Re: Please secure your FTP access
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 06:55:05PM -0500, Ryan Coleman wrote: > On Sep 16, 2011, at 17:27, Chad Perrin wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 02:14:42PM -0400, Daniel Staal wrote: > >> > >> Also many smartphone and tablet mailers automatically top-post, and make > >> it significantly harder to move the cursor around inside the text with any > >> accuracy. > > > > This is why I don't deal with email on my Android smartphone. The mail > > client is a bucket of ass. > > +1. That's why I have an iPhone now. :-) Seriously . . . ? You have an iPhone because the mail client on an Android smartphone sucks. That's odd. I still prefer my iPhone, and have some hope that some day I'll be able to install some kind of BSD Unix system on an Android device. Unlike with the iPhone, I probably wouldn't get sued for doing so. Also, I get to have a keyboard with an Android device. Even before I can shoehorn BSD Unix onto it, at least it's possible to root some Android smartphones without getting sued. Et cetera. . . . but I'm pretty mystified at the idea of getting an iPhone just because of the mail client. Trying to deal with email on *any* smartphone client would be a pain in my fourth point of contact. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpk3YP37aaTm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Please secure your FTP access
On Sep 16, 2011, at 17:27, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 02:14:42PM -0400, Daniel Staal wrote: >> >> Also many smartphone and tablet mailers automatically top-post, and make >> it significantly harder to move the cursor around inside the text with any >> accuracy. > > This is why I don't deal with email on my Android smartphone. The mail > client is a bucket of ass. +1. That's why I have an iPhone now. :-) -- Ryan Coleman ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Please secure your FTP access
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 02:14:42PM -0400, Daniel Staal wrote: > > Also many smartphone and tablet mailers automatically top-post, and make > it significantly harder to move the cursor around inside the text with any > accuracy. This is why I don't deal with email on my Android smartphone. The mail client is a bucket of ass. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpTDbXxn6qIq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Please secure your FTP access
On 9/16/2011 1:37 PM, David Demelier wrote: > On 15/09/2011 23:46, Allen wrote: >> Sorry for top posting > > I have never understood why people apologise when they top post. Is your > client mail so bad that you can't move your cursor selector under the > last message? I top posted on purpose. Of course my mail client allows me to post normally. The REASON I top posted, was to say something that was not part of the reply I quoted. See, I wanted to say something first, and THEN I wanted to reply to a few things. So, I top posted the part that wasn't related to what was said, and I then posted the rest normally. Clear it up yet? > For me, I have tested a lot of client mails and I was always able to > write text under the last message. And even microsoft outlook. My message was sent with Thunderbird. I don't normally use that because it's a resource hog and a half, but since my ISP decided to be stupid and no longer allow direct access, instantly making Mutt and Fetchmail impossible to use anymore, I have to use something else. I miss Mutt and Fetchmail, but my ISP is acting stupid. So now, I use Thunderbird sometimes, Opera's Mail client a lot more, and Kamil, and others, whenever. Sylpheed and the other one related to it get some use from me, along with Opera and Kmail, as my main clients now. Still miss Mutt though. I trimmed the rest of this message since that's something another person brought up about your client ;) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
On 16. sep. 2011, at 16:18, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: > zpool create data da1 > zfs create data/maildomains > zfs set sync=disabled data/maildomains Just for the archives... sync=disabled won't disable disable the zil, it'll disable waiting for a disk-flush on fsync etc. With a battery backed controller cache, those flushes should go to cache, and be pretty mich free. You end up tossing away something for nothing. You're getting about half the performance on a sequential write to the zfs, as you get with raw ufs. That makes perfect sense, doesn't it? Ufs writes raw, zfs writes to zil, then final restingplace forthe data. Account for the seeks between, and you're seeing what you should. Move the zil if you don't want both those sets of writes on the same array, or do what Svein said, and get funk^w logical. (a tad simplified, but I think the logic will hold. (yes, pun intended)) Terje___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
