Re: FreeBSD File Server with ZFS
On 18 February 2010 11:24, Christian Baer christian.b...@uni-dortmund.dewrote: krad schrieb: On another point make sure your p4 has plenty of ram preferably 4gb, but at least 2 Exactly what good will that much RAM do for a 32Bit-CPU? Regards, Chris ___ 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 not sure what your point is? ___ 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: FreeBSD File Server with ZFS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 19/02/2010 00:28, Ghirai wrote: On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:21:48 -0500 mailinglist mailingl...@ucwv.edu wrote: UFS on the other hand will work just fine on 32bit systems and smaller and older machines. (The limitation with UFS is a maximum 2TB filesystem size, but I suspect this will not cause you any practical difficulties.) UFS2 has a maximum volume size of 1YiB (2^80 bytes). Yes. Brainfart: it's MBR that has the 2TB limit, and that can be avoided nowadays by using gpart(8). Cheers, Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkt+WqkACgkQ8Mjk52CukIybegCcCusoKfR1KffSFSBHw/b3ecnP QLEAnjytMAYIF1Nu7hl5WyobRND1707V =SbT9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: FreeBSD File Server with ZFS
krad schrieb: On another point make sure your p4 has plenty of ram preferably 4gb, but at least 2 Exactly what good will that much RAM do for a 32Bit-CPU? Regards, Chris ___ 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: FreeBSD File Server with ZFS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 18/02/2010 00:11, mailinglist wrote: I've got an old P4 desktop computer running in the basement with a 1 TB external USB drive connected to that I use as a file server. That PC is running XP. It has recently become infected with some sort of virus. I'd like to replace it with FreeBSD running ZFS + Samba (I need to access it from a OS X machine and a Windows 7 box). Does your old P4 support 64-bit operation? Does it have 2GB RAM or more? If not, then you might want to reconsider using ZFS. It's not that it won't or can't be made to work given those limitations, but you'll find it hard work to get it running stably and performing well. UFS on the other hand will work just fine on 32bit systems and smaller and older machines. (The limitation with UFS is a maximum 2TB filesystem size, but I suspect this will not cause you any practical difficulties.) 1) Will FreeBSD be able to detect and use my TB hard drive as ZFS disk? Right now it is only a single disk, but later on I'll and a second disk and setup a mirror. Even as a single disk, the checksumming ability would be nice. Yes. You can run ZFS from a single drive. That's not where ZFS's strengths really lie, but it's worthwhile as a learning exercise certainly, and the zpool management stuff is cool in any case. 2)Assume I get everything setup in regards to step 1 and my OS disk dies. How do I go about importing the ZFS external disk into another FreeBSD installation? You plug the drive in and then run 'zpool import' with appropriate flags to tell the system to investigate the new disk and discover any ZFS related metadata on it. See zpool(1M) which has a long sequence on the 'import' sub-command. Cheers, Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkt8/cgACgkQ8Mjk52CukIx9hACgk9e3DveizS58vpO5182GIb/u rBcAn2S67UTMGdZoaKoo8ffl5dx9cy++ =dShY -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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: FreeBSD File Server with ZFS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Does your old P4 support 64-bit operation? Does it have 2GB RAM or more? If not, then you might want to reconsider using ZFS. It's not that it won't or can't be made to work given those limitations, but you'll find it hard work to get it running stably and performing well. UFS on the other hand will work just fine on 32bit systems and smaller and older machines. (The limitation with UFS is a maximum 2TB filesystem size, but I suspect this will not cause you any practical difficulties.) Cheers, Matthew I'm not sure if my box supports 64 bit OSes or not, I'll have to look into that. I know for a fact it doesnt have 3+ GB of RAM. At most it'll have 2 GBat least RAM for that old beast should be cheap! :-) ___ 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: FreeBSD File Server with ZFS
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:21:48 -0500 mailinglist mailingl...@ucwv.edu wrote: UFS on the other hand will work just fine on 32bit systems and smaller and older machines. (The limitation with UFS is a maximum 2TB filesystem size, but I suspect this will not cause you any practical difficulties.) UFS2 has a maximum volume size of 1YiB (2^80 bytes). ___ 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
FreeBSD File Server with ZFS
I've got an old P4 desktop computer running in the basement with a 1 TB external USB drive connected to that I use as a file server. That PC is running XP. It has recently become infected with some sort of virus. I'd like to replace it with FreeBSD running ZFS + Samba (I need to access it from a OS X machine and a Windows 7 box). 1) Will FreeBSD be able to detect and use my TB hard drive as ZFS disk? Right now it is only a single disk, but later on I'll and a second disk and setup a mirror. Even as a single disk, the checksumming ability would be nice. 2)Assume I get everything setup in regards to step 1 and my OS disk dies. How do I go about importing the ZFS external disk into another FreeBSD installation? Thanks for all of the help! ___ 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: FreeBSD File Server with ZFS
On 18 February 2010 00:11, mailinglist mailingl...@ucwv.edu wrote: I've got an old P4 desktop computer running in the basement with a 1 TB external USB drive connected to that I use as a file server. That PC is running XP. It has recently become infected with some sort of virus. I'd like to replace it with FreeBSD running ZFS + Samba (I need to access it from a OS X machine and a Windows 7 box). 1) Will FreeBSD be able to detect and use my TB hard drive as ZFS disk? Right now it is only a single disk, but later on I'll and a second disk and setup a mirror. Even as a single disk, the checksumming ability would be nice. Should be fine 2)Assume I get everything setup in regards to step 1 and my OS disk dies. How do I go about importing the ZFS external disk into another FreeBSD installation? Just make sure you plug it into a freebsd v 7.2+ (preferably 8+) and zpool import it with a -f flag On another point make sure your p4 has plenty of ram preferably 4gb, but at least 2 Thanks for all of the help! ___ 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 ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
Hi Roland, many thanks for the response!!! :-) I waited until I had a test server setup and at least now I do.. In fact I think from my usage perspective FreeBSD is not that difficult to understand!!! I now have a test machine setup which I built nano and Bind 9.6.1 from the ports collection and I have ntp and nfs setup too. I am currently wondering what to do about the disk space as nothing is used: test# df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a 34G1.2G 30G 4%/ devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100%/dev devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100%/var/named/dev If I create separate partitions for /var /usr and /tmp I am sure that I won't need that much unless I have a totally dynamic file system which will grow over time. But with minimal usage just to transfer the off file but mainly read files from as now the users are going down to 1 machine (just me) so I think with 2GB I can probably get away with it for each filesystem??? What do you say? Many thanks to everyone else that responded to this thread/post all your help and advice has been much appreciated! Regards, Kaya P.s. The good part with this is that I'm only using 23MB or memory too which is incredible considering that Linux or Solaris would take so much more. This is kinda cool.. ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
Just to give a quick overview of what is being used currently: test# du -sch etc 1.7Metc 1.7Mtotal test# du -sch var 1.0Mvar 1.0Mtotal test# du -sch tmp 10Ktmp 10Ktotal test# du -sch usr 1.0Gusr 1.0Gtotal I think I could get away with 500MB for /var and /tmp and have /usr as 2 or 3GB?? What's everyone's verdict? Also I didn't realize and forgot to mention before that NFS on BSD won't export /home but instead exports the link in /usr/home. as I had issues with bad exports line /home in /var/log/messages! In addition I edited my rc.conf file to include these extra lines as per Google; what's everyone's opinion on them though as I'm a little unsure of what they do (indicated with *): inetd_enable=YES keymap=us.iso nfs_server_enable=YES *nfs_server_flags=-u -t -n 4 rpcbind_enable=YES *rpcbind_flags=-r sshd_enable=YES named_enable=YES mountd_enable=YES ntpd_enable=YES Finally for Bind I don't get why everything has been stuffed into named.conf??? In terms of all root servers etc Linux is very different in that a separate dir is created with separate file for root servers. Is there any particular reason for this?? --Kaya ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Fri, Jan 01, 2010 at 11:41:04PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: Hi Roland, many thanks for the response!!! :-) You're welcome! I waited until I had a test server setup and at least now I do.. In fact I think from my usage perspective FreeBSD is not that difficult to understand!!! If you're used to Solaris of Linux, it should be familiar. But there are some differences in details. I now have a test machine setup which I built nano and Bind 9.6.1 from the ports collection and I have ntp and nfs setup too. I am currently wondering what to do about the disk space as nothing is used: test# df -h Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad0s1a 34G1.2G 30G 4%/ devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100%/dev devfs 1.0K1.0K 0B 100%/var/named/dev If I create separate partitions for /var /usr and /tmp I am sure that I won't need that much unless I have a totally dynamic file system which will grow over time. You do realize that changing partitions will destroy your filesystems? Just so you know. :-) But with minimal usage just to transfer the off file but mainly read files from as now the users are going down to 1 machine (just me) so I think with 2GB I can probably get away with it for each filesystem??? What do you say? It really depends on what you want to do with it... How many ports do you want to install? What kind of servers do you want to run? How much data will the users generate/store? All these questions have an impact, and nobody can answer them for you. :-) You could leave it as it is for now, and just use the machine for a while, and see how big the different directories get over time. (hint; use du(1) to check the size of all files under a directory) Once you've got a feeling for how much space you need, you can backup your data (config files and user data) and do a new install where you partition the disk properly. That's the best way IMO. P.s. The good part with this is that I'm only using 23MB or memory too which is incredible considering that Linux or Solaris would take so much more. This is kinda cool.. You can reduce memory usage somewhat more by building a kernel that only contains the drivers that you need compiled in, and nothing else. If you don't build kernel modules, it will save some disk space as well. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpY7I6WIYC7K.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:49:31PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: Hi guys, I attempted an install of 7.2 stable on my laptop and subsequently installed X11also. Now I didn't have any Xorg.conf file but each time I tried to start X from the CLI using the normal startx command (read the documentation through fully beforehand) but I didn't manage to get the mouse or keyboard to even work let alone starting the Gnome2 interface. Beside the two daemons others refered to, you sould also edit ~/.initrc and ~/xsession. For me both have the line: 'exec startkde'. Thats the command to start kde. I am looking to setup a small file server which I will use as DNS and NTP server also. The reason for selecting FreeBSD is that the system I about to install onto doesn't have much memory (not sure how much but probably in the region of 300-500MB perhaps) and although Linux would definitely suite this kind of system as Solaris needs round 2GB or so for OpenSolaris, I am quite interested to learn FreeBSD but also take advantage of the ZFS file system which is standard now in version 8. I would stick with UFS of UFS2. The latter if you don't intent to share them with *BSD. As I understand ZFS uses quite a lot more resources. If I wanted to something with RAID I might still use it, but even so still would use UFS to the system slices. If you low on disk space you can reduce this. I have used 256M for / in the past but would advise against this. You would need something like 8G for /usr. But may need to raise that by 5G if you build ports. I have larger /temp of 7G, but also build ports there. If you build Java it would need a least 4G. I won't be installing a GUI on this machine since it is going to be a server so I would like to know if BSD has a small footprint memory and CPU wise for me to run on the machine in question which is a PIV? It's not a problem. The footprint depends more on the ports you like to run. Also just to make sure: NFS, Samba, NTPd, and ISC's Bind are all supported on FreeBSD aren't they?? Some come with the system, others you have to install. -- Alex Please copy the original recipients, otherwise I may not read your reply. ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 04:20:10PM -0600, Adam Vande More wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Kaya Saman kayasa...@optiplex-networks.com Running with no xorg.conf is fine, but you need to make sure dbus and hal are started at boot. Follow the handbook for best results. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/handbook/x-config.html How come? The keybord and mouse work for me without on a simple shell. -- Alex Please copy the original recipients, otherwise I may not read your reply. ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 05:04:52PM -0600, Adam Vande More wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Kaya Saman samank...@netscape.net wrote: Also if something goes wrong with the filesystem what are the tools to check the drive and repair errors as in Linux I use e2fsck followed by device ID. Example after a dirty shutdown: fsck -y FreeBSD 7 and up is able to do a lot of this on the background: fsck -yB Adding the line 'fsck_y_enable=YES' to /etc/rc.conf will run fsck -y if the initial preen fails -- Alex ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
