are those the Mac/Windows Sonnet cards that go for less than $200?
What
On 03/05/2011 09:00 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:16 PM, compdoccomp...@hotrodpc.com wrote:
If the Marvell drivers don't pan out, it looks like I'll have
to either spend money on a 3Ware|LSI|Promise controller
The 3ware are excellent...
And Promise,
On 03/04/2011 09:00 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 3/3/11 6:52 PM, Chuck Munro wrote:
I've been on a real roller coaster ride getting a large virtual host up
and running. One troublesome thing I've discovered (the hard way) is
that the drivers for Marvell SAS/SATA chips still have
Hello all,
I've been on a real roller coaster ride getting a large virtual host up
and running. One troublesome thing I've discovered (the hard way) is
that the drivers for Marvell SAS/SATA chips still have a few problems.
After Googling around quite a bit, I see a significant number of
On 02/24/2011 09:00 AM, centos-requ...@centos.org wrote:
On 02/23/2011 01:36 PM John R Pierce wrote:
On 02/23/11 10:16 AM, Keith Roberts wrote:
I think you will get far better video quality using CCTV
cameras than a webcam on a USB port.
you may think that, but those solutions you
On 02/12/2011 09:00 AM, Gerhard Schneider wrote:
Sorry, I don't use CentOS 6 now so I cannot check, but:
Could it be that RHEL6 changed the default superblock mdadm is creating?
CentOS 5 is creating a 0.9 superblock. Some other OS are creating 1.2
per default. But you can change that on the
Hello all,
In the process of building a new VM box to replace several individual
CentOS servers, I've had the interesting experience of running both
CentOS-5.5 and RHEL-6 (eval copy) as I build out the hardware based on a
Supermicro motherboard.
A couple of observations regarding RAID-6:
-
On 02/07/11 20:42, RedShift wrote:
Actually it's possible a hardware monitoring module is interfering with the
FAN speed control duties. Try preventing any hardware monitoring related
modules get modprobed. See modprobe.conf how to blacklist modules.
Glenn
Interesting thought Glenn,
On Sun, 06 Feb 2011 12:09:12 + Ned Slider wrote:
On 06/02/11 07:00, Chuck Munro wrote:
Hello folks,
I'm having a difficult time trying to figure out why the CPU cooling
fans run at full speed on my Supermicro X8DAL-3 motherboard. There
doesn't seem to be any variable speed
Hello folks,
I'm having a difficult time trying to figure out why the CPU cooling
fans run at full speed on my Supermicro X8DAL-3 motherboard. There
doesn't seem to be any variable speed (the fans are PWM compatible) ...
they either idle at almost nothing, or suddenly burst into a
On 02/03/2011 09:00 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
--
On Wednesday, February 02, 2011 08:04:43 pm Les Mikesell wrote:
I think there are ways that drives can fail that would make them not be
detected
at all - and for an autodetected raid member in a system that has
On 02/02/2011 09:00 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Wednesday, February 02, 2011 02:06:15 am Chuck Munro wrote:
The real key is to carefully label each SATA cable and its associated
drive. Then the little mapping script can be used to identify the
faulty drive which mdadm reports by its
Les Mikesell wrote:
On 1/30/11 1:37 PM, Chuck Munro wrote:
Hello list members,
My adventure into udev rules has taken an interesting turn. I did
discover a stupid error in the way I was attempting to assign static
disk device names on CentOS-5.5, so that's out of the way
Hello list members,
My adventure into udev rules has taken an interesting turn. I did
discover a stupid error in the way I was attempting to assign static
disk device names on CentOS-5.5, so that's out of the way.
But in the process of exploring, I installed a trial copy of RHEL-6 on
the new
Les Mikesell kindly wrote:
Identifying drives by their ID string (which includes the drive's serial
number) and assigning names in the rules works ok. BUT, what happens
when I have to swap out a failed drive? The serial number (and possibly
model number) changes, and the udev
Hello list members,
In CentOS-5.5 I'm trying to achieve static assignment of SCSI device
names for a bunch of RAID-60 drives on a Supermicro motherboard. The
scsi_id command identifies all drives ok.
The board has one SATA controller and three SAS/SATA controllers ...
standard on-board
Hello List Members (and Holiday greetings!)
This rambles a bit ... my apologies in advance.
I am in the process of building a large CentOS-based VM host machine
which will replace several individual boxes. I've done the usual
hardware research and ended up with a SuperMicro motherboard, dual
Regarding a small proxy appliance, my thanks to those who responded
either on this list or by direct email.
We are going to get one of the little Acer AspireRevo 3610 boxes and
give it a try. It's small, quiet, runs cool, and has more than enough
resources to handle our CentOS proxy
I need to configure a small proxy appliance which doesn't require a lot
of CPU power. I'm looking for any warnings this group may have
regarding CentOS-5 on the following:
- Acer AspireRevo 3610 (Atom CPU)
- Dell Inspiron 537s (Celeron)
- Any other small machines you might recommend (UL
Thanks to those who responded. The use of Apache's reverse proxy was
something I would never have though of (it's the mind-numbing cold
medication I'm on, LOL)
However, I did manage to get things rolling thru the tunnel by configuring
strong-end routing at the remote server. Requests were
Perhaps someone with a sharper brain than I can solve this little mystery.
I've Googled until I'm blue in the face, read all TFM's I can find, and
tried several iptables rule combinations but just can't get the following to
work. Here's my challenge:
I have a CentOS-5.3 main server with a
Jason Pyeron wrote:
Can I get some recommendations:
We are looking for a hosting provider (other than godaddy) with
1: SLA
2: SSH access
3: subversion/rsync or the ability to install binaries / compile source.
Would like them to include http/https and email.
Any suggestions?
48 matches
Mail list logo