Quoting Terje Elde : On 16. sep. 2011, at 16:18, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: Got a measly 74MB/sec. You can't ask for advice, get it, do something completely different, and then complain that it didn't work. Neither can you ask people to donate their time, if you won't spend yours. In other words: if you won't listen, there's no point in us talking. However: Don't disable ZIL. Just don't. It's not the way to go. If you want to know why, google will help. Also, you're making some assumptions, such as the ZIL being bad for performance. That's not always the case. ZIL-writes are a rather nice load for spinning metal storage. Even if you write through cache, that can give you a boost on your real world workload. Which brings us to the third bit. You're benchmarking, not trying real world loads. That's the load you'll have to worry about, and it's the load zfs shines at. Thanks to the ZIL (the thing you're trying to kill, remember?) you can convert seek heavy writes to sequential zil-writes, freeing up disk bandwith for concurrent reads. If you want to test before spending money, try what Svein said. Set up a small logical volume (preferrably smaller than your controller cache, if it's large enough), then try that as a dedicated zil-device. Never tried that, but worth a shot. Terje It's not about spending money or not. I really want to use ZFS for some of its features ( journaled, snapshots, etc ) but it has to be a good fit for me. I'm not ignoring the advice I am given, just taking it with a grain of salt disabling the ZIL is recommended - sometimes - for NFS. As per hundreds of messages I've read from the Archive along with this page, http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSTuningGuide, it does appear that disabling the ZIL is a solution for NFS. Yes, they still recommend SSD drives and I fully understand that. My point was the following: Why is a sequential write test like dd slower on ZFS than on UFS ? The writes is already serialized so enabling/disabling the ZIL should have very little impact - which is indeed the case. I even went as far as disabling the cache flush option of ZFS through this variable: vfs.zfs.cache_flush_disable: 1, since I already have the write cache of the controller. I've also set some other variables as per the Tuning guide but according to several benchmarks ( iozone, bonnie++, dd ) ZFS still comes in slower than UFS at pretty much everything. Either I am missing something or there is something wrong with my setup. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
On 16. sep. 2011, at 16:18, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: > Got a measly 74MB/sec. You can't ask for advice, get it, do something completely different, and then complain that it didn't work. Neither can you ask people to donate their time, if you won't spend yours. In other words: if you won't listen, there's no point in us talking. However: Don't disable ZIL. Just don't. It's not the way to go. If you want to know why, google will help. Also, you're making some assumptions, such as the ZIL being bad for performance. That's not always the case. ZIL-writes are a rather nice load for spinning metal storage. Even if you write through cache, that can give you a boost on your real world workload. Which brings us to the third bit. You're benchmarking, not trying real world loads. That's the load you'll have to worry about, and it's the load zfs shines at. Thanks to the ZIL (the thing you're trying to kill, remember?) you can convert seek heavy writes to sequential zil-writes, freeing up disk bandwith for concurrent reads. If you want to test before spending money, try what Svein said. Set up a small logical volume (preferrably smaller than your controller cache, if it's large enough), then try that as a dedicated zil-device. Never tried that, but worth a shot. Terje___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Please secure your FTP access
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:46 PM, Allen wrote: > Sorry for top posting but can anyone send this to "Computer Stupidities" > ? It seems to good to waste like this. Anyone who thinks they're a > Hacker yet doesn't know how FTP works is not only funny, it's > entertainment. And also, the web site I'm speaking of, has a similar > story sent in from another reader, where they talked about back when > they were in a Web Development class once, the teacher partnered > everyone up with someone else, and so, since he had already made his own > web site, he figured he'd show it to his new partner, and said "This is > my web site here" and the guy, like a moron, highlighted ALL of the text > with a Mouse, and threatened to hit the "Delete" button on the Keyboard... > > This reminds me of that quite a bit lol. > > On 9/14/2011 5:57 AM, Eduardo Morras wrote: >> At 21:43 13/09/2011, Sarang. wrote: >>> H! there, >>> >>> I have seen your site and also got ftp access.. >>> >>> Please secure your ftp acces otherwise anyone can delete your data >>> >>> Why anyone? even I am also interested in it.. please move your ass >>> otherwise it will cost you. >>> >>> If you are not going to fix this problem then I will delete all the >>> files tommorrow... >>> >>> Take care.. >> >> You log in as anonymous user but the user whom owns the ftp is another >> one (perhaps ftp). The permises you get are r-x (thh last ones) not rwx. >> >> HTH >> >>> Ethical but Bad Hacker... He may have actually used his real name too :) - https://www.facebook.com/sarang.chepe ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Please secure your FTP access
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:03:40 -0700 Devin Teske articulated: Between Top/Bottom and in-line posting, this thread is getting harder to read by the minute. I am not at my Windows machine at the moment; however, I know from past experience that I CAN enter text, plain or HTML, after the last entry in a message. It always did work in-line; however since I don't use Outlook for replying to forum mail I cannot swear that it doesn't cause a problem with in-line posting. That then brings up the next question, why is the OP or any of the subsequent posters using HTML to begin with? It certainly does not belong in forum posts. Furthermore, Outlook will send in plain ASCII text if configured to do so. It can also be configured to reply after the text rather than before if configured to do so. Most users don't bother to configure it correctly and then blame the product for their own inadequacies. -- Jerry ✌ jerry+f...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or ignored. Do not CC this poster. Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header. http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Please secure your FTP access