Alex de Kruijff wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 05:04:52PM -0600, Adam Vande More wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Kaya Saman samank...@netscape.net wrote: Also if something goes wrong with the filesystem what are the tools to check the drive and repair errors as in Linux I use e2fsck followed by device ID. Example after a dirty shutdown: fsck -y FreeBSD 7 and up is able to do a lot of this on the background: fsck -yB Adding the line 'fsck_y_enable=YES' to /etc/rc.conf will run fsck -y if the initial preen fails Many thanks guys for all the advice :-) It is really appreciated! Sorry haven't snipped more stuff into this mail but things are a bit hectic here but what I will say is this; in a few hours once the BSD 8 DVD ISO comes in I will attempt an install and have a look at what's what. The server will be constructed first and then I will look at the GUI environment with Vbox. I reckon the proposed disk usage spec from the FreeBSD hand book should suffice though shouldn't it?? With a larger HD I would normally do something like 15 - 25GB / (root) partition and the rest for /home with round 1.5 - 3GB for swap. Now my HD is round 40GB so I will do a minimal install and try to maximize the /home slice! As result only services I will run are DNS, NTP, SAMBA and NFS. I suppose I could get away with something like 2GB for / which would then contain /tmp, /etc, /root, /boot etc. Only 2 machines will be connected, my uncles Win XP box and my Linux/Solaris system. --Kaya ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 05:19:54PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: Many thanks guys for all the advice :-) It is really appreciated! Sorry haven't snipped more stuff into this mail but things are a bit hectic here but what I will say is this; in a few hours once the BSD 8 DVD ISO comes in I will attempt an install and have a look at what's what. The server will be constructed first and then I will look at the GUI environment with Vbox. I reckon the proposed disk usage spec from the FreeBSD hand book should suffice though shouldn't it?? IMO the root slice is too small in the handbook. You should make it 2GB, since you've got the space. With a larger HD I would normally do something like 15 - 25GB / (root) partition and the rest for /home with round 1.5 - 3GB for swap. Now my HD is round 40GB so I will do a minimal install and try to maximize the /home slice! As result only services I will run are DNS, NTP, SAMBA and NFS. What is not unusual is to symlink /home e.g: # ln -s /usr/home /home ditto for /tmp. i.e you remove all the stuff that uses up space from the root partition. So the only slices you need are /, /usr, /var and swap. How I'd slice up the disk: 2GB for / 2GB for swap 2GB for /var 34GB for /usr I suppose I could get away with something like 2GB for / which would then contain /tmp, /etc, /root, /boot etc. Should be OK but /tmp symlinked to /usr/tmp as some things can really fill up /tmp. For example, IIRC OpenOffice needs gigs of temp space to build. Only 2 machines will be connected, my uncles Win XP box and my Linux/Solaris system. Should work fine. Just remember to make your /home and /tmp symlinks as soon as you first boot up. Regards, -- Frank Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
[...] What is not unusual is to symlink /home e.g: # ln -s /usr/home /home ditto for /tmp. i.e you remove all the stuff that uses up space from the root partition. So the only slices you need are /, /usr, /var and swap. How I'd slice up the disk: 2GB for / 2GB for swap 2GB for /var 34GB for /usr Ah so BSD is slightly different from Linux in the fact that it needs to have /var and /usr filesystems separate?? I guess it must be similar to the way Solaris handles things when UFS based (not ZFS). The /home partition then is very similar to Solaris in that /export/home is considered the user directory. Means BSD stores /home in /usr/home?? Should be OK but /tmp symlinked to /usr/tmp as some things can really fill up /tmp. For example, IIRC OpenOffice needs gigs of temp space to build. OpenOffice or IIRC is for GUI based usage and not CLI. Since this will be a simple server no GUI or work will be done on the machine itself in terms of keyboard/mouse setup. Normally I work through SSH so will be much easier once I have network connectivity up and running after initial install :-) Should work fine. Just remember to make your /home and /tmp symlinks as soon as you first boot up. Regards, Thanks!!! --Kaya ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009, Kaya Saman wrote: How I'd slice up the disk: 2GB for / 2GB for swap 2GB for /var 34GB for /usr Ah so BSD is slightly different from Linux in the fact that it needs to have /var and /usr filesystems separate?? It's not required, it's just nice to do if the disk space is available. You can allocate the whole disk to /. With all the free space in one filesystem, that's useful for small disks (under 8G, I'd say). Keeping the filesystems separate provides some versatility at the expense of splitting up the free space. dump(8)ing a 300M / or a 100M /var is a lot easier than a 100G whole disk. -Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota USA ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 06:37:25PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: [...] What is not unusual is to symlink /home e.g: # ln -s /usr/home /home ditto for /tmp. i.e you remove all the stuff that uses up space from the root partition. So the only slices you need are /, /usr, /var and swap. How I'd slice up the disk: 2GB for / 2GB for swap 2GB for /var 34GB for /usr Ah so BSD is slightly different from Linux in the fact that it needs to have /var and /usr filesystems separate?? You can have /var on the same slice but because it's a filesystem that's constantly being read written to it's usual to keep it separate from your static partitions. I guess it must be similar to the way Solaris handles things when UFS based (not ZFS). The /home partition then is very similar to Solaris in that /export/home is considered the user directory. Means BSD stores /home in /usr/home?? Again, it's just a common practice. Due to the PC BIOS, IIRC you're restricted to 4 slices. Should be OK but /tmp symlinked to /usr/tmp as some things can really fill up /tmp. For example, IIRC OpenOffice needs gigs of temp space to build. OpenOffice or IIRC is for GUI based usage and not CLI. Since this will be a simple server no GUI or work will be done on the machine itself in terms of keyboard/mouse setup. Normally I work through SSH so will be much easier once I have network connectivity up and running after initial install :-) OK. You may want to make /tmp a separate slice. You can always make it a symlink into /usr at a latter date if you repurpose the machine. You would find that FreeBSD works quite well as a workstation even with that limited hardware. Should work fine. Just remember to make your /home and /tmp symlinks as soon as you first boot up. Regards, Thanks!!! BTW, you mentioned you were going to use packages. If I were you I'd build from source. It's less problematic in my experience and since FreeBSD multitasks so well it's not much of a pain. You've got plenty of room for the ports tree. Best of luck with your installation! Regards, -- Frank Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 04:27:11PM +, Frank Shute wrote: On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 05:19:54PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: Many thanks guys for all the advice :-) It is really appreciated! ... I reckon the proposed disk usage spec from the FreeBSD hand book should suffice though shouldn't it?? IMO the root slice is too small in the handbook. You should make it 2GB, since you've got the space. First of all, you are mixing up your terminology. You do not mean 'slice' here. The unit used for root or any other filesystem in a non-dangerously-dedicated disk is called a partition. Partitions divisions of slices and are identified as a..h with c reserved for the system and by convention (and expectation of some pieces of software) 'a' is for the bootable OS partition (root) and 'b' is used for swap. In FreeBSD, partitions reside inside of slices. A slice is essentially the same thing as a DOS primary partition and is the initial (primary) division of a disk. A disk drive may have up to four slices identified as 1..4 and each may be made bootable or not and contain different OSen or OS versions. If a disk is only to be used for a single installation of FreeBSD, it is most common to define just one slice which encompasses the whole drive, leaving the other three slices empty and unused. (It is also common to define a 'dangerously dedicated' disk, but that is a different discussion issue than that being addressed here) In FreeBSD, slices are defined and created by the FreeBSD fdisk program, though a number of other partition management utilities can be used and FreeBSD seems to be moving to a new one too. In FreeBSD, one uses bsdlabel(8) to create partitions within a slice. Each slice can have up to 8 identified as a..h, but the 'c' partition is reserved and must be left unused. We use common names associated with partitions, such as / (root) /usr, /var, /home, etc. Those are essentially directories that are 'linked' to a partition by the mount system. You create a mount point using the mkdir(1) command and then link using mount(8). The 'a' partition becomes root because it gets mounted to the / mount point. Now, on to divvying up the disk. I agree that the root partition listed in the handbook is anciently too small. But, I don't see what you need 2GB for unless you put everything (/usr, /var, etc) in it. Since you are defining those separately, root really only needs about a half GigaByte. I am running a little low on one machine with 1/3 GB in root, but still going. I also create a partition for /tmp to keep it isolated from the other filesystems, in case something runs wild. With a larger HD I would normally do something like 15 - 25GB / (root) partition and the rest for /home with round 1.5 - 3GB for swap. Now my HD is round 40GB so I will do a minimal install and try to maximize the /home slice! As result only services I will run are DNS, NTP, SAMBA and NFS. What is not unusual is to symlink /home e.g: # ln -s /usr/home /home ditto for /tmp. i.e you remove all the stuff that uses up space from the root partition. So the only slices you need are /, /usr, /var and swap. How I'd slice up the disk: 2GB for / 2GB for swap 2GB for /var 34GB for /usr I suppose I could get away with something like 2GB for / which would then contain /tmp, /etc, /root, /boot etc. My suggestion is more like: partition mount point Size a/ 512 MegaBytes (1/2 GByte) bswap 2048 MBytes (2 GBytes) d/tmp 512 MBytes e/usr 4096 MBytes f/var 4096 MBytes g/home 29 GB (eg all of the rest of the disk) If you are running a database, you will want /var to be larger or to move things in to that /home file system. I actually use a different mount point name than /home because /home is assumed for other things in some howto-s hanging around. I also move and symlink /usr/local /usr/ports /usr/src and sometimes /var/spool in to that '/home' filesystem and then make the actual /usr and /var only half the above sizes and increase the space in '/home' (33 GB) so they can grow there more easily. Things in a well running system do not grow so much in /tmp and if something does go wild and spew out a lot of stuff, you really want to notice it before it gobbles up 30GB of space, so you need enough /tmp to run easily, but do not want huge amounts. Thus, putting /tmp in its own limited partition is a bit of a protection. All users' login (home) directories and web content go in that '/home' filesystem too, where they can grow without having to redo disk later. In spite of the name that seems to suggest it, I never put users' home directories in /usr. It may have begun that way back in the
