Tab, I sympathize with much you have said, but there just hasn't been any alternative that I could find that is linux based, has a web management interface and lets you use your own hardware instead of it being a hardware appliance...oh and not high priced too. I have however just stumbled across an alternative that I'm testing out that looks very promising and is under $300. Email me if you're interested.
-James -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tab Bennedum Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 1:35 PM To: dave johnson Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OF-users] Installation/upgrade problems Dave, Once again, thanks for the response. Re WebDAV: I've never used it nor do I have any knowledge about it (beyond hearing its name). I presume you're saying it runs on the standard SSL port? In that case I apologize for complaining about the weird port choice for the GUI. Would it be possible to add a feature to the GUI to allow an admin to change the port OF listens on? Re Download links on OF site: The download link I found and used on the OF site DID NOT redirect me to rpath. It pointed me to SF, which, I believe you're saying, contains the older versions of OF. I don't mind keeping older versions around and I understand the need for older versions (even if partially broken). But if rpath always contains the latest versions and SF the old versions (and maybe also the latest, which seems to be the case since the copy I downloaded from SF is identical to the copy I just downloaded from rpath), the website should make that painfully clear. I don't recall it being so when I went to grab what I thought was the latest version. > in short, while i agree with your overall attitude that OF is not > complete yet, i also feel my expectations are inline with those of > rest of the OF community in that I do not expect it to be complete > as yet. My problem with this keeps coming to me as a question, "Why is this marked as v2.2 when it's not complete yet?". Version numbers mean something and when I don't see a "beta" or "test" or "RC1" or something similar in the version number, I assume the version to be complete and all the included features cooked. If a new feature is being added or overhauled, release a new version with something suitable appended to the number to make it clear what's going on. I think I remember this being done for this project and maybe it was believed that the 2.2 version was complete when it was released, but based on the comments I've seen on this list and the fact that a conary updateall wants to apply 18 updates makes me think it wasn't really ready. Anyway, I've shown OF to the people I planned to. While they agree with me about the "problems" (real or perceived) I pointed out previously, they're willing to wait a little to see if they get addressed (making the allowance based on how quickly updates have been released in the past for this project). I might be able to contribute some code changes in the future, but I usually don't have the resources to do this. I'll keep an I on the list. -Tab On Fri, March 16, 2007 4:24 pm, dave johnson wrote: > Tab, > > > Re: > > > 1) Have you ever heard of WebDAV ? > > > 2) ibid > > > as for the rest of your concerns, i cannot agree. If the people > you are trying to "sell" the Openfiler idea to want another > solution, they should use another solution. That said, if asked > about the OF interface, I would be the first person to pipe up that > I think it is the most convoluted > (ableit spiffy ajax'd and all) piece of confusion i've seen next to > possibly that of a Nexsan SATABeast. regardless, interfaces do not > miraculously generate themselves so i can only conclude that the > designers prefer this interface and if i thought a better interface > would be better, it would be up to me to code up some changes and > present them for consideration. outside of that, i am more concerned > over things like the VG showing up as twice the size it actually is, > the inability to specify LUN on the iSCSI targets, unability to get > UPS service for APC working correctly, etc. > > > as for where you downloaded the iso, that, as you suspected, is an > old ISO and if you go to the openfiler website to find the latest > version, it will of course link to the latest version from the rpath > site. > > why keep a "flawed" ISO available ? while it may be "flawed" for > your system, for others it may not. likewise, i would be howling at > the moon if they had taken down their 2.1 variants off of > sourceforge as i have had, and continue to have, some need for > access to a Centos based OF appliance (even if not the latest and > greatest) due to some other occasional project requirements. > > regarding the interface, please feel