On Fri, September 16, 2011 2:03 pm, Devin Teske wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- >> questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of David Demelier >> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2011 10:38 AM >> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >> Subject: Re: Please secure your FTP access >> >> On 15/09/2011 23:46, Allen wrote: >> > Sorry for top posting >> >> I have never understood why people apologise when they top post. Is your > client >> mail so bad that you can't move your cursor selector under the last >> message? > > Preamble: Not making excuses for others' actions, but airing grievances > because > I'd really like Microsoft to fix this one. > > Observation: > Microsoft Outlook 2010 has a nasty nasty bug (or at least, I consider it > to be a > bug). If the e-mail that you are responding to is in HTML format and your > reply > is also in HTML format, then you cannot insert text in the middle of the > reply-text. The expectation that you can insert text in the middle of the > reply-text at a different indentation-level fails miserably. As a > work-around > you can change the reply-mail to be in either Rich Text or Plain Text > format, > but that removes the indentation-level of the reply-text (yuck). It's > rather > frustrating and whenever I am faced with top-posting because of Outlook's > iniquities or using another mail client ... I simply use another mail > client > (period). > > Just sharing... > Devin Also many smartphone and tablet mailers automatically top-post, and make it significantly harder to move the cursor around inside the text with any accuracy. Daniel T. Staal --- This email copyright the author. Unless otherwise noted, you are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use the contents for non-commercial purposes. This copyright will expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years, whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of local copyright law. --- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Please secure your FTP access
On 9/16/11 1:37 PM, David Demelier wrote: For me, I have tested a lot of client mails and I was always able to write text under the last message. And even microsoft outlook. Though your current client does appear to keep you from trimming. -- --Jon Radel j...@radel.com
RE: Please secure your FTP access
> -Original Message- > From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- > questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of David Demelier > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2011 10:38 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Please secure your FTP access > > On 15/09/2011 23:46, Allen wrote: > > Sorry for top posting > > I have never understood why people apologise when they top post. Is your client > mail so bad that you can't move your cursor selector under the last message? Preamble: Not making excuses for others' actions, but airing grievances because I'd really like Microsoft to fix this one. Observation: Microsoft Outlook 2010 has a nasty nasty bug (or at least, I consider it to be a bug). If the e-mail that you are responding to is in HTML format and your reply is also in HTML format, then you cannot insert text in the middle of the reply-text. The expectation that you can insert text in the middle of the reply-text at a different indentation-level fails miserably. As a work-around you can change the reply-mail to be in either Rich Text or Plain Text format, but that removes the indentation-level of the reply-text (yuck). It's rather frustrating and whenever I am faced with top-posting because of Outlook's iniquities or using another mail client ... I simply use another mail client (period). Just sharing... Devin > > For me, I have tested a lot of client mails and I was always able to write text > under the last message. And even microsoft outlook. > > :) > > > but can anyone send this to "Computer Stupidities" > > ? It seems to good to waste like this. Anyone who thinks they're a > > Hacker yet doesn't know how FTP works is not only funny, it's > > entertainment. And also, the web site I'm speaking of, has a similar > > story sent in from another reader, where they talked about back when > > they were in a Web Development class once, the teacher partnered > > everyone up with someone else, and so, since he had already made his > > own web site, he figured he'd show it to his new partner, and said > > "This is my web site here" and the guy, like a moron, highlighted ALL > > of the text with a Mouse, and threatened to hit the "Delete" button on the > Keyboard... > > > > This reminds me of that quite a bit lol. > > > > On 9/14/2011 5:57 AM, Eduardo Morras wrote: > >> At 21:43 13/09/2011, Sarang. wrote: > >>> H! there, > >>> > >>> I have seen your site and also got ftp access.. > >>> > >>> Please secure your ftp acces otherwise anyone can delete your data > >>> > >>> Why anyone? even I am also interested in it.. please move your ass > >>> otherwise it will cost you. > >>> > >>> If you are not going to fix this problem then I will delete all the > >>> files tommorrow... > >>> > >>> Take care.. > >> > >> You log in as anonymous user but the user whom owns the ftp is > >> another one (perhaps ftp). The permises you get are r-x (thh last ones) not > rwx. > >> > >> HTH > >> > >>> Ethical but Bad Hacker... > > ___ > > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions- > unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > > -- > David Demelier > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. _ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Please secure your FTP access