Re: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 06:37:25PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: [...] What is not unusual is to symlink /home e.g: # ln -s /usr/home /home ditto for /tmp. i.e you remove all the stuff that uses up space from the root partition. So the only slices you need are /, /usr, /var and swap. How I'd slice up the disk: 2GB for / 2GB for swap 2GB for /var 34GB for /usr Ah so BSD is slightly different from Linux in the fact that it needs to have /var and /usr filesystems separate?? It doesn't _need_ to have separate filesystems. It is just convenient. If you want to stick everything (apart from swap) on a single / partition, you can do so. If that is wise is another thing. :-) If your server will never hold much data (e.g. just a router/firewall) it would probably be fine. It depends on the use you want to put the machine to, and if/where you expect to store a lot of stuff. For my desktop I tend to put /home on a separate partition because that is where most of my data is. For a server I would put the big directories where the data is stored on separate partitions. E.g. the DocumentRoot for your Apache webserver. Or whereever the place is where an SQL server stores its data. The /home partition then is very similar to Solaris in that /export/home is considered the user directory. Means BSD stores /home in /usr/home?? If you don't make a separate /home partition, sysinstall will indeed default to making /home a symlink to /usr/home, AFAIK. For my desktop, with around 450 ports installed, I have the following lay-out; Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad4s1a484M 93M353M21%/ /dev/ad4s1g.eli373G168G175G49%/home /dev/ad4s1e 48G198K 45G 0%/tmp /dev/ad4s1f 19G5.8G 12G32%/usr /dev/ad4s1d1.9G226M1.6G12%/var For swap space (/dev/ad4s1b), I reserved 2x the size of the RAM. The 'Used' column should give you an idea of the minimum space needed for different filesystems. Keep in mind that disk space is relatively cheap, and it is much better to have lots of free space then to run out of space! This division makes it easy to use dump(8) for backup purposes of /, /usr and /var. I do this so it is easy to restore(8) to a functioning system, and keep the size of the dumps reasonably small, although /usr is getting prtty big. Maybe next time I will split off /usr/local (for ports) into a separate filesystem. For big filesystems dump(8) takes a long time and needs a lot of space. I prefer to back those up with rsync(1). Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpNOmODLW3A3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 06:37:25PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: [...] What is not unusual is to symlink /home e.g: # ln -s /usr/home /home ditto for /tmp. i.e you remove all the stuff that uses up space from the root partition. So the only slices you need are /, /usr, /var and swap. How I'd slice up the disk: 2GB for / 2GB for swap 2GB for /var 34GB for /usr Ah so BSD is slightly different from Linux in the fact that it needs to have /var and /usr filesystems separate?? No, it doesn't. In fact, technically you can put everything all in / (root), except for swap and you can even create a file in / for that in root if you have the bad judgement to do it that way. It is just a good idea to separate them if those filesystems are likely to grow a lot, such as when installing ports (/usr in /usr/ports and /usr/local) and when building a database (/var in /var/db) or something that spools a lot (/var in /var/spool). It provides a small amount of additional protection for the system. I guess it must be similar to the way Solaris handles things when UFS based (not ZFS). The /home partition then is very similar to Solaris in that /export/home is considered the user directory. Means BSD stores /home in /usr/home?? You can put it where you like. Just do your own links or make your own mounts in /etc/fstab. Should be OK but /tmp symlinked to /usr/tmp as some things can really fill up /tmp. For example, IIRC OpenOffice needs gigs of temp space to build. OpenOffice or IIRC is for GUI based usage and not CLI. Since this will be a simple server no GUI or work will be done on the machine itself in terms of keyboard/mouse setup. Normally I work through SSH so will be much easier once I have network connectivity up and running after initial install :-) So, use 'vi' or install 'vim' from ports and us it. Since 'vi' is always available, it becomes important to learn it and then it is second nature to use it. (actually, vi is not available in single user mode if you do not have /usr mounted, but I usually just put a copy in /bin and then it is always available) jerry Should work fine. Just remember to make your /home and /tmp symlinks as soon as you first boot up. Regards, Thanks!!! --Kaya ___ 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 ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
Many thanks again for all suggestions! :-) [...] For my desktop, with around 450 ports installed, I have the following lay-out; Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/ad4s1a484M 93M353M21%/ /dev/ad4s1g.eli373G168G175G49%/home /dev/ad4s1e 48G198K 45G 0%/tmp /dev/ad4s1f 19G5.8G 12G32%/usr /dev/ad4s1d1.9G226M1.6G12%/var [...] Hmm... lot's of different pieces of advice rolling in now! I guess what I will do as I have a small hard disk for what I want to do which is to get rid of my music and few movies which are stored on my laptop currently, is create separate /, /tmp, /usr and /var. I propose which is similar to what Frank has suggested: / ~500M /tmp ~2GB /var ~2GB /usr ~2GB /home the rest but then Jerry has already suggested: partition mount point Size a/ 512 MegaBytes (1/2 GByte) bswap 2048 MBytes (2 GBytes) d/tmp 512 MBytes e/usr 4096 MBytes f/var 4096 MBytes g/home 29 GB (eg all of the rest of the disk) This could be ok I reckon as the 4GB partitions should be there as everyone has suggested for me to use ports and build from source! The reason why I preferred to use package manager was that on say Solaris it's pretty a much a pain having to install all the dependencies from Sun Freeware site. I mean what I will be installing if completely base install with just OS and nothing more like I mentioned before is Samba, NFS server/client, NTP, Nano as the quote below from Jerry using vi or vim is not my preferred text editor as I find them extremely difficult and a real pain to use. In addition I do not think this machine has a DVD drive either although I haven't fired up the Win build yet to transfer files but from what the drive says on the front of 52x looks like it's CD only :-( This means that I will need to download the minimal install CD and install the packages from there! For this reason the discussed packages above will need to be downloaded and installed my best guess is from source. Meaning I will need extra space in one of the filesystems but am unsure where the source gets stored?? My best guess would be /usr? Have setup the machine now and am almost at the point of attempted an install! :-) Guys the support has been really awsome and I highly appreciate everyones efforts to assist me! [quote] So, use 'vi' or install 'vim' from ports and us it. Since 'vi' is always available, it becomes important to learn it and then it is second nature to use it. (actually, vi is not available in single user mode if you do not have /usr mounted, but I usually just put a copy in /bin and then it is always available) [/quote] ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:25:48PM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote: On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 04:27:11PM +, Frank Shute wrote: On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 05:19:54PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: Many thanks guys for all the advice :-) It is really appreciated! ... I reckon the proposed disk usage spec from the FreeBSD hand book should suffice though shouldn't it?? IMO the root slice is too small in the handbook. You should make it 2GB, since you've got the space. First of all, you are mixing up your terminology. You do not mean 'slice' here. The unit used for root or any other filesystem in a non-dangerously-dedicated disk is called a partition. Partitions divisions of slices and are identified as a..h with c reserved for the system and by convention (and expectation of some pieces of software) 'a' is for the bootable OS partition (root) and 'b' is used for swap. You're correct. I thought they used a separate slice for the root partition. They don't. I usually do. In FreeBSD, partitions reside inside of slices. A slice is essentially the same thing as a DOS primary partition and is the initial (primary) division of a disk. A disk drive may have up to four slices identified as 1..4 and each may be made bootable or not and contain different OSen or OS versions. If a disk is only to be used for a single installation of FreeBSD, it is most common to define just one slice which encompasses the whole drive, leaving the other three slices empty and unused. (It is also common to define a 'dangerously dedicated' disk, but that is a different discussion issue than that being addressed here) In FreeBSD, slices are defined and created by the FreeBSD fdisk program, though a number of other partition management utilities can be used and FreeBSD seems to be moving to a new one too. In FreeBSD, one uses bsdlabel(8) to create partitions within a slice. Each slice can have up to 8 identified as a..h, but the 'c' partition is reserved and must be left unused. We use common names associated with partitions, such as / (root) /usr, /var, /home, etc. Those are essentially directories that are 'linked' to a partition by the mount system. You create a mount point using the mkdir(1) command and then link using mount(8). The 'a' partition becomes root because it gets mounted to the / mount point. Now, on to divvying up the disk. I agree that the root partition listed in the handbook is anciently too small. But, I don't see what you need 2GB for unless you put everything (/usr, /var, etc) in it. Since you are defining those separately, root really only needs about a half GigaByte. I am running a little low on one machine with 1/3 GB in root, but still going. I also create a partition for /tmp to keep it isolated from the other filesystems, in case something runs wild. I'm struggling with a 1GB / here: /dev/ad0s2a984524 657068 24869673%/ That's having removed /boot/kernel.old/ after running out of space during upgrading to 8.0 I can't see anything else I can delete. /home and /var are not on that slice. So I think it depends on how you upgrade your machine. E.g less room needed if you use freebsd-update (?) With a larger HD I would normally do something like 15 - 25GB / (root) partition and the rest for /home with round 1.5 - 3GB for swap. Now my HD is round 40GB so I will do a minimal install and try to maximize the /home slice! As result only services I will run are DNS, NTP, SAMBA and NFS. What is not unusual is to symlink /home e.g: # ln -s /usr/home /home ditto for /tmp. i.e you remove all the stuff that uses up space from the root partition. So the only slices you need are /, /usr, /var and swap. How I'd slice up the disk: 2GB for / 2GB for swap 2GB for /var 34GB for /usr I suppose I could get away with something like 2GB for / which would then contain /tmp, /etc, /root, /boot etc. My suggestion is more like: partition mount point Size a/ 512 MegaBytes (1/2 GByte) bswap 2048 MBytes (2 GBytes) d/tmp 512 MBytes e/usr 4096 MBytes f/var 4096 MBytes g/home 29 GB (eg all of the rest of the disk) If you are running a database, you will want /var to be larger or to move things in to that /home file system. I actually use a different mount point name than /home because /home is assumed for other things in some howto-s hanging around. I also move and symlink /usr/local /usr/ports /usr/src and sometimes /var/spool in to that '/home' filesystem and then make the actual /usr and /var only half the above sizes and increase the space in '/home' (33 GB)
Re: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 09:06:09PM +0200, Kaya Saman wrote: lot's of different pieces of advice rolling in now! I guess what I will do as I have a small hard disk for what I want to do which is to get rid of my music and few movies which are stored on my laptop currently, is create separate /, /tmp, /usr and /var. If you can afford it, and if your laptop has a USB port, buy one of those external harddisks. Plenty of room for music and movies... Also great for backups! I propose which is similar to what Frank has suggested: / ~500M /tmp ~2GB /var ~2GB /usr ~2GB /home the rest I would make /usr greater. See below. but then Jerry has already suggested: partition mount point Size a/ 512 MegaBytes (1/2 GByte) bswap 2048 MBytes (2 GBytes) d/tmp 512 MBytes e/usr 4096 MBytes f/var 4096 MBytes g/home 29 GB (eg all of the rest of the disk) This could be ok I reckon as the 4GB partitions should be there as everyone has suggested for me to use ports and build from source! I'd make /usr bigger. 5-10 GiB, if you can spare it. The reason why I preferred to use package manager was that on say Solaris it's pretty a much a pain having to install all the dependencies from Sun Freeware site. Realize that not all software is available as packages because of e.g. licensing restrictions. And some ports you can customize via so-called options. If you install from packages, you're stuck with the (default) options used when building the packages. The FreeBSD ports system is _so_ convenient. It's one of the great features of FreeBSD, as is the user community. I mean what I will be installing if completely base install with just OS and nothing more like I mentioned before is Samba, NFS server/client, NTP, Nano as the quote below from Jerry using vi or vim is not my preferred text editor as I find them extremely difficult and a real pain to use. The ee(1) editor is part of the base system. This is a _lot_ friendlier than vi! Give it a try, you might not even need nano. In addition I do not think this machine has a DVD drive either although I haven't fired up the Win build yet to transfer files but from what the drive says on the front of 52x looks like it's CD only :-( Good enough for installing. :-) For this reason the discussed packages above will need to be downloaded and installed my best guess is from source. Installing from source is the most flexible method. How is your internet connection? Meaning I will need extra space in one of the filesystems but am unsure where the source gets stored?? My best guess would be /usr? In /usr/ports to be exact. The source code tarballs are also stored there, under /usr/ports/distfiles. On my system, /usr/ports/distfiles is now 799 MiB (450 ports, remember!). The rest of /usr/ports is 543 MiB. Realize that ports will be compiled under /usr/ports as well! Good luck! Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpuZAoQom2xG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