free to provide any fixes and > present them here as you see fit. i can assure you that if you > build a better mouse trap, others will appreciate your insightful > change of perspective. likewise if you would like to help with the > documentation, just say the word. almost 3 months ago i signed up > to help orchestrate revamping the wiki to do just that but between > moving, changing jobs, and everything else, it fell off my plate. i > suspect the same forsaking of the documentation could easily happen > if i also had an open source filer project to develop <grin> > > > in short, while i agree with your overall attitude that OF is not > complete yet, i also feel my expectations are inline with those of > rest of the OF community in that I do not expect it to be complete > as yet. if it were complete i'm sure you would not be emailing to > this list about your concerns.. > > -=dave > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tab Bennedum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Brad Dormanen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 11:33 AM > Subject: RE: [OF-users] Installation/upgrade problems > > > >> Brad, >> >> >> Thanks for the vote of encouragement. I've made a little >> progress, but I keep getting tripped up by the small stuff. >> >> The first problem was my own inneptitude and I don't mind taking >> hits for it. I was pointing my browser at http://<box>:446. Notice >> I >> left off the "s" for SSL. Again, my own fault. But this raises an >> issue. Please implement any (or all?) of the following: >> >> 1) Make the web server listen on the standard SSL port (443) so I >> don't have to enter a whacky URL. Why is a non-standard port >> being used on a box that isn't running anything else? >> >> 2) Make a non-SSL request automatically redirect to the secured >> version of the page. I do this all the time for any web app I >> write. Make it simple for the user to get to the app. >> >> >> Ok, so I can log into the web interface. The next problem, and I >> can't possibly be the only one seeing this: >> >> 3) Fix the stylesheet(s) so that text in input fields is not >> clipped on its bottom edge. I'm using IE6 on XP Pro and the input >> fields look like crap because I can't see the bottom 10% of the >> letters and numbers. How did this ever get released without being >> caught? >> >> I've put a screenshot of what I see when I look at the >> Authentication page here: http://www.bennedum.org/files/of1.jpg. >> The >> problem is not isolated to that page. >> >> Here's a few more problems I see in the GUI within 15 minutes of >> starting: >> >> >> 4) In the physical storage management page, my SATA drive is >> listed as type SCSI. Why? It's SATA (or least IDE) not SCSI. >> >> 5) I created an iSCSI LV that consumes a whole VG. On the List of >> Existing Volumes page, the pie chart looks like this: >> http://www.bennedum.org/files/of2.jpg. I would suggest that a >> special case should be added to whatever code generates the pie >> chart such that when all of a VG is used, the pie chart doesn't >> show the crappy "non-slice" of unused space (the gray bar in the >> image). >> >> 6) May I suggest the Status page be the default page when first >> logging in? Why would I want to see the Accounts/Authentication >> page when I first log into the box? In fact, the entire tab >> structure could probably be better organized, with Status first >> (and reorg >> that page to put the more useful info near the top. The hardware >> information box in my setup is so large, the nice memory and >> filesystem graphs are off the bottom of the page; users don't >> like to scroll.), then the General tab, then the rest of them. >> >> 7) Wasn't there another web address on the box that I could go to >> to make other system level changes (like network config stuff)? I >> thought I read about it on the mailing list once. Something >> provided by rpath itself? If so, what's the address? Can it be >> linked in from the main admin pages so no one has to hunt around >> for it? >> >> Maybe some of the comments seem picky and only reflect on >> cosmetic changes, but the people I'm trying to sell this Openfiler >> idea to are REALLY picky about stuff like that. They feel that the >> quality of the interface (the stuff they can see) reflects on the >> quality of the underlying code (the stuff they can't see), and I >> can't fault them for that belief as I share it too. Polish is >> important to perception and I think Openfiler wants to be >> perceived as the best (and it's so close it's painful when I find >> things that detract). >> >> So, now that I've played with the interface a little, I ssh'ed >> into the box and ran conary updateall (before I remembered I could >> do this in the GUI). Again, the update runs only so