On 15/09/2011 23:46, Allen wrote: Sorry for top posting I have never understood why people apologise when they top post. Is your client mail so bad that you can't move your cursor selector under the last message? For me, I have tested a lot of client mails and I was always able to write text under the last message. And even microsoft outlook. :) but can anyone send this to "Computer Stupidities" ? It seems to good to waste like this. Anyone who thinks they're a Hacker yet doesn't know how FTP works is not only funny, it's entertainment. And also, the web site I'm speaking of, has a similar story sent in from another reader, where they talked about back when they were in a Web Development class once, the teacher partnered everyone up with someone else, and so, since he had already made his own web site, he figured he'd show it to his new partner, and said "This is my web site here" and the guy, like a moron, highlighted ALL of the text with a Mouse, and threatened to hit the "Delete" button on the Keyboard... This reminds me of that quite a bit lol. On 9/14/2011 5:57 AM, Eduardo Morras wrote: At 21:43 13/09/2011, Sarang. wrote: H! there, I have seen your site and also got ftp access.. Please secure your ftp acces otherwise anyone can delete your data Why anyone? even I am also interested in it.. please move your ass otherwise it will cost you. If you are not going to fix this problem then I will delete all the files tommorrow... Take care.. You log in as anonymous user but the user whom owns the ftp is another one (perhaps ftp). The permises you get are r-x (thh last ones) not rwx. HTH Ethical but Bad Hacker... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" -- David Demelier ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Please secure your FTP access
On Thursday 15 September 2011 13:46:35 Allen wrote: > Sorry for top posting but can anyone send this to "Computer Stupidities" > ? It seems to good to waste like this. Anyone who thinks they're a > Hacker yet doesn't know how FTP works is not only funny, it's > entertainment. And also, the web site I'm speaking of, has a similar > story sent in from another reader, where they talked about back when > they were in a Web Development class once, the teacher partnered > everyone up with someone else, and so, since he had already made his own > web site, he figured he'd show it to his new partner, and said "This is > my web site here" and the guy, like a moron, highlighted ALL of the text > with a Mouse, and threatened to hit the "Delete" button on the Keyboard... > > This reminds me of that quite a bit lol. > > On 9/14/2011 5:57 AM, Eduardo Morras wrote: > > At 21:43 13/09/2011, Sarang. wrote: > >> H! there, > >> > >> I have seen your site and also got ftp access.. > >> > >> Please secure your ftp acces otherwise anyone can delete your data > >> > >> Why anyone? even I am also interested in it.. please move your ass > >> otherwise it will cost you. > >> > >> If you are not going to fix this problem then I will delete all the > >> files tommorrow... > >> > >> Take care.. > > > > You log in as anonymous user but the user whom owns the ftp is another > > one (perhaps ftp). The permises you get are r-x (thh last ones) not rwx. > > > > HTH > > > >> Ethical but Bad Hacker... All your files are now belong to us :-P -- --- Beech Rintoul - FreeBSD Developer - be...@freebsd.org /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | FreeBSD Since 4.x \ / - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail | http://people.freebsd.org/~beech X - NO Word docs in e-mail | Skype: akbeech / \ - http://www.FreeBSD.org/releases/8.2R/announce.html --- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
On 16.09.2011 15:57, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: > Quoting Terje Elde : > >> On 16. sep. 2011, at 12:31, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: >>> Right now I defined an entire array of 8TB ( all 16 disks ) separated >>> in two pieces. 50 GB for FreeBSD to boot and the rest available to >>> configure as storage. >> >> ZFS will want to write to it's ZIL (zfs intent log) before writing to >> the final location of the data. Even if you're not waiting for the >> ZIL-write to disk (because of the controller ram), those writes will >> probably make it through to disk. That gives you twice as many writes >> to disk, and a lot more seek. >> >> If you want to take zfs for a proper spin, I'd like to sugget adding >> two small SSDs to the setup, mirrored by zfs. You can use those both >> for the ZIL, and also as cache, for the array. That's a fairly small >> investment these days, and I would be surprised if it didn't >> significantly improve performance, both for your benchmark, and real >> load. >> >> Note: you might be in trouble if you loose your ZIL, thus the doubling >> up. I *think* you can SSD a cache without risking dataloss, but don't >> take my word for it. >> >> Terje > > I know it's usually a big no-no but since I have the battery backed-up > write cache from the raid card, can't I just disable the ZIL entirely ? No. However, you could allow the ZIL to be written to a logical disk with the battery-backed cache. //Svein -- +---+--- /"\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE +---+--- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