Roland: If you can afford it, and if your laptop has a USB port, buy one of those external harddisks. Plenty of room for music and movies... Also great for backups! Can't afford :-( I have many disks like that where I bought really cool enclosures and the drives separately but currently am in a really bad situation financially. In UK in my parents house I have round 3.2TB or so with 1.7TB dedicated to music and movies. Out here though I only have my 320GB drive on my laptop which has 9 OS's on it including VM's. 160GB for Linux which I have Fedora 10 and Kubuntu on the other side I run OpenSolaris and Belenix in different ZFS pools. Laptop is cool 6GB memory too :-) ~# fdisk -l Disk /dev/sda: 320.0 GB, 320072933376 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 38913 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x34f7742e Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 1 19453 156256191 bf Solaris /dev/sda2 19454 2370934186320 83 Linux /dev/sda3 * 23710 2553414659312+ 83 Linux /dev/sda4 25535 38913 107466817+ 5 Extended /dev/sda5 25535 38665 105474726 83 Linux /dev/sda6 38666 38913 1992028+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris ~# df -h FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 33G 11G 21G 34% / tmpfs 2.9G 4.0K 2.9G 1% /lib/init/rw varrun2.9G 240K 2.9G 1% /var/run varlock 2.9G 4.0K 2.9G 1% /var/lock udev 2.9G 180K 2.9G 1% /dev tmpfs 2.9G 708K 2.9G 1% /dev/shm lrm 2.9G 2.5M 2.9G 1% /lib/modules/2.6.28-17-generic/volatile /dev/sda5 100G 93G 1.2G 99% /home /dev/sda3 14G 9.6G 3.6G 74% /mnt/tmp I propose which is similar to what Frank has suggested: / ~500M /tmp ~2GB /var ~2GB /usr ~2GB /home the rest I would make /usr greater. See below. but then Jerry has already suggested: partition mount point Size a/ 512 MegaBytes (1/2 GByte) bswap 2048 MBytes (2 GBytes) d/tmp 512 MBytes e/usr 4096 MBytes f/var 4096 MBytes g/home 29 GB (eg all of the rest of the disk) This could be ok I reckon as the 4GB partitions should be there as everyone has suggested for me to use ports and build from source! I'd make /usr bigger. 5-10 GiB, if you can spare it. Err I will try 4GB because I need to dump round 10-15GB here clogging up my disks. In fact I just partitioned the drive using FreeBSIE and I think it's only a 30GB on this desktop which I can always look into getting a new one in time. But slightly stuck for now! Realize that not all software is available as packages because of e.g. licensing restrictions. And some ports you can customize via so-called options. If you install from packages, you're stuck with the (default) options used when building the packages. The FreeBSD ports system is _so_ convenient. It's one of the great features of FreeBSD, as is the user community. I just the packages I mentioned before that's it! If I can do that it will be really cool. The ee(1) editor is part of the base system. This is a _lot_ friendlier than vi! Give it a try, you might not even need nano. I will try it out thanks for that! :-) In addition I do not think this machine has a DVD drive either although I haven't fired up the Win build yet to transfer files but from what the drive says on the front of 52x looks like it's CD only :-( Good enough for installing. :-) For this reason the discussed packages above will need to be downloaded and installed my best guess is from source. Installing from source is the most flexible method. How is your internet connection? Hahahah the biggest joke of 2k9 is my internet as it's 512kbps :-( That's what happens when you move country to a developing one things slow down to a halt. In UK I had 20Mbps h I really miss it! Meaning I will need extra space in one of the filesystems but am unsure where the source gets stored?? My best guess would be /usr? In /usr/ports to be exact. The source code tarballs are also stored there, under /usr/ports/distfiles. On my system, /usr/ports/distfiles is now 799 MiB (450 ports, remember!). The rest of /usr/ports is 543 MiB. Realize that ports will be compiled under /usr/ports as well! Ah ok I will look at this once my install progresses, I just hope that 4GB is enough for this! I really need to maximize space for /home where all my stuff will be deposited to for the moment as I don't trust the drive either as it really grinds like crazy but then it might be MS Win doing that? Good luck! Roland Many
New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
Hi guys, first up I hope I am in the right place as my questions are of a generic nature about FreeBSD as I consider myself a new user not having much mileage with the OS as of yet! Secondly I just wanted to wish everyone a happy Christmas and New Year also since we are in that period :-) I will start with my GUI question as I believe that it is something simple: I attempted an install of 7.2 stable on my laptop and subsequently installed X11also. Now I didn't have any Xorg.conf file but each time I tried to start X from the CLI using the normal startx command (read the documentation through fully beforehand) but I didn't manage to get the mouse or keyboard to even work let alone starting the Gnome2 interface. Now I don't have that particular machine with me now as it's in another country but just wanted to know a few possible causes for the issue. I am guessing it's probably tied into not having the xorg.conf file but I will install a VM of it soon and be more specific with logs etc as I am used to Linux and Sun Solaris I know this is really ad-hoc and frowned upon way of asking which will probably earn me minus brownie points but just wanted a quick idea of what maybe so when the time comes I can investigate further! The second and main question that I wish to ask is more to do with peoples opinions or experienced BSD users advice: I am looking to setup a small file server which I will use as DNS and NTP server also. The reason for selecting FreeBSD is that the system I about to install onto doesn't have much memory (not sure how much but probably in the region of 300-500MB perhaps) and although Linux would definitely suite this kind of system as Solaris needs round 2GB or so for OpenSolaris, I am quite interested to learn FreeBSD but also take advantage of the ZFS file system which is standard now in version 8. I won't be installing a GUI on this machine since it is going to be a server so I would like to know if BSD has a small footprint memory and CPU wise for me to run on the machine in question which is a PIV? Also just to make sure: NFS, Samba, NTPd, and ISC's Bind are all supported on FreeBSD aren't they?? I know this is a bit of an RTFM issue here but for example the Solaris implementation of NTP and even SNMP are slightly different from the GNU or GPL based ones in Linux so therefor I have to ask :-) Many thanks for any responses Best regards, Kaya ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Kaya Saman kayasa...@optiplex-networks.com wrote: Hi guys, first up I hope I am in the right place as my questions are of a generic nature about FreeBSD as I consider myself a new user not having much mileage with the OS as of yet! Secondly I just wanted to wish everyone a happy Christmas and New Year also since we are in that period :-) I will start with my GUI question as I believe that it is something simple: I attempted an install of 7.2 stable on my laptop and subsequently installed X11also. Now I didn't have any Xorg.conf file but each time I tried to start X from the CLI using the normal startx command (read the documentation through fully beforehand) but I didn't manage to get the mouse or keyboard to even work let alone starting the Gnome2 interface. Now I don't have that particular machine with me now as it's in another country but just wanted to know a few possible causes for the issue. I am guessing it's probably tied into not having the xorg.conf file but I will install a VM of it soon and be more specific with logs etc as I am used to Linux and Sun Solaris I know this is really ad-hoc and frowned upon way of asking which will probably earn me minus brownie points but just wanted a quick idea of what maybe so when the time comes I can investigate further! Running with no xorg.conf is fine, but you need to make sure dbus and hal are started at boot. Follow the handbook for best results. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/handbook/x-config.html The second and main question that I wish to ask is more to do with peoples opinions or experienced BSD users advice: I am looking to setup a small file server which I will use as DNS and NTP server also. The reason for selecting FreeBSD is that the system I about to install onto doesn't have much memory (not sure how much but probably in the region of 300-500MB perhaps) and although Linux would definitely suite this kind of system as Solaris needs round 2GB or so for OpenSolaris, I am quite interested to learn FreeBSD but also take advantage of the ZFS file system which is standard now in version 8. I won't be installing a GUI on this machine since it is going to be a server so I would like to know if BSD has a small footprint memory and CPU wise for me to run on the machine in question which is a PIV? Also just to make sure: NFS, Samba, NTPd, and ISC's Bind are all supported on FreeBSD aren't they?? I know this is a bit of an RTFM issue here but for example the Solaris implementation of NTP and even SNMP are slightly different from the GNU or GPL based ones in Linux so therefor I have to ask :-) If you're concerned about system resources, at least from a minimalist perspective, then ZFS is not for you. Solaris can't help you with that either, ZFS is hungry. ZFS is also not standard, but considered production ready. UFS is still the standard, and the only filesystem supported by the installer without resorting to tricks. All the other services work well on FreeBSD. -- Adam Vande More ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
Running with no xorg.conf is fine, but you need to make sure dbus and hal are started at boot. Follow the handbook for best results. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/handbook/x-config.html I'm sure I started them as this doc is exactly what I followed.. I think if I recall correctly or at least something like it?? Anyway as explained I will use Vbox to check 100% and then at least have proper logs and cli output to compare to and give everyone an idea of what's going on unlike now! If you're concerned about system resources, at least from a minimalist perspective, then ZFS is not for you. Solaris can't help you with that either, ZFS is hungry. ZFS is also not standard, but considered production ready. UFS is still the standard, and the only filesystem supported by the installer without resorting to tricks. Yes ZFS is hungry :-) I run Solaris 10 on an ancient Sun Netra T105 server with 360MB of RAM which uses ZFS file system and apart being a reverse proxy it won't handle anything else easily. Also my E420r server with 1GB of RAM running Sun Ray software is limited to just that and can only handle 1 Ray unit on top of the SXCE (Solaris Express Community Edition) OS. I know how strong UFS v.1 is as I use it with Solaris 9, but how about UFS v.2 which is what FreeBSD runs?? When compared with ext3 from a performance/reliability perspective which one comes on top? Also if something goes wrong with the filesystem what are the tools to check the drive and repair errors as in Linux I use e2fsck followed by device ID. As mention UFS v.1 is incredibly strong especially when run on SCSI II drives that the Sun Netra T105 uses so I haven't had an FS failure yet and if UFS v.2 is similar I don't suspect having a failure either although this machine will have IDE drives and uses x86 architecture as opposed to SPARC. In fact I am only really after ZFS for its self healing properties as I don't mind going with any file system as long as it's stable. Ext3 although easily repairable is quite unstable on my systems anyway! All the other services work well on FreeBSD. -- Adam Vande More Cool, thanks Adam! :-) I appreciate the response. Kaya ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Kaya Saman samank...