Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Framework error: code: 28 reason
Good day. On 05/31/2011 09:04, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: I have the following error while trying to install new zone or doing pkg refresh: # zoneadm -z webservShared install Publisher: Using openindiana.org (http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/ ). Image: Preparing at /zones/webservShared-zone/root. pkg: 0/1 catalogs successfully updated: 1: Framework error: code: 28 reason: Operation too slow. Less than 1024 bytes/sec transfered the last 30 seconds URL: 'http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/openindiana.org/catalog/1/catalog.summary.C'. (happened 4 times) 2: Framework error: code: 28 reason: Operation too slow. Less than 1024 bytes/sec transfered the last 30 seconds URL: 'http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/openindiana.org/catalog/1/catalog.base.C'. (happened 4 times) 3: Framework error: code: 28 reason: Operation too slow. Less than 1024 bytes/sec transfered the last 30 seconds URL: 'http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/openindiana.org/catalog/1/catalog.dependency.C'. (happened 4 times) Are there any ways to make pkg to wait longer for server answer? Are there any mirrors of OpenIndiana repositories nearby (in Russia)? # traceroute pkg.openindiana.org traceroute to pkg.openindiana.org (91.194.74.166), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 r1.r61.net (x.x.x.x) 1.743 ms 0.308 ms 0.292 ms 2 r2.r61.net (x.x.x.x) 0.372 ms 0.256 ms 0.254 ms 3 r3.r61.net (x.x.x.x) 1.851 ms 0.543 ms 0.433 ms 4 r4.r61.net (x.x.x.x) 0.309 ms 0.298 ms 0.288 ms 5 m9-2-gw.msk.runnet.ru (194.190.254.57) 17.959 ms 18.056 ms 19.112 ms 6 m9-1-gw.msk.runnet.ru (194.85.40.213) 65.170 ms 63.829 ms 63.875 ms 7 b57-1-gw.spb.runnet.ru (194.85.40.134) 216.482 ms 199.536 ms 200.265 ms 8 kt12-1-gw.spb.runnet.ru (194.85.40.154) 63.868 ms 63.777 ms 66.601 ms 9 tug11-1-gw.sth.runnet.ru (194.85.40.142) 68.817 ms 64.107 ms 65.088 ms 10 hikhef-1-gw.ams.runnet.ru (194.85.40.241) 64.304 ms 63.918 ms 63.926 ms 11 ae0-501.rt0.nik.nl.goscomb.net (195.69.145.107) 64.222 ms 65.009 ms 64.193 ms 12 ge-1-1-11-1368.rt0.the.uk.goscomb.net (77.75.109.105) 78.184 ms 70.497 ms 70.622 ms 13 everycity-186.gw.goscomb.net (77.75.109.186) 72.999 ms 76.527 ms 73.731 ms 14 v1121.c02.thnstar.everycity.co.uk (95.131.250.170) 71.609 ms 71.390 ms 72.336 ms 15 v150.c02.ixlon1.everycity.co.uk (95.131.250.140) 72.039 ms 72.652 ms 72.223 ms 16 91.194.74.166 (91.194.74.166) 71.445 ms 71.784 ms 71.106 ms What is a full size of OI pkg repository? Now I am investigating the possibility of deploying several OI servers. If we are satisfied with results (stability + availability of necessary packages + easy ways to incorporate our patches (e.g., apache patches), for example, in local repository), I'd like to create local OI repository (this idea also depends on necessary disk space). After trying to do pkg refresh for a half a day, I noticed: 1) setting PKG_CLIENT_TIMEOUT or PKG_CLIENT_LOWSPEED_TIMEOUT doesn't help; 2) using proxy doesn't help; 3) snooping shows that IPS requests the same files several times (without tcpdump it's hard to analyze network traffic, but without working repository server I can't install tcpdump...): oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=38798 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=57202 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=56828 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP R port=57202 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP R port=56828 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - resolv1.r61.net DNS C 166.74.194.91.in-addr.arpa. Internet PTR ? resolv1.r61.net - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net DNS R Error: 3(Name Error) oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - resolv1.r61.net DNS C 166.74.194.91.in-addr.arpa. Internet PTR ? resolv1.r61.net - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net DNS R Error: 3(Name Error) oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=33855 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP R port=33855 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=33855 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP GET /dev-il/versions/0/ HTTP/1.1 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP R port=33855 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP HTTP/1.1 200 OK oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=33855 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP GET /dev-il/openindiana.org/catalog/1/catalog.attrs HTTP/1.1 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP R port=33855 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP HTTP/1.1 200 OK oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=33855 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP GET /dev-il/openindiana.org/catalog/1/catalog.attrs HTTP/1.1 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP HTTP/1.1 200 OK oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP GET /dev-il/openindiana.org/catalog/1/catalog.summary.C HTTP/1.1 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=59162 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=55054 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP R port=59162 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=59162 91.194.74.166 - oihost1.mgmt.r61.net HTTP R port=55054 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net - 91.194.74.166 HTTP C port=55054 oihost1.mgmt.r61.net -