Quoting Terje Elde : On 16. sep. 2011, at 12:31, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: Right now I defined an entire array of 8TB ( all 16 disks ) separated in two pieces. 50 GB for FreeBSD to boot and the rest available to configure as storage. ZFS will want to write to it's ZIL (zfs intent log) before writing to the final location of the data. Even if you're not waiting for the ZIL-write to disk (because of the controller ram), those writes will probably make it through to disk. That gives you twice as many writes to disk, and a lot more seek. If you want to take zfs for a proper spin, I'd like to sugget adding two small SSDs to the setup, mirrored by zfs. You can use those both for the ZIL, and also as cache, for the array. That's a fairly small investment these days, and I would be surprised if it didn't significantly improve performance, both for your benchmark, and real load. Note: you might be in trouble if you loose your ZIL, thus the doubling up. I *think* you can SSD a cache without risking dataloss, but don't take my word for it. Terje Well, I tried disabling the ZIL on a new dataset. These are the commands that I ran: zpool create data da1 zfs create data/maildomains zfs set sync=disabled data/maildomains dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=/data/maildomains/t1 count=1M 1048576+0 records in 1048576+0 records out 1073741824 bytes transferred in 14.537711 secs (73859071 bytes/sec) Got a measly 74MB/sec. On the UFS partition however... dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=/usr/t1 count=1M 1048576+0 records in 1048576+0 records out 1073741824 bytes transferred in 5.828395 secs (184225983 bytes/sec) 184MB/sec! And this is synchronous writing, not random! So what is ZFS good for finally ? Synchronous writing or small random iops ? By the way, this is how the array is configured with 3ware: Unit UnitType Status %RCmpl %V/I/M Stripe Size(GB) Cache AVrfy -- u0RAID-10 OK - - 64K 7450.5ON ON VPort Status Unit Size Type Phy Encl-SlotModel -- p0OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 0 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p1OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 1 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p2OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 2 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p3OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 3 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p4OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 4 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p5OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 5 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p6OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 6 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p7OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 7 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p8OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 8 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p9OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 9 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p10 OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 10 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p11 OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 11 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p12 OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 12 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p13 OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 13 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p14 OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 14 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 p15 OK u0 931.51 GB SATA 15 -WDC WD1002FBYS-01A6 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 08:57:45 -0500, wrote: I know it's usually a big no-no but since I have the battery backed-up write cache from the raid card, can't I just disable the ZIL entirely ? No. ZFS doesn't work the way traditional filesystems do. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
Quoting Terje Elde : On 16. sep. 2011, at 12:31, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: Right now I defined an entire array of 8TB ( all 16 disks ) separated in two pieces. 50 GB for FreeBSD to boot and the rest available to configure as storage. ZFS will want to write to it's ZIL (zfs intent log) before writing to the final location of the data. Even if you're not waiting for the ZIL-write to disk (because of the controller ram), those writes will probably make it through to disk. That gives you twice as many writes to disk, and a lot more seek. If you want to take zfs for a proper spin, I'd like to sugget adding two small SSDs to the setup, mirrored by zfs. You can use those both for the ZIL, and also as cache, for the array. That's a fairly small investment these days, and I would be surprised if it didn't significantly improve performance, both for your benchmark, and real load. Note: you might be in trouble if you loose your ZIL, thus the doubling up. I *think* you can SSD a cache without risking dataloss, but don't take my word for it. Terje I know it's usually a big no-no but since I have the battery backed-up write cache from the raid card, can't I just disable the ZIL entirely ? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
PF and dup-to?
Hi folks, I have the following pf.conf on FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE *and* 8.2-RELEASE === set block-policy return set skip on lo int_if=bge1 ext_if=bge0 dup_if=dc0 # NAT rule nat on $ext_if from $int_if:network to any -> ($ext_if) sticky-address # # Windows RDP redirection... # # we have to stick a pass rule inside the rdr rule. # I think it's nasty but it works. # rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp from any to $ext_if port rdp -> 10.201.201.101 # same for the Apache test instance rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp from any to $ext_if port http -> 10.201.201.102 # And to proxy web traffic from the inside # disabled temporarily # rdr pass on $int_if proto tcp from any to any port 80 -> 127.0.0.1 port 3128 # block everything block in all block out all pass out quick on dc0 # allow everything from the NAT and any outbound connections from the FW pass in on $int_if from any to any keep state pass out on $ext_if from any to any keep state # # SSH # # allow inbound on the external interface pass in on $ext_if proto tcp from any to ($ext_if) port ssh keep state # # Windows Remote Desktop # pass out on $int_if proto tcp from any to 10.201.201.101 port rdp keep state # # Apache test instance # pass out on $int_if proto tcp from any to 10.201.201.102 port http keep state # # temp to allow any connections from the FW to come to the internal net; # note this is inclusive of the above two pass out rules pass out on $int_if from ($int_if) to 10.201.201.0/24 === When I change pass in on $int_if from any to any keep state to pass in on $int_if dup-to $dup_if from any to any keep state or pass in on $int_if dup-to ($dup_if 192.168.1.2) all all traffic to the outside stops passing. In addition, I get a TON of kernel messages: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 152.10.2.222 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llianrfpor efsoorl v1e0:. 2c0a1n.'2t0 1a.l1l o cate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 152.10.2.222 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 10.201.201.1 arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 152.10.2.222 My understanding of dup-to is that it should allow the interface to basically act as a span port - the original traffic gets passed via normal routing rules and a copy of each packet gets sent out $dup_if and should be visible via tcpdump on the other end but a tcpdump of dc0 doesn't see the traffic ever leaving the interface. Apparently I have a fundamental misunderstanding somewhere along the way or I've been looking at this for far too long over the last few days and I'm missing something extremely basic. I'll test with another laptop with a different configuration and reply back with any success I find. Thanks! kmw ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
On 16. sep. 2011, at 12:31, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: > Right now I defined an entire array of 8TB ( all 16 disks ) separated in two > pieces. 50 GB for FreeBSD to boot and the rest available to configure as > storage. ZFS will want to write to it's ZIL (zfs intent log) before writing to the final location of the data. Even if you're not waiting for the ZIL-write to disk (because of the controller ram), those writes will probably make it through to disk. That gives you twice as many writes to disk, and a lot more seek. If you want to take zfs for a proper spin, I'd like to sugget adding two small SSDs to the setup, mirrored by zfs. You can use those both for the ZIL, and also as cache, for the array. That's a fairly small investment these days, and I would be surprised if it didn't significantly improve performance, both for your benchmark, and real load. Note: you might be in trouble if you loose your ZIL, thus the doubling up. I *think* you can SSD a cache without risking dataloss, but don't take my word for it. Terje___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
On 16/09/2011 13:30, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: > Is zfs supposed to be faster if you let it manage the disks directly ? > Not necessarily faster (in fact, RAID-Z variants have known limitations which are not so pronounced in RAID5/6), but definitely more convenient and in some respects safer. I would test very carefully if you need speed and stability from ZFS. For one thing, you will probably want to reduce the block size in ZFS to 8K or such. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
On 16/09/2011 12:31, free...@top-consulting.net wrote: > A. TEST1: dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=/data/t1 count=1M > > 1. ZFS performed the worst, averaging 67MB/sec > 2. UFS + gjournal did around 130MB/sec > 3. UFS did around 190MB/sec > > B. TEST2 ( random file creation ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 0 -n 50 -u 0 > > 1. UFS + gjournal performed the worst > 2. ZFS performed somewhat better > 3. UFS performed the best again ( about 50% better ) > > C. TEST3 ( sequential writing ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 8088 -n 0 -u 0 > > 1. UFS + gjournal crashed the box > 2. ZFS performed average > 3. UFS performed better than ZFS ( about 50% better ) > > > I really like the concepts behind ZFS and UFS + Journaling but the > performance hit is quite drastic when compared to UFS. > > What I'm looking for here is max IOPS when doing random read/writes. Is > UFS the best choice for this ? Do my results make sense ? Your tests do look a bit odd - ZFS usually does better on sequential and UFS on random IO (rw mix). For random IO I'd go with UFS. Try comparing with blogbench. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
Quoting Johan Hendriks : free...@top-consulting.net schreef: I have a new server that I would like to use as a back-end Maildir storage shared through NFS. The specs are: FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 2 Xeon x3470 @ 2.93 quad-core CPU 4 GB Ram @ 1333mhz ( upgrading to 12GB tomorrow ) 3WARE 9650SE-16LP card with write cache enabled ( battery is installed ) 16 x WD RE3 1TB drives RAID 10 setup Right now I defined an entire array of 8TB ( all 16 disks ) separated in two pieces. 50 GB for FreeBSD to boot and the rest available to configure as storage. I've tried three options for the storage file system but I'm not sure which one is the best option since I can't really reproduce production conditions. I only ran tests with dd and bonnie and here's what I found: A. TEST1: dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=/data/t1 count=1M 1. ZFS performed the worst, averaging 67MB/sec 2. UFS + gjournal did around 130MB/sec 3. UFS did around 190MB/sec B. TEST2 ( random file creation ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 0 -n 50 -u 0 1. UFS + gjournal performed the worst 2. ZFS performed somewhat better 3. UFS performed the best again ( about 50% better ) C. TEST3 ( sequential writing ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 8088 -n 0 -u 0 1. UFS + gjournal crashed the box 2. ZFS performed average 3. UFS performed better than ZFS ( about 50% better ) I really like the concepts behind ZFS and UFS + Journaling but the performance hit is quite drastic when compared to UFS. What I'm looking for here is max IOPS when doing random read/writes. Is UFS the best choice for this ? Do my results make sense ? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Did you use raidz1 2 or 3 or mirror for the ZFS ppol. I believe that ZFS mirror gives you the best performance, but the least actual space. If you did make a raidz[1,2,3] try it with a mirror pool. Also do not use the raid function of your raid controller if you use ZFS, this way you loose the goodies of zfs. If you setup ZFS use JBOD on the raid controller. Gr Johan I simply did a : zpool create data da1 and no zfs-level raid. I also created a dataset - tried both with lzjb compression and without - but the results were similar, aka bad. Is zfs supposed to be faster if you let it manage the disks directly ? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
free...@top-consulting.net schreef: I have a new server that I would like to use as a back-end Maildir storage shared through NFS. The specs are: FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 2 Xeon x3470 @ 2.93 quad-core CPU 4 GB Ram @ 1333mhz ( upgrading to 12GB tomorrow ) 3WARE 9650SE-16LP card with write cache enabled ( battery is installed ) 16 x WD RE3 1TB drives RAID 10 setup Right now I defined an entire array of 8TB ( all 16 disks ) separated in two pieces. 50 GB for FreeBSD to boot and the rest available to configure as storage. I've tried three options for the storage file system but I'm not sure which one is the best option since I can't really reproduce production conditions. I only ran tests with dd and bonnie and here's what I found: A. TEST1: dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=/data/t1 count=1M 1. ZFS performed the worst, averaging 67MB/sec 2. UFS + gjournal did around 130MB/sec 3. UFS did around 190MB/sec B. TEST2 ( random file creation ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 0 -n 50 -u 0 1. UFS + gjournal performed the worst 2. ZFS performed somewhat better 3. UFS performed the best again ( about 50% better ) C. TEST3 ( sequential writing ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 8088 -n 0 -u 0 1. UFS + gjournal crashed the box 2. ZFS performed average 3. UFS performed better than ZFS ( about 50% better ) I really like the concepts behind ZFS and UFS + Journaling but the performance hit is quite drastic when compared to UFS. What I'm looking for here is max IOPS when doing random read/writes. Is UFS the best choice for this ? Do my results make sense ? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Did you use raidz1 2 or 3 or mirror for the ZFS ppol. I believe that ZFS mirror gives you the best performance, but the least actual space. If you did make a raidz[1,2,3] try it with a mirror pool. Also do not use the raid function of your raid controller if you use ZFS, this way you loose the goodies of zfs. If you setup ZFS use JBOD on the raid controller. Gr Johan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