@netscape.net wrote: I know how strong UFS v.1 is as I use it with Solaris 9, but how about UFS v.2 which is what FreeBSD runs?? When compared with ext3 from a performance/reliability perspective which one comes on top? I would say ufs2 easily wins, but remember this is the freebsd-questions list ;) There are some differences though, ufs2 uses softupdates, not journaling(journaling is available and easy to implement via gjournal). Softupdates I believe are a little faster than journaling, but it's drawback is long disk checking after a dirty shutdown. I've never had a ufs specific issue in hundreds if not thousands of deployments, but nothing is guaranteed. ufs does have a great track records and bunch of service hours logged. Also if something goes wrong with the filesystem what are the tools to check the drive and repair errors as in Linux I use e2fsck followed by device ID. Example after a dirty shutdown: fsck -y In fact I am only really after ZFS for its self healing properties as I don't mind going with any file system as long as it's stable. Ext3 although easily repairable is quite unstable on my systems anyway! That's actually a bit disconcerting, do you have hardware instability? -- Adam Vande More ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 14:42, Kaya Saman samank...@netscape.net wrote: Running with no xorg.conf is fine, but you need to make sure dbus and hal are started at boot. Â Follow the handbook for best results. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/handbook/x-config.html I'm sure I started them as this doc is exactly what I followed.. I think if I recall correctly or at least something like it?? Anyway as explained I will use Vbox to check 100% and then at least have proper logs and cli output to compare to and give everyone an idea of what's going on unlike now! I can't speak to the rest, but WRT the GUI, I suspect you'll find it a lot easier if you install a Window Manager to handle a lot of this. I have found xfce4 to be a good one for me - gnome and kde were a bit much. Once I installed /usr/ports/x11-wm/xfce4 with a 'make config-recursive' then chose my options, then 'make install', the GUI fired up just fine, and all of the hal/dbus stuff was handled for me. Kurt ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
I would say ufs2 easily wins, but remember this is the freebsd-questions list ;) There are some differences though, ufs2 uses softupdates, not journaling(journaling is available and easy to implement via gjournal). Softupdates I believe are a little faster than journaling, but it's drawback is long disk checking after a dirty shutdown. I've never had a ufs specific issue in hundreds if not thousands of deployments, but nothing is guaranteed. ufs does have a great track records and bunch of service hours logged. Cool meaning I am going UFS2 on my new install! Example after a dirty shutdown: fsck -y Aaah fsck :-) If I run this on an ext3 FS it tends to make things much worse as I did it once and got left with a whole bunch of unattached inodes :-( reason for Linux and ext3 e2fsck is much better I have found from personal experience! That's actually a bit disconcerting, do you have hardware instability? Nope! These systems are actually desktop systems which I run as servers as I couldn't afford to buy proper systems so got a whole bunch of cheap x86 boxes off Ebay. If running Scalix though I found it really eats up hard drives - although running a collaboration suite on a laptop is not the most intelligent thing to do but then what else can you do with a portable computer with bust LCD display? Left in my parents house in the UK now as I'm currently in Turkey but my lab from scavenged parts and systems: http://www.optiplex-networks.com/lab/lab.html -- Adam Vande More Kaya ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
I can't speak to the rest, but WRT the GUI, I suspect you'll find it a lot easier if you install a Window Manager to handle a lot of this. I have found xfce4 to be a good one for me - gnome and kde were a bit much. Once I installed /usr/ports/x11-wm/xfce4 with a 'make config-recursive' then chose my options, then 'make install', the GUI fired up just fine, and all of the hal/dbus stuff was handled for me. Kurt I thought Gnome already came with Nautilus as Window manager??? Or in FreeBSD is it extra? Sorry am not used to doing things from scratch but soon I will get the hang of it - just give me a couple of days to get the file server I am on about up and running then will transfer the stuff clogging my notebooks HD over there and install a VM through Vbox and really have a go at understanding the GUI. I did play around with FreeBSIE which is FreeBSD with the GUI installed as a live CD which was really cool and light and worked especially well on my 512MB RAM laptop. Now I don't have a memory issue as I have 6GB on a newer machine running 64bit OS's all the way but still need to get to grips with this :-) Thanks for the tip Kurt! Regards, --Kaya ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Monday 28 December 2009 22:49:31 Kaya Saman wrote: Hi guys, first up I hope I am in the right place as my questions are of a generic nature about FreeBSD as I consider myself a new user not having much mileage with the OS as of yet! Secondly I just wanted to wish everyone a happy Christmas and New Year also since we are in that period :-) I will start with my GUI question as I believe that it is something simple: I attempted an install of 7.2 stable on my laptop and subsequently installed X11also. Now I didn't have any Xorg.conf file but each time I tried to start X from the CLI using the normal startx command (read the documentation through fully beforehand) but I didn't manage to get the mouse or keyboard to even work let alone starting the Gnome2 interface. The most common cause is that either hald (sysutils/hal) or dbus (devel/dbus) isn't running. Xorg needs them both to detect mouse and keyboard. Add dbus_enable=YES and hald_enable=YES to rc.conf to get them to start automatically. Now I don't have that particular machine with me now as it's in another country but just wanted to know a few possible causes for the issue. I am guessing it's probably tied into not having the xorg.conf file but I will install a VM of it soon and be more specific with logs etc as I am used to Linux and Sun Solaris I know this is really ad-hoc and frowned upon way of asking which will probably earn me minus brownie points but just wanted a quick idea of what maybe so when the time comes I can investigate further! The second and main question that I wish to ask is more to do with peoples opinions or experienced BSD users advice: I am looking to setup a small file server which I will use as DNS and NTP server also. The reason for selecting FreeBSD is that the system I about to install onto doesn't have much memory (not sure how much but probably in the region of 300-500MB perhaps) and although Linux would definitely suite this kind of system as Solaris needs round 2GB or so for OpenSolaris, I am quite interested to learn FreeBSD but also take advantage of the ZFS file system which is standard now in version 8. I agree with Adam Vande More's opinion that UFS2 is the way to go on such a low memory system. UFS2 also works well with large disks (1+ TB) if you tune the newfs parameters a bit (mainly to shorten the fsck time). With geom(8) you can do all kinds of mirroring/striping if you're into RAID. With regards to stability, UFS2 was before the import of ZFS the only filesystem widely used. It is very well tested, and in my opinion, very stable. In fact, I can't remember ever having a UFS2 filesystem go bad to the point I couldn't repair it anymore. If you're expecting lots of power outages, it may be worthwile to set up journaling using gjournal(8), which will reduce fsck times considerably, at the cost of reduced streaming write speed (which will halve unless a dedicated journal disk is used). I won't be installing a GUI on this machine since it is going to be a server so I would like to know if BSD has a small footprint memory and CPU wise for me to run on the machine in question which is a PIV? That won't be a problem. To illustrate, FreeBSD on a 256MB (i386) machine has about 211MB memory free just after startup. To be safe you could configure a large swap, so the system won't kill the memory hogs as soon as it runs out of memory. Also just to make sure: NFS, Samba, NTPd, and ISC's Bind are all supported on FreeBSD aren't they?? I know this is a bit of an RTFM issue here but for example the Solaris implementation of NTP and even SNMP are slightly different from the GNU or GPL based ones in Linux so therefor I have to ask :-) NFS, BIND, SNMP (bsnmpd) and NTP come with the OS and are installed by default. Samba can be installed from ports. Many thanks for any responses Best regards, Kaya Good luck! Pieter ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 15:29, Kaya Saman samank...@netscape.net wrote: I can't speak to the rest, but WRT the GUI, I suspect you'll find it a lot easier if you install a Window Manager to handle a lot of this. I have found xfce4 to be a good one for me - gnome and kde were a bit much. Once I installed /usr/ports/x11-wm/xfce4 with a 'make config-recursive' then chose my options, then 'make install', the GUI fired up just fine, and all of the hal/dbus stuff was handled for me. Kurt I thought Gnome already came with Nautilus as Window manager??? Or in FreeBSD is it extra? I see I didn't completely read your original message. Indulge me a moment while I ramble here, and probably expose my ignorance... Xorg/X11 Gnome Nautilis is a file manager, unless I misremember. The native file manager for xfce4 is Thunar. Gnome, like xfce4 (and ratpoison, kde, etc.) is a Window Manager, which depends on Xorg/X11 to function. WMs are usually installed installed after Xorg. Did you install gnome from source, or did you use 'pkg_add -r'? I don't know why, but I seem to have better luck, though it takes much longer, if I use 'make install' from the ports tree. Sorry am not used to doing things from scratch but soon I will get the hang of it - just give me a couple of days to get the file server I am on about up and running then will transfer the stuff clogging my notebooks HD over there and install a VM through Vbox and really have a go at understanding the GUI. I'm not far along that learning curve myself. Heh. I started on an old Toshiba laptop with 256mbytes RAM, and Freesbie worked well on that. I then learned how to install from scratch. That was, um, interesting. I hated Linux, as it seems so arcane. Well, perhaps 'hate' is too strong a word, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. Once I worked with FreeBSD, it became much more clear. Things seem to be done more sanely in FreeBSD. Now I have a nice 4gbyte Lenovo T61, and I still like xfce4 - it does what I want, and I didn't want to expend the effort to learn anything new. I did play around with FreeBSIE which is FreeBSD with the GUI installed as a live CD which was really cool and light and worked especially well on my 512MB RAM laptop. Now I don't have a memory issue as I have 6GB on a newer machine running 64bit OS's all the way but still need to get to grips with this :-) If you're very familiar with gnome, you might wish to stay with it. If you're just learning, for both gnome and xfce4, my preference would be for xfce4. But that's just me, and you'll get at least 10 different answers from the first 8 people you meet. Thanks for the tip Kurt! Regards, --Kaya ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
The most common cause is that either hald (sysutils/hal) or dbus (devel/dbus) isn't running. Xorg needs them both to detect mouse and keyboard. Add dbus_enable=YES and hald_enable=YES to rc.conf to get them to start automatically. We'll see what the issue actually is - as I mentioned I kinda stuffed this question in without any proper log or tty output to support anything I mentioned which is quite ad-hoc and not recommended on mailing lists of this caliber unless wanting to irritate the participants. Just need to clear up my notebooks drive first before setting up the VM environment to test! I agree with Adam Vande More's opinion that UFS2 is the way to go on such a low memory system. UFS2 also works well with large disks (1+ TB) if you tune the newfs parameters a bit (mainly to shorten the fsck time). With geom(8) you can do all kinds of mirroring/striping if you're into RAID. With regards to stability, UFS2 was before the import of ZFS the only filesystem widely used. It is very well tested, and in my opinion, very stable. In fact, I can't remember ever having a UFS2 filesystem go bad to the point I couldn't repair it anymore. If you're expecting lots of power outages, it may be worthwile to set up journaling using gjournal(8), which will reduce fsck times considerably, at the cost of reduced streaming write speed (which will halve unless a dedicated journal disk is used). I agree also and thank you guys for your opinions! As mentioned I know UFS1 from Solaris 9 on my SPARC systems and have never had any issues with it at all. Hang on what are these things called slices and this wacky naming convention I thought disks where labeled hdax or sdax according to the partition :-P sorry internal joke! That won't be a problem. To illustrate, FreeBSD on a 256MB (i386) machine has about 211MB memory free just after startup. To be safe you could configure a large swap, so the system won't kill the memory hogs as soon as it runs out of memory. Yeah I reckon large swap also! Usually round 2 or 3 times amount of memory but for everyday generic use I find about 1.5 - 3 gigs is enough. This is the good part of static filesystems I find over ZFS is that the swap space is easily tunable without editing ZFS pools or other. NFS, BIND, SNMP (bsnmpd) and NTP come with the OS and are installed by default. Samba can be installed from ports. Hmm I will need a bit of assistance for the ports part as I'm kinda used to Debian backports through the Apt repos but BSD ports is something quite different. I'm sure there's plenty of documentation on the web to find out how to install and implement! bsnmpd sounds to me more like snmpx from Solaris in terms of that it is different from opensnmpd. Not a problem won't be doing any SNMP monitoring right now as I don't have anything to monitor as my router isn't even my beloved Cisco at the mo. When I have more memory I will play around with SNMP monitoring software if available for BSD, and my all time favorite: Cacti. Good luck! Pieter Thanks a lot Pieter --Kaya ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