far before it >> appears to freeze: >> >> Applying update job 1 of 19: >> Install >> kernel(:runtime)=2.6.19.7-0.1-1[~!kernel.debug,~!kernel.debugdata, >> ~!kernel.numa,~kernel.smp] >> Applying update job 2 of 19: >> Install >> kernel(:runtime)=2.6.19.7-0.1-1[~!kernel.debug,~!kernel.debugdata, >> ~!kernel.numa,~!kernel.smp] >> Writing 669k of 49955k (1%)... >> >> >> In each of the 4 installations I've done of this OF version on >> this box in the last 24 hours, it freezes at a different point, >> but usually around the same place. I can always ctrl-z out of the >> process and put it back in the foreground, so the box isn't hung. >> The CPU is mostly idle, no disks spinning, no network activity. >> What's OF doing? I'll let it run a little longer to see if it ever >> recovers. >> >> BTW, I'm using the ISO I downloaded from SourceForge (through the >> download link on the OF home page). If I'm supposed to use the >> image from rpath, then why doesn't the home page point there? This >> is another perception problem. There should only be ONE place to >> get the images (with possibly many ways to get there). NEVER make >> a bad image available to the public. >> >> And other people have griped about this, so I'll throw mine in >> too: >> why are the docs on the OF site so out of date? When a new version >> is released, it shouldn't be considered released until the docs >> are up to date. Until then, it's only an alpha/beta/test version. >> The >> docs are as important as the software. >> >> -Tab >> >> >> >> On Fri, March 16, 2007 12:30 pm, Brad Dormanen wrote: >> >>> Tab, >>> >>> >>> >>> Sorry to hear that your experiences to date have been >>> frustrating. I >>> have been there and can understand. >>> >>> I do know that the ISO has had a couple of reissues since the >>> original release. If you have not used the latest image, try >>> again with the downloads at. >>> >>> http://www.rpath.org/rbuilder/project/openfiler/release?id=5384 >>> >>> >>> >>> I have a total of 7 Openfiler servers spread out over 3 >>> locations and most on the 2.2 release. Their hardware ranges >>> from Dell PowerEdge, >>> Xinit Hardware, Old Compaq machine and many test laptops/old >>> desktops. One server even connects to an Apple Xserve RAID and >>> we love iSCSI. I have not had any issues installing to date. I >>> have even directed someone offsite on it's install procedure and >>> they have never used Linux before. >>> >>> As far as your rant is concerned, like I mentioned I can >>> understand where you are coming from. I can tell you that as an >>> IT company we >>> have implemented Openfiler in mission critical production >>> environments and find it rock solid. I hope you are able to get >>> it going and get to see the amazing power and application that >>> it could bring to you as it has for us. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> >>> >>> Brad >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >>> Of >>> Tab >>> Bennedum >>> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:32 PM >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [OF-users] Installation/upgrade problems >>> >>> >>> >>> Update: >>> >>> >>> >>> I let the box sit at the "stuck point" overnight. When I looked >>> at it this morning, I have a prompt back with a message: >>> >>> The local database is locked. It is possible that a database >>> journal file exists that needs to be rolled back, but you don't >>> have write permission to the database. >>> >>> I'm logged in as root, so how can not have permission? >>> >>> >>> >>> Figuring something was wrong, I attempted to conary rollback, >>> but I didn't use the command correctly so it didn't run. >>> Thinking, "What >>> the hell?", I ran conary updateall again and this time it seemed >>> to finished "correctly" (without the huge delay) after applying >>> 17 >>> update jobs. I say it that way because I don't know what >>> "correct" >>> looks like, but I ended up at a shell prompt with no glaring >>> errors on screen. >>> >>> I've tried hitting the web page again, but it's still blank. So >>> I >>> rebooted. Before I could get to the keyboard, I noticed 3 >>> choices in the boot loader. I wasn't able to read them before >>> the bootloader timed out and started the first image in the >>> list. >>> >>> After a reboot, the web page is still blank. I tried a conary >>> updateall to make sure everything was cool, but said there were >>> no new troves. So, I would expect at this point to have working >>> box, but I clearly don't. I have no idea what to do now. >>> >>> Irebooted the box and looked at the boot choices this time. The >>> first choice does seem to be the correct one, with a newer >>> kernal and non SMP. Still a blank web page. >>> >>> >>> <slight rant> >>> I know Openfiler is free, so don't get