FS of choice for max random iops ( Maildir )
I have a new server that I would like to use as a back-end Maildir storage shared through NFS. The specs are: FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 2 Xeon x3470 @ 2.93 quad-core CPU 4 GB Ram @ 1333mhz ( upgrading to 12GB tomorrow ) 3WARE 9650SE-16LP card with write cache enabled ( battery is installed ) 16 x WD RE3 1TB drives RAID 10 setup Right now I defined an entire array of 8TB ( all 16 disks ) separated in two pieces. 50 GB for FreeBSD to boot and the rest available to configure as storage. I've tried three options for the storage file system but I'm not sure which one is the best option since I can't really reproduce production conditions. I only ran tests with dd and bonnie and here's what I found: A. TEST1: dd bs=1024 if=/dev/zero of=/data/t1 count=1M 1. ZFS performed the worst, averaging 67MB/sec 2. UFS + gjournal did around 130MB/sec 3. UFS did around 190MB/sec B. TEST2 ( random file creation ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 0 -n 50 -u 0 1. UFS + gjournal performed the worst 2. ZFS performed somewhat better 3. UFS performed the best again ( about 50% better ) C. TEST3 ( sequential writing ): bonnie++ -d /data -c 10 -s 8088 -n 0 -u 0 1. UFS + gjournal crashed the box 2. ZFS performed average 3. UFS performed better than ZFS ( about 50% better ) I really like the concepts behind ZFS and UFS + Journaling but the performance hit is quite drastic when compared to UFS. What I'm looking for here is max IOPS when doing random read/writes. Is UFS the best choice for this ? Do my results make sense ? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Need an audio multicasting solution
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:57:04 +0700 Victor Sudakov wrote: > > You can use videolan / vlc. It allows you to multicast video too. > > In September 2011 BSD Magazine you have some examples about that. > > I like vlc on Linux/Windows machines. But installing it to a streaming > server is a pain. Even if you disable all options in "make config", it > still tries to build scores of dependencies including some components > of the X Window system. Not nice. did you try setting WITH_SERVER_ONLY? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
About swap_pager I/O error
My FreeBSD Machine sometimes appear these messages: swap_pager: I/O error - pageout failed; blkno 2097158,size 4096, error 6 (or error 11) swap_pager: I/O error - pageout failed; blkno 1048581,size 4096, error 6 swap_pager: I/O error - pageout failed; blkno 2097167,size 8192, error 6 ... This error messages often destroy some normal process or demond. If not do reboot my system, i don't know how to deal with this problem. our work is dump/restore these systems, and the methode that add/remove these new disk is "camcontrol rescan all". But i don't know whether it is this reason that device not configured or not. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
AHCI: Error while READ LOG EXT
Hello, I got strange errors from ahci this morning (on a 8.2-RELEASE box): +ahcich3: Error while READ LOG EXT +ahcich3: Error while READ LOG EXT +GEOM_MIRROR: Request failed (error=5). ada1[READ(offset=457644130304, length=16384)] +GEOM_MIRROR: Device backup: provider ada1 disconnected. +(ada1:ahcich3:0:0:0): Synchronize cache failed +ahcich3: Error while READ LOG EXT +ahcich3: Error while READ LOG EXT +ahcich3: Error while READ LOG EXT The disks are quite recent, so I wondered if it could be a bug in the ahci driver .. ? The controller is a JMicron: ahci1@pci0:0:31:2: class=0x010601 card=0x81ec1043 chip=0x28248086 rev=0x02 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = '82801HR/HO/HH (ICH8R/DO/DH) SATA AHCI Controller' class = mass storage subclass = SATA ahci0@pci0:2:0:0: class=0x010601 card=0x81e41043 chip=0x2363197b rev=0x03 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'JMicron Technology Corp.' device = 'JMicron JMB362/JMB363 AHCI Controller (JMB36X)' class = mass storage subclass = SATA atapci0@pci0:2:0:1: class=0x010185 card=0x81e41043 chip=0x2363197b rev=0x03 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'JMicron Technology Corp.' device = 'JMicron JMB362/JMB363 AHCI Controller (JMB36X)' class = mass storage subclass = ATA thank you, Julien -- No trees were killed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