Kurt Buff wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 15:29, Kaya Saman samank...@netscape.net wrote: I see I didn't completely read your original message. Indulge me a moment while I ramble here, and probably expose my ignorance... Xorg/X11 Gnome Gnome runs on Xorg: Xorg/Xfree runs X11 Xfree is now obsolete as Xorg is much better. Nautilis is a file manager, unless I misremember. The native file manager for xfce4 is Thunar. Gnome, like xfce4 (and ratpoison, kde, etc.) is a Window Manager, which depends on Xorg/X11 to function. WMs are usually installed installed after Xorg. Correct on both counts :-) Did you install gnome from source, or did you use 'pkg_add -r'? I don't know why, but I seem to have better luck, though it takes much longer, if I use 'make install' from the ports tree. I used pkg_add! Am such a package manager guy as although have compiled quite a bit of stuff I find on some systems such as Sun Solaris compiling can be a nightmare. Especially if it means hacking out source code and using special make parameters as I'm not a programmer but also not that far advanced when it comes down to building software from scratch! I'm not far along that learning curve myself. Heh. I started on an old Toshiba laptop with 256mbytes RAM, and Freesbie worked well on that. I then learned how to install from scratch. That was, um, interesting. I hated Linux, as it seems so arcane. Well, perhaps 'hate' is too strong a word, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. Once I worked with FreeBSD, it became much more clear. Things seem to be done more sanely in FreeBSD. Now I have a nice 4gbyte Lenovo T61, and I still like xfce4 - it does what I want, and I didn't want to expend the effort to learn anything new. Well, Linux has its advantages and for the last 2 years have completely used it as an M$ Windowz replacement as one can do almost everything on it. When I meant; not used to doing things from scratch I meant building the OS. I actually prefer doing a minimal install of CentOS with no software or GUI at all and then building the system up to what I need when it comes down to servers!!! Means I can fine tune the system that way and only use the system resources for what I need. Being a user of both Solaris and Linux though, they are both pretty cool with Solaris only hindered by lack of software and multimedia apps. Otherwise I think Solaris in Open guise would win anyday provided that the H/W support was as vast as Linux. If you're very familiar with gnome, you might wish to stay with it. If you're just learning, for both gnome and xfce4, my preference would be for xfce4. But that's just me, and you'll get at least 10 different answers from the first 8 people you meet. Have played round with everything including KDE3/4, XFCE, Blackbox, Fluxbox, Window Maker, CDE (on Solaris).. Wish there was something more, new and interesting but they're all a bit bland after a while. Gnome I find is more functional! If anyone has any idea of getting something like they use on TV shows like NCIS and CSI that would be really cool (not Hollywood OS) or something they use in the military that one sees on the discovery channel say on the US Navy ships. I mean I do develop GUI's for the OpenSolaris spin-off distro Belenix which can be seen here: http://www.optiplex-networks.com/belenix/index_belenix.html under themes. But really need a new concept of completely tricked out geeky 'suped' up WM. Lot's of bar graphs, text outputs and other really cool stuff embedded into it :-) - no need for Gkrellm or Conky or Torsmo anymore! ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
Adam Vande More wrote: On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Kaya Saman kayasa...@optiplex-networks.com wrote: Hi guys, I attempted an install of 7.2 stable on my laptop and subsequently installed X11also. Now I didn't have any Xorg.conf file but each time I tried to start X from the CLI using the normal startx command (read the documentation through fully beforehand) but I didn't manage to get the mouse or keyboard to even work let alone starting the Gnome2 interface. Running with no xorg.conf is fine, but you need to make sure dbus and hal are started at boot. Follow the handbook for best results. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/handbook/x-config.html I don't know if I'd be too happy to agree on that ... while the answer IS correctfrom a narrow point of view, the documentation on both dbus and hal is very, VERY thin on the ground (and what exists is for Linux only), so if the setup programmed into the port isn't right for your particular FreeBSD machine, you can pretty much forget about getting enough info to fix things. Realize that both hal and dbus were written for Linux (not a particularly portable thing), and it was only because of FreeBSD porters that it works at all under FreeBSD, so the docs that come with them understand Linux only. You can't even find out how to fix the config files for FreeBSD. Trying to fix even the most minor problem is really climbing mountains. Much, much easier to fix up an xorg.conf, which is not only well documented, but has tools to generate you a good local setup for your particular machine. If dbus/hal happen to work for you right out of the FreeBSD port, well, that's great, but if you need to adapt things for use outside of Linux, good luck, fella. The folks who wrote our FreeBSD dbus and hal implementations did a good job of translating things which are VERY Linux-centric to FreeBSD, but it's still only really good for a default FreeBSD setup. I know that it didn't work for anything but a thin slice of default environments, in the FreeBSD-7.x release era. Some day, if when the Linux developers are ready to admit there are other OSes and document things more portably, both tools are really, really fine ideas. Maybe ask again in 6 months to a year? Or, get ready to read a lot of source code and figure it out for yourself. Right now looking at what email I can find on the web regarding running hal dbus on 7.2, no one else can find an easy fund of knowledge either. ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 16:23, Kaya Saman samank...@netscape.net wrote: snip So, given what you've written below, you probably know more about this stuff than I do. Cool. I will echo the advice already given, however: add dbus_enable=YES hald_enable=YES to your /etc/rc.conf. That will most likely clear your problem. Did you install gnome from source, or did you use 'pkg_add -r'? I don't know why, but I seem to have better luck, though it takes much longer, if I use 'make install' from the ports tree. I used pkg_add! Am such a package manager guy as although have compiled quite a bit of stuff I find on some systems such as Sun Solaris compiling can be a nightmare. Especially if it means hacking out source code and using special make parameters as I'm not a programmer but also not that far advanced when it comes down to building software from scratch! I'm not far along that learning curve myself. Heh. I started on an old Toshiba laptop with 256mbytes RAM, and Freesbie worked well on that. I then learned how to install from scratch. That was, um, interesting. I hated Linux, as it seems so arcane. Well, perhaps 'hate' is too strong a word, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. Once I worked with FreeBSD, it became much more clear. Things seem to be done more sanely in FreeBSD. Now I have a nice 4gbyte Lenovo T61, and I still like xfce4 - it does what I want, and I didn't want to expend the effort to learn anything new. Well, Linux has its advantages and for the last 2 years have completely used it as an M$ Windowz replacement as one can do almost everything on it. When I meant; not used to doing things from scratch I meant building the OS. I actually prefer doing a minimal install of CentOS with no software or GUI at all and then building the system up to what I need when it comes down to servers!!! Means I can fine tune the system that way and only use the system resources for what I need. That's what I do with mine under FreeBSD, for both servers and workstations. Being a user of both Solaris and Linux though, they are both pretty cool with Solaris only hindered by lack of software and multimedia apps. Otherwise I think Solaris in Open guise would win anyday provided that the H/W support was as vast as Linux. I need to dive back into Linux - I want to figure out Xen now that it can do live migrations/failover, and FreeBSD doesn't do Dom0 - yet. So, I'll probably try out CentOS, though I suppose I could use NetBSD. Wish there was something more, new and interesting but they're all a bit bland after a while. Gnome I find is more functional! If anyone has any idea of getting something like they use on TV shows like NCIS and CSI that would be really cool (not Hollywood OS) or something they use in the military that one sees on the discovery channel say on the US Navy ships. I mean I do develop GUI's for the OpenSolaris spin-off distro Belenix which can be seen here: http://www.optiplex-networks.com/belenix/index_belenix.html under themes. But really need a new concept of completely tricked out geeky 'suped' up WM. Lot's of bar graphs, text outputs and other really cool stuff embedded into it :-) - no need for Gkrellm or Conky or Torsmo anymore! Eh. I just want something that works and keeps out of my way - xfce seems to do that just fine. For me, 'cool' is the apps and what I can do with them. Kurt ___ 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: New user - small file server questions and quick GUI question
[...] add dbus_enable=YES hald_enable=YES to your /etc/rc.conf. That will most likely clear your problem. [...] I will give this a go soon :-) That's what I do with mine under FreeBSD, for both servers and workstations. Having both servers and workstations is cool as both of them need to be looked at very differently! I like having Linux for desktop systems due to the full multimedia traits of it. I mean Debian or Ubuntu is pretty cool, Red Hat based Fedora is problematic as by default some packages don't work properly so you end up having to hack around the problem. Also multimedia is a slight pain in Fedora due to having to add extra repos to get things like MP3's working since there is some licensing issue. For servers one can pretty much install anything just for raw services. However when one starts considering performance attributes such as disk write speed, ease of adding storage, memory usage, security etc into the equation then one must side with one of the UNIX's around. Different UNIX versions have different strengths and weaknesses but it is nice to get to know as many as possible in order to actually identify and see these attributes in live real time so that in a professional capacity one has the experience to choose the correct system for the task at hand. I need to dive back into Linux - I want to figure out Xen now that it can do live migrations/failover, and FreeBSD doesn't do Dom0 - yet. So, I'll probably try out CentOS, though I suppose I could use NetBSD. Aaaah yes Citrix Xen, it's cool - read the manual but haven't played with it. Yeah I would run Linux just in case there are some things you wish to do but can't in BSD although I can't comment on the differences as I haven't seen them myself yet. I am really a big fan of testing systems on Suns Virtual Box! Is almost like running a disposable OS. Plug in and play then throw away until you need a proper H/W install :-) Eh. I just want something that works and keeps out of my way - xfce seems to do that just fine. For me, 'cool' is the apps and what I can do with them. Hahahaha :-) As long as I can listen to music and watch videos I am ok, oh as well as browse web, check mail and use the occasional office app. the rest is all CLI for me.. However I will use a few more things too rarely - even 3D games. I do like flashy screens though that no body can understand apart from a trained operator :-P - tried this with normal lighting effect too as I tried to emulate an aircraft landing strip with Christmas tree lights. Where I live currently is like a complex with a few houses enclosed in a site with private security etc. Anyway we put my lighting effect in the entrance and before we knew it rained blowing out everything even the backup generator and almost electrocuting everyone living inside... it was so embarrassing for that to happen to a person with an electrical/electronic engineering degree :-O h oh well! I blame the site manager as he bought indoor lights as they were cheap!!! --Kaya ___ 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: FreeNAS file server...which hardware to choose?