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] sata port multiplier? dedup tables overflowing RAM D510MO
On 05/28/2011 08:45 AM, Matt Connolly wrote: On 28/05/2011, at 7:08 AM, Ray Arachelian r...@arachelian.com wrote: On 05/25/2011 05:21 PM, Matt Connolly wrote: Sounds like an almost identical setup to what I have. Although I'm using a Si3114 card. I have AHCI enabled in the bios, so my drivers are: Silicon Image si3114 = pci-ide Intel SATA Controller = ahci. And, if you do find a miniPCIe SSD, please do share, I'd be interested in this too. I bought this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167039 I haven't yet installed it, but I'll do it this weekend. :) Bad news. This card requires mSATA support, which of course, the D510, even though it being also an Intel product, and even though the SSD also being an Intel product, does not have. Neither Solaris, nor the BIOS, nor Linux see the SSD. These are intended for eeePC's. I'm now looking for a mini PCIe SATA card, and a standard SATA SSD. Grrr Arg... (insert other angry sounds here.) I don't see any mini PCIe SATA cards at newegg, so I'll have to look deeper I guess. I did see another mini PCIe SATA card that doesnt mention mSATA, but it won't be in stock at newegg until the end of July, so I'm not sure I want to wait for it. I think I saw some mini PCIe to PCIe adapter, not sure, but even so, I'm not sure it will fit in the case either. So incase anyone else has a D510MO, please don't buy that card, it won't work. I initially thought I had to reflash the BIOS, which I did. I went up from some low end version 145 or so to 516. Sadly you can't directly flash that way, you have to download a copy of every major version and flash from 1XX to 2XX to 3XX to 4XX to 5XX. It's painful as it's just copying a bunch of .BIO files and pressing repeatedly F7 and rebooting, so only a little bit annoying. Sounds just like what I've done recently, except I zfs send straight from one drive (was previously mirrored) into a freshly made raidz pool with 4k alignment. I'd consider not using dedup given the cheap price of storage these days combined with limited ram in on that mobo. As in, the performance hit for the saved disk space wouldnt be worth it for my needs. I'm sure the dedup would work just fine for casual duplicates, but as usual good sanitary practices are more important. I wish there was some warning to /var/adm/messages saying your dedup tables are over 25% of your RAM, clean up your filesystem. :) Is there a way to safely turn off dedup? What happens to the already deduped files and the dedup tables? Or better yet find out which inodes contain duplicate blocks? What I did was very time consuming - took more than a week to go through all the files and obtain MD5 sums of them. Looking on sourceforge for programs that find duplicate files wasn't of much help - they're just not suited for this kind of massive task. I guess if I were to write something like this, I'd not use sort and instead dump the md5's out to sqlite or mysql and then add some fields in there for mtime/ctime/inode to also handle moving files around Anyone interested in this, other than just myself? Should I bother to invest the effort? ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] sata port multiplier? dedup tables overflowing RAM D510MO
Is there a way to safely turn off dedup? What happens to the already deduped files and the dedup tables? AFAIK, turning off (or on) dedup does not affect already deduped (or non-deduped) blocks. What might be faster (if possible) is to copy a directory at a time to a temp name, rename the original, then rename the temp to the original, then delete the renamed original (or somesuch.) ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
Currently I'm running OI 151 as a Xen 4.1.1 domU. While I have a couple of other domUs on this server, the OI domU is my 'main' VM. Because of this, I'm thinking of redoing the machine and installing OI on the barebones hardware, and then using VirtualBox headless to run the other VMs when I need them. That way OI can get all of the resources 95% of the time. Last time I tried doing this I was running VBox on top of FreeBSD. While it worked, after an hour or so the entire server would hard-lock, so I had to go back to Xen. Has anybody done something similar under OI? Has is the stability? I'm hoping since Solaris VirtualBox are both Oracle products that it would work well, but that's just a guess. -Dustin ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
Not vbox on OI personally, although I did run vbox on centos5.4 with no issues. What I am doing now is running OI as a VM under ESXi passing thru the sata controller. Performance is not detectably worse than bare metal... ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
I've got a few Images running in VirtualBox, they seem solid enough, but I don't leave them running for more than a Day, I don't enjoy staring at the Windows Logo on my nice laptop ... I've never had any critical services running in them either, I have the images more for applications that require specific OS's or just to play with them. Jon On 31 May 2011 17:50, Dan Swartzendruber dswa...@druber.com wrote: Not vbox on OI personally, although I did run vbox on centos5.4 with no issues. What I am doing now is running OI as a VM under ESXi passing thru the sata controller. Performance is not detectably worse than bare metal... ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
On 05/31/11 12:47 PM, Dustin Marquess wrote: Currently I'm running OI 151 as a Xen 4.1.1 domU. While I have a couple of other domUs on this server, the OI domU is my 'main' VM. Because of this, I'm thinking of redoing the machine and installing OI on the barebones hardware, and then using VirtualBox headless to run the other VMs when I need them. That way OI can get all of the resources 95% of the time. Last time I tried doing this I was running VBox on top of FreeBSD. While it worked, after an hour or so the entire server would hard-lock, so I had to go back to Xen. Has anybody done something similar under OI? Has is the stability? I'm hoping since Solaris VirtualBox are both Oracle products that it would work well, but that's just a guess. -Dustin Hi Dustin, I had issues with the early VirtualBox 4.0.x releases. I had to go back to VB 3.2.12 a number of times before I settled on 4.0.6 and then 4.0.8. The early 4.0.x releases would lock-up the VM or Solaris Express *solid* within a few days. VB 3.2.12 was rock solid. I would go with Xen or ESXi if my pay cheque depended on it :) Cheers, Paul ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] usb
Seems that the bug in the usb library that I saw in 147, which was ok in 148, is back in 151. Because of this, the apcusbd program crashes like it did in 147: (gdb) where #0 0xfee5c3ec in strtok_r () from /lib/libc.so.1 #1 0xfee5c37f in strtok () from /lib/libc.so.1 #2 0xfef42619 in usb_init () from /usr/lib/libusb.so.1 #3 0x08061077 in open_usb_device (ups=0x8081a58) at generic-usb.c:399 #4 0x080616da in pusb_ups_open (ups=0x8081a58) at generic-usb.c:632 #5 0x0805ef4a in usb_ups_open (ups=0x8081a58) at usb.c:220 #6 0x08055df3 in setup_device (ups=0x8081a58) at device.c:64 #7 0x080575d9 in main (argc=2, argv=0x8047c64) at apcupsd.c:285 I replaced /usr/lib/libusb.so.1 and /usr/lib/64/libusb.so.1 from 148 which solved the problem. Who do I report this to? Gary ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] usb
On 05/31/11 02:05 PM, Gary Gendel wrote: Seems that the bug in the usb library that I saw in 147, which was ok in 148, is back in 151. I replaced /usr/lib/libusb.so.1 and /usr/lib/64/libusb.so.1 from 148 which solved the problem. Who do I report this to? http://bugs.openindiana.org ? ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
I'm running VirtualBox 4.0.6 on OI b148. I'm using sparse zvols for storage, rather than .vdi'and using ZFS snapshots On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Dustin Marquess dmarqu...@gmail.comwrote: Has anybody done something similar under OI? Has is the stability? I'm hoping since Solaris VirtualBox are both Oracle products that it would work well, but that's just a guess. -Dustin ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] sata port multiplier? dedup tables overflowing RAM D510MO
On 05/31/2011 08:00 AM, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: AFAIK, turning off (or on) dedup does not affect already deduped (or non-deduped) blocks. Ok, so it's safe to turn off. What might be faster (if possible) is to copy a directory at a time to a temp name, rename the original, then rename the temp to the original, then delete the renamed original (or somesuch.) I was thinking more along the lines of replacing the duplicate files with either links, or deleting them. :) ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
Sorry, somehow that got sent too early there, I'm running VirtualBox 4.0.6 on OI b148. I'm using sparse zvols for storage, rather than .vdi's. I'm very happy with the performance. (dedicated ZIL and L2ARC devices help a lot) I'm taking snapshots using ZFS for these vbox machines. All has been working great, I reluctantly started this machine with vbox 4.0.4, and it's been great. Though as previously mentioned vbox 3.2.12 is truly solid on OI too. If you are the type of guy who would consider using VirtualBox for your hypervisor, then don't hesitate if you feel inclined to do so. I'm sure it will treat you just fine. Definitely consider using zvols for storage if you go with vbox. On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Dustin Marquess dmarqu...@gmail.comwrote: Has anybody done something similar under OI? Has is the stability? I'm hoping since Solaris VirtualBox are both Oracle products that it would work well, but that's just a guess. -Dustin ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
On Wednesday, June 01, 2011 05:00 AM, Chris Mosetick wrote: Sorry, somehow that got sent too early there, I'm running VirtualBox 4.0.6 on OI b148. I'm using sparse zvols for storage, rather than .vdi's. I'm very happy with the performance. (dedicated ZIL and L2ARC devices help a lot) I'm taking snapshots using ZFS for these vbox machines. All has been working great, I reluctantly started this machine with vbox 4.0.4, and it's been great. Though as previously mentioned vbox 3.2.12 is truly solid on OI too. If you are the type of guy who would consider using VirtualBox for your hypervisor, then don't hesitate if you feel inclined to do so. I'm sure it will treat you just fine. Definitely consider using zvols for storage if you go with vbox. Running Windows 2008 Server on vbox 3.x over here on an OI_147 box. Nay problems whatsoever with vbox. Problems with the crappy Softlink Oliver library software yes but not with vbox. ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
On Wednesday, June 01, 2011 08:17 AM, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: I hava better performance with files instead of zvols. Now that is interesting... ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
I don't remember the specifics, but it was non-trivial.. -Original Message- From: Christopher Chan [mailto:christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk] Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 8:36 PM To: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Subject: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI On Wednesday, June 01, 2011 08:17 AM, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: I hava better performance with files instead of zvols. Now that is interesting... ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
On 05/31/11 17:35, Christopher Chan wrote: On Wednesday, June 01, 2011 08:17 AM, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: I hava better performance with files instead of zvols. Now that is interesting... there are two factors that you may want to look at: 1) block size. files default to a 128K allocation block size, while zvols default to 8K. 2) check the sync property; the zvol may be generating synchronous writes while I/O to the file isn't. ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
Nope, I had sync disabled across the board. There are people on the nexenta boards who are ticked because nextentastor only allows zvol iscsi targets (via the gui...) -Original Message- From: Bill Sommerfeld [mailto:sommerf...@alum.mit.edu] Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 9:15 PM To: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org Subject: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI On 05/31/11 17:35, Christopher Chan wrote: On Wednesday, June 01, 2011 08:17 AM, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: I hava better performance with files instead of zvols. Now that is interesting... there are two factors that you may want to look at: 1) block size. files default to a 128K allocation block size, while zvols default to 8K. 2) check the sync property; the zvol may be generating synchronous writes while I/O to the file isn't. ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] VirtualBox on OI
On Wednesday, June 01, 2011 09:15 AM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: On 05/31/11 17:35, Christopher Chan wrote: On Wednesday, June 01, 2011 08:17 AM, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: I hava better performance with files instead of zvols. Now that is interesting... there are two factors that you may want to look at: 1) block size. files default to a 128K allocation block size, while zvols default to 8K. 2) check the sync property; the zvol may be generating synchronous writes while I/O to the file isn't. Default setting on OI_147 is 'standard' and not 'always'. I think I better bug the powers that be for that failover server for testing. ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Framework error: code: 28 reason
Let's continue my conversation with myself. I've found out that problem exists with all pkg.openindiana.org repositories. If I use /dev repository from pkg-2.de.openindiana.org, it works fine (at least I can do pkg refresh). Unfortunately, this host doesn't have /dev-il repository. So, is there any way to get a copy of /dev-il to deploy it on local computer? -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Computer Center of Southern Federal University ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