on my case about what I >>> should expect for nothing; this comes from a programmer that >>> takes pride in his work doing exactly what it's supposed to do >>> before anyone else ever sees it. >>> >>> I thought the point of the Openfiler project was to produce a >>> burnable disk image that could be used to turn an ordinary lump >>> of computer equipment into a fully functional network attached >>> storage appliance. When I think of "network appliance" I don't >>> think of a shell prompt, I think of web page. I don't think of >>> Linux, I think >>> of "I don't care what it runs". When I think "fully functional", >>> I >>> think it should work as advertised after installation, maybe >>> with the need to run an update and probably make lots of >>> configuration changes (all using a web page). >>> >>> Since beginning testing with v1 versions and now v2.2, on my >>> current hardware and on other hardware, I've never seen an >>> Openfiler >>> instance that I would consider beyond a Beta version, let alone >>> v2.2. I would never consider using this software in production >>> or paying for support given the problems I've seen myself and >>> the problems I've read about in the mailing lists and forums. I >>> want the product to work and I don't mind paying for support, >>> but the product first has to be at least beyond beta. If I want >>> beta software, I'll use MS products. >>> >>> Is my understanding of the OF project not correct? Am I being >>> too critical? Should I just drop it and find something else? >>> I've even >>> considered rolling my own (with just the functionality I need, >>> iSCSI), which I'm fairly confident I could do in an amount of >>> time comparable to the time I've wasted so far. </slight rant> >>> >>> >>> Anyway, can anyone suggest what I should do to get this system >>> functional? >>> >>> -Tab >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, March 16, 2007 12:37 am, Tab Bennedum wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I tested an older v1 version of OF a while ago and have been >>>> lurking ever since. Now that 2.2 is out, I'm back to testing >>>> again. And I'm disappointed. >>>> >>>> My system is brand new hardware: Athlon 64 running on an MSI >>>> nforce4 board (K9NBPM2-FID, v5.3 BIOS), 1 GB RAM, 80GB Seagate >>>> PATA >>>> system disk and 320GB Seagate SATA data disk. >>>> >>>> I've installed the OF 2.2 i86_64 ISO image. Immediately after >>>> install, >>> >>>> I try to hit the web page (http://<box>:446/) and I'm greeted >>>> by a blank page. A view source shows an empty HTML doc >>>> (HTML/BODY >>>> begin/end >>> >>>> tags, no content). Hmm. Is the ISO that broken? >>>> >>>> I should note that I receieved no errors (that I could >>>> identify) during installation. >>>> >>>> Ok, so I ssh in as root and run "conary updateall". I get >>>> this: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Applying update job 1 of 19: >>>> Install >>>> kernel(:runtime)=2.6.19.7-0.1-1[~!kernel.debug,~!kernel.debugd >>>> ata, ~! >>>> kernel.numa,~kernel.smp] Applying update job 2 of 19: Install >>>> kernel(:runtime)=2.6.19.7-0.1-1[~!kernel.debug,~!kernel.debug >>>> data, ~! >>>> kernel.numa,~!kernel.smp] Creating database transaction (1 of >>>> 2)... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> And conary is hung. I can suspend the process and kill it, >>>> but before doing so, I left it in the above state for over an >>>> hour with no progress being made. >>>> >>>> I started from scratch again and reinstalled, this time >>>> partitioning as described in the docs (I did it a little >>>> differently the first time). Long story short, I get the same >>>> results. >>>> >>>> Anyone have any clue what might be going on? What other >>>> information can I provide that might help? Didn't find >>>> anything in the forums that >>> >>>> applied, and been reading the mailing list for a couple >>>> months. Anyone? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm getting ready to show this system to someone (tomorrow) >>>> who might be interested in putting together an iSCSI SAN but >>>> as it is, it will never see the light of day and some other >>>> solution will be used. >>>> >>>> -Tab >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Openfiler-users mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Openfiler-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Openfiler-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Openfiler-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users > > > > _______________________________________________ Openfiler-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users _______________________________________________ Openfiler-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openfiler.com/mailman/listinfo/openfiler-users