Hi Guys, I just wanted to mention that George's changes should be incorporated into the official FreeNAS build of 0.7 (it's RC1 right now) when it comes out, so using our custom image should only be a temporary thing should you choose to go the A2000 route. Regards, David Davis Software Engineer Logic Supply, Inc. Direct Line: 802 861 7428 Office: 802 861 2300 ext. 428 david.da...@logicsupply.com www.logicsupply.com George Hartzell wrote: Tim Judd writes: On 7/19/09, Aleksandr Miroslav alexmiros...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Aleksandr Miroslav alexmiros...@gmail.com wrote: What kind of RAID chassis, computer system should I get for this setup? Would a soekris be sufficient, or is that overkill? Or should I just buy a barebones headless desktop PC (Dell has them cheap now for $241) for this task? I don't like OEMs. I would rather build my own. Recently well-reviewed Via ARTiGO A2000 is a 2 SATA drive enclosure. You can install anything you want in it. I don't think it has onboard raid, but a software raid (in a lightly loaded NAS) should work pretty well Let me know what you choose. I have an A2000 running -STABLE and another running a slightly hacked version of FreeNAS. All of my FreeNAS support hacks (and then some) have been merged into the image available at: http://www.logicsupply.com/blog/2009/05/11/custom-a2000-freenas-image/ I don't have any connection with them except as a happy camper/customer. You'd need to hang the third drive off the USB connection, so it wouldn't be a screamer, but it should work well. Both systems are running the 1TB Western Digital green drives. Otherwise they're plug and play. g. ___ 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
FreeNAS file server...which hardware to choose?
I would like to setup a home fileserver running FreeNAS (which itself runs on FreeBSD 7.2). Can someone recommend hardware for this? I know I'd have to get 3 harddrives. Two will be at home running RAID1, and the third will be mirrored about once per quarter and brought offsite. What kind of RAID chassis, computer system should I get for this setup? Would a soekris be sufficient, or is that overkill? Thanks in advance for your help/advice. ___ 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: FreeNAS file server...which hardware to choose?
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Aleksandr Miroslav alexmiros...@gmail.com wrote: What kind of RAID chassis, computer system should I get for this setup? Would a soekris be sufficient, or is that overkill? Or should I just buy a barebones headless desktop PC (Dell has them cheap now for $241) for this task? ___ 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: FreeNAS file server...which hardware to choose?
On 7/19/09, Aleksandr Miroslav alexmiros...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Aleksandr Miroslav alexmiros...@gmail.com wrote: What kind of RAID chassis, computer system should I get for this setup? Would a soekris be sufficient, or is that overkill? Or should I just buy a barebones headless desktop PC (Dell has them cheap now for $241) for this task? I don't like OEMs. I would rather build my own. Recently well-reviewed Via ARTiGO A2000 is a 2 SATA drive enclosure. You can install anything you want in it. I don't think it has onboard raid, but a software raid (in a lightly loaded NAS) should work pretty well Let me know what you choose. ___ 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: FreeNAS file server...which hardware to choose?
Aleksandr Miroslav wrote: I would like to setup a home fileserver running FreeNAS (which itself runs on FreeBSD 7.2). Can someone recommend hardware for this? I know I'd have to get 3 harddrives. Two will be at home running RAID1, and the third will be mirrored about once per quarter and brought offsite. Right off the bat, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. Technically: Have at *least* four disks, in RAID 10 ( 10 as in 1+0, or bin(1010) ); As far as chassis, I prefer anything that says Intel on it. Your RAID setup will be managed by FreeBSD anyway. I've found that FreeBSD interacts well deeply with Intel-based hardware. Politically: Don't do 'once per quarter'. It feels to me as though you are an outside contractor (forgive me if i'm wrong). Put a cheap box in that aggregates a daily rsync on a removable drive, and have one of the staff take that drive home. If that is not feasible, dump the changes over the Internet with rsync(1). If both suggestions are not feasible, then you don't want them as your client anyway, as they are too cheap to listen to reason. Either way, for reliable consistency: - use good hardware where the manufacturer has a long-standing reputation for providing documentation to their hardware API (afaik, Intel (smack me if I'm wrong)) - learn the difference between ``archive'' and ``backup'' - understand that the hardware is your weakest link... once you figure out that your storage method is better than the storage mechanism, then you won't ever have to ask this question again ;) Steve smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: FreeNAS file server...which hardware to choose?
Steve Bertrand wrote: Aleksandr Miroslav wrote: I would like to setup a home fileserver running FreeNAS (which itself runs on FreeBSD 7.2). Can someone recommend hardware for this? I know I'd have to get 3 harddrives. Two will be at home running RAID1, and the third will be mirrored about once per quarter and brought offsite. Right off the bat, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. meh, I missed the entire home fileserver... when I flamed my last post. My apologies. Hopefully it will still apply. Steve smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: FreeNAS file server...which hardware to choose?
Tim Judd writes: On 7/19/09, Aleksandr Miroslav alexmiros...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Aleksandr Miroslav alexmiros...@gmail.com wrote: What kind of RAID chassis, computer system should I get for this setup? Would a soekris be sufficient, or is that overkill? Or should I just buy a barebones headless desktop PC (Dell has them cheap now for $241) for this task? I don't like OEMs. I would rather build my own. Recently well-reviewed Via ARTiGO A2000 is a 2 SATA drive enclosure. You can install anything you want in it. I don't think it has onboard raid, but a software raid (in a lightly loaded NAS) should work pretty well Let me know what you choose. I have an A2000 running -STABLE and another running a slightly hacked version of FreeNAS. All of my FreeNAS support hacks (and then some) have been merged into the image available at: http://www.logicsupply.com/blog/2009/05/11/custom-a2000-freenas-image/ I don't have any connection with them except as a happy camper/customer. You'd need to hang the third drive off the USB connection, so it wouldn't be a screamer, but it should work well. Both systems are running the 1TB Western Digital green drives. Otherwise they're plug and play. g. ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
I think my file/print/mail server is a bit overkill: http://w3.mutehq.net:8008/sysinfo/ Nice, esp when you compile world. Last year I upgraded our server to a Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz, Intel DG965 board. 2GB RAM. Previous board was an ASUS P3 1.1GHz, which now hosts my backup server. Both ran FreeBSD file/print/email/web services perfectly. I upgraded to get the onboard SATA sockets so I could increase our available disk space (4x500GB in RAID5 for data). However, a nice benefit is that the Core2 will compile world in 1/4 the time, and user don't notice the server is 'busy'. SO, to the original question, yes that motherboard will work just fine. What are you doing for system backups? A single drive is not enough. I recommend a mirror pair at least, and suggest a second box for backups. -- DA Fo rsythNetwork Supervisor Principal Technical Officer -- Institute for Water Research http://www.ru.ac.za/institutes/iwr/ ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
the onboard SATA sockets so I could increase our available disk space (4x500GB in RAID5 for data). However, a nice benefit is that the Core2 will compile world in 1/4 the time, and user don't notice the server is 'busy'. Core2 is actually only a bit faster per clock cycle than PIII, but you have 2 processors (cores) and much more cache and faster memory... SO, to the original question, yes that motherboard will work just fine. What are you doing for system backups? A single drive is not enough. I recommend a mirror pair at least, and suggest a second box why? it's a backup system not main system. ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:06 AM, DA Forsyth d.fors...@ru.ac.za wrote: I think my file/print/mail server is a bit overkill: http://w3.mutehq.net:8008/sysinfo/ Nice, esp when you compile world. Last year I upgraded our server to a Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz, Intel DG965 board. 2GB RAM. Previous board was an ASUS P3 1.1GHz, which now hosts my backup server. Both ran FreeBSD file/print/email/web services perfectly. I upgraded to get the onboard SATA sockets so I could increase our available disk space (4x500GB in RAID5 for data). However, a nice benefit is that the Core2 will compile world in 1/4 the time, and user don't notice the server is 'busy'. SO, to the original question, yes that motherboard will work just fine. What are you doing for system backups? A single drive is not enough. I recommend a mirror pair at least, and suggest a second box for backups. Hello community, Thanks everybody for their thoughts. After reading your posts and some articles over the weekend I will take the gmirror(8) + gjournal(8) road. The backups will be done offsite because the company which I'm doing this for is a friend of my boss and we do have a lot of spare space or our servers. thanks once again, v -- network warrior since 2005 ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:06 AM, DA Forsyth d.fors...@ru.ac.za wrote: I think my file/print/mail server is a bit overkill: http://w3.mutehq.net:8008/sysinfo/ Nice, esp when you compile world. Last year I upgraded our server to a Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz, Intel DG965 board. 2GB RAM. Previous board was an ASUS P3 1.1GHz, which now hosts my backup server. Both ran FreeBSD file/print/email/web services perfectly. I upgraded to get the onboard SATA sockets so I could increase our available disk space (4x500GB in RAID5 for data). However, a nice benefit is that the Core2 will compile world in 1/4 the time, and user don't notice the server is 'busy'. SO, to the original question, yes that motherboard will work just fine. What are you doing for system backups? A single drive is not enough. I recommend a mirror pair at least, and suggest a second box for backups. The system will have 2x1TB HDD in mirroring and 500 GB HDD for another use requested by the client. v -- network warrior since 2005 ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
On 8 Jun 2009 , freebsd-questions-requ...@freebsd.org entreated about freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 262, Issue 2: Message: 13 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 09:18:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl SO, to the original question, yes that motherboard will work just fine. What are you doing for system backups? A single drive is not enough. I recommend a mirror pair at least, and suggest a second box why? it's a backup system not main system. From his original it seemd he would be using a single drive for the system and a mirror pair for data. Seems I got it wrong and the single drive will be for 'some other purpose'. Fine, but all the more reason to back it up. A backup server is not the place to avoid data security. From personal experience I can tell you that life is hell when your backup drives are needed but don't work. My backup server has a mirror pair for the data, and that gets copied to an external drive which lives off site. And I'm not sure I've got enough backups yet (-: -- DA Fo rsythNetwork Supervisor Principal Technical Officer -- Institute for Water Research http://www.ru.ac.za/institutes/iwr/ ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
If you want to use gmirror + gjournal on the root filesystem (/), be sure to use FreeBSD 7.2. A bug prevented the system to boot on unclean shutdown because the replay of the journal took too much time and FreeBSD wanted to mount non-existant (yet) devices. It caused me a lot of trouble when I installed my server and finally I had to leave the root filesystem without gjournal as a workaround. Gabriel 2009/6/8 Valentin Bud valentin@gmail.com: On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:06 AM, DA Forsyth d.fors...@ru.ac.za wrote: I think my file/print/mail server is a bit overkill: http://w3.mutehq.net:8008/sysinfo/ Nice, esp when you compile world. Â Last year I upgraded our server to a Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz, Intel DG965 board. Â 2GB RAM. Â Previous board was an ASUS P3 1.1GHz, which now hosts my backup server. Â Both ran FreeBSD file/print/email/web services perfectly. Â I upgraded to get the onboard SATA sockets so I could increase our available disk space (4x500GB in RAID5 for data). However, a nice benefit is that the Core2 will compile world in 1/4 the time, and user don't notice the server is 'busy'. SO, to the original question, yes that motherboard will work just fine. Â What are you doing for system backups? Â A single drive is not enough. Â I recommend a mirror pair at least, and suggest a second box for backups. Hello community, Â Thanks everybody for their thoughts. After reading your posts and some articles over the weekend I will take the gmirror(8) + gjournal(8) road. Â The backups will be done offsite because the company which I'm doing this for is a friend of my boss and we do have a lot of spare space or our servers. thanks once again, v -- network warrior since 2005 ___ 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 -- Gabriel Lavoie glav...@gmail.com ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
2009/6/6 Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl: Not counting the CPU and its power circuitry, I would be very suprised if the other components on a normal motherboard pulled as much as half of that even when under load. In fact a typical modern desktop computer will, when idle, draw less than 100W for the whole system.  It is not even difficult to put together a system that will stay under 100W even when under load. but power supplies are not really efficient when used at small load. maybe some newer are better... Mine has a 250W PSU in it, and draws around 45W (measured with a power meter)... In the UK it thus costs ~£45 (US$70) per year, at the current E.O.N. rate. Not too expensive! Chris -- A: Because it messes up 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 in a mailing list? ___ 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
Opinion request about a file server
Hello community, I have an old computer (ASRock P4Dual-915GL) with Intel P4 CPU at 3.0Ghz and 2Gb of RAM. I am asking the list maybe is somebody out there with a similar configuration and running FreeBSD on such a system as a File Server and Print Server using samba. What i mainly try to achieve, talking in storage space, is 2 HDD of 1TB in mirroring using gmirror(8) and 1 separate HDD of 500Gb. So do you think the system I've mentioned would handle the load? The server will be used by 4 people for storage of all sorts of files that can be found in Design and daily Office World (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc, Word Documents, etc). Thank you, v -- network warrior since 2005 ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
Valentin Bud wrote: Hello community, I have an old computer (ASRock P4Dual-915GL) with Intel P4 CPU at 3.0Ghz and 2Gb of RAM. I am asking the list maybe is somebody out there with a similar configuration and running FreeBSD on such a system as a File Server and Print Server using samba. What i mainly try to achieve, talking in storage space, is 2 HDD of 1TB in mirroring using gmirror(8) and 1 separate HDD of 500Gb. So do you think the system I've mentioned would handle the load? The server will be used by 4 people for storage of all sorts of files that can be found in Design and daily Office World (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc, Word Documents, etc). Thank you, v Got more than a few of similar systems, and have setup one very similar to this for a friend, primarily used as a Samba server: Pentium 4 2.8Ghz, (socket 478), 2GB RAM Two mirrors (1 Tb total capacity, 4X500Gb drives), using gmirror and gjournal Gigabit Ethernet He stores very large files (he is an avid photographer). Needless to say it works without problems and performance is very good. So, I'd say you can go ahead with your plan. ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 03:57:21PM +0300, Valentin Bud wrote: Hello community, I have an old computer (ASRock P4Dual-915GL) with Intel P4 CPU at 3.0Ghz and 2Gb of RAM. I am asking the list maybe is somebody out there with a similar configuration and running FreeBSD on such a system as a File Server and Print Server using samba. What i mainly try to achieve, talking in storage space, is 2 HDD of 1TB in mirroring using gmirror(8) and 1 separate HDD of 500Gb. So do you think the system I've mentioned would handle the load? The server will be used by 4 people for storage of all sorts of files that can be found in Design and daily Office World (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc, Word Documents, etc). I think its gross overkill for that very light load. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
I have an old computer (ASRock P4Dual-915GL) with Intel P4 CPU at 3.0Ghz and 2Gb of RAM. this is not old - very powerfull machine. I am asking the list maybe is somebody out there with a similar configuration and running FreeBSD on such a system as a File Server and Print Server using samba. what a problem? much more than needed. What i mainly try to achieve, talking in storage space, is 2 HDD of 1TB in mirroring using gmirror(8) and 1 separate HDD of 500Gb. So do you think the system I've mentioned would handle the load? The server 10 times more power than needed. disks speed is the only limit ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
2009/6/5 Valentin Bud valentin@gmail.com: Hello community, Â I have an old computer (ASRock P4Dual-915GL) with Intel P4 CPU at 3.0Ghz and 2Gb of RAM. Â I am asking the list maybe is somebody out there with a similar configuration and running FreeBSD on such a system as a File Server and Print Server using samba. Â What i mainly try to achieve, talking in storage space, is 2 HDD of 1TB in mirroring using gmirror(8) and 1 separate HDD of 500Gb. Â So do you think the system I've mentioned would handle the load? The server will be used by 4 people for storage of all sorts of files that can be found in Design and daily Office World (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc, Word Documents, etc). Thank you, v -- network warrior since 2005 Wow! You have a powerhouse. I'm using this: http://www.bayofrum.net/phpsysinfo for *everything*; web server, mail server, file server, the odd bittorrent (usually for ubuntu, I don't touch warez :P), and even run a Left 4 Dead server on it from time to time... Chris -- A: Because it messes up 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 in a mailing list? ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 06:16:49PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: What i mainly try to achieve, talking in storage space, is 2 HDD of 1TB in mirroring using gmirror(8) and 1 separate HDD of 500Gb. So do you think the system I've mentioned would handle the load? The server 10 times more power than needed. disks speed is the only limit I have a P-II at 400 MHz running as a file server. See about 5 MB/sec on most file transfers. Has one of the original 15GB IBM Deskstar drives, and a much slower 6 GB WD drive. Both on ATA16 interfaces. I suspect network speed will determine the limits. A modern SATA drive should be sequentially read or write at at least 80 MB/sec. while a 100M bit/sec ethernet will be limited to 11 MB/sec. Latency of disk drive and network are usually the limiting factors, not server CPU. With gigabit ethernet one could reasonably expect to see 25MB/sec file rates. Depends a lot as to how big the file, the bigger the faster. Used smartctl just now to check, the Deskstar drive has 50331 hours of run time, 5.7 years. Has only been power cycled 72 times. Run time seems low as I have almost never turned this drive off since 2000. The WD drive claims to have 1418293 hours of uptime. Know that is not right. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
10 times more power than needed. disks speed is the only limit I have a P-II at 400 MHz running as a file server. See about 5 MB/sec on it depends from both sides ability, but pentium 100 with SDRAM memory can saturate 100Mbit/s network running FreeBSD 6.2 ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
Valentin Bud wrote: Hello community, I have an old computer (ASRock P4Dual-915GL) with Intel P4 CPU at 3.0Ghz and 2Gb of RAM. I am asking the list maybe is somebody out there with a similar configuration and running FreeBSD on such a system as a File Server and Print Server using samba. What i mainly try to achieve, talking in storage space, is 2 HDD of 1TB in mirroring using gmirror(8) and 1 separate HDD of 500Gb. So do you think the system I've mentioned would handle the load? The server will be used by 4 people for storage of all sorts of files that can be found in Design and daily Office World (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc, Word Documents, etc). Thank you, v The short answer is yes - this will be fine for what you need. This is one place where FreeBSD is very good. It will give you performance on slightly downlevel hardware that Windows Server just can't touch. -Mike ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
This is one place where FreeBSD is very good. It will give you performance on slightly downlevel hardware that Windows Server just can't touch. is really pentium 4 downlevel hardware? sound like a joke to me. i made all-need server for small office (8 people) using PIII/500 and 384 MB RAM. i charged them only for configuration and new harddrive, server is for free :) it runs mail server (including spamassassin, and dovecot), file and print server (samba), asterisk VoIP software, squid proxy and www server. with proper configuration it rarely swaps, and can easily saturate 100Mbit/s LAN, just not with single transfer, but it's not hardware problem, but windows problem :) ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
Wojciech Puchar wrote: This is one place where FreeBSD is very good. It will give you performance on slightly downlevel hardware that Windows Server just can't touch. is really pentium 4 downlevel hardware? sound like a joke to me. Not really. But considering how everyone is buying Core Duos and quads these days, you can get decent P4s for free. Not that I complain about it ;) Got three of them running and have donated few more. ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
Wojciech Puchar wrote: This is one place where FreeBSD is very good. It will give you performance on slightly downlevel hardware that Windows Server just can't touch. is really pentium 4 downlevel hardware? sound like a joke to me. Sorry - it wasn't really intended that way. Please note that slightly downlevel... was meant to refer to a combination of older Netburst architecture and consumer retail motherboard. The Core Xeons that replaced the old Netburst processors are much better performers. In a true datacenter server environment wrt file serving it is better to spend money on I/O rather than CPU. A server motherboard (as opposed to consumer retail) will have better I/O subsystems, enabling better throughput. i made all-need server for small office (8 people) using PIII/500 and 384 MB RAM. i charged them only for configuration and new harddrive, server is for free :) it runs mail server (including spamassassin, and dovecot), file and print server (samba), asterisk VoIP software, squid proxy and www server. Reminds me of my very first FreeBSD server box. It was a Pentium 75MHz that I had overclocked up to 100MHz. I used it on my then dial up connection as a gateway/firewall and pretty much the collection of services you described. With a user load of one (me) it did just fine. with proper configuration it rarely swaps, and can easily saturate 100Mbit/s LAN, just not with single transfer, but it's not hardware problem, but windows problem :) At some point (when I went to a DSL broadband connection) I replaced the above box with a K-6 II 500MHz with 384MB RAM. Same collection of multiple services. This box was previously utilized for beta testing Windows NT 3.5, 3.51, and NT 4. So I was able to make a direct comparison between running Windows NT and FreeBSD on the exact same piece of hardware. FreeBSD simply just made better use of the hardware and outperformed NT. In order to match what FreeBSD was capable of NT would require a more powerful hardware platform. It still remains that, in spite of the OP using a consumer retail motherboard and not a true server component his FreeBSD/Samba arrangement will work just fine for what he and his 4 users have in mind for their needs. I believe the performance characteristics of FreeBSD will maximize his return on CPU cycles. -Mike ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
Sorry - it wasn't really intended that way. Please note that slightly downlevel... was meant to refer to a combination of older Netburst architecture and consumer retail motherboard. The Core Xeons that replaced the old Netburst processors are much better performers. In a true datacenter server environment wrt file serving it is indeed. pentium IV in average usage (contrary to special cases like video encoding) are even 40% slower per clock cycle than pentium III. new core2duo are mostly improved pentium III with higher clock and more cache :) better to spend money on I/O rather than CPU. A server motherboard (as opposed to consumer retail) will have better I/O subsystems, enabling better throughput. indeed. in most unix usage patterns it's more important than CPU speed. with proper configuration it rarely swaps, and can easily saturate 100Mbit/s LAN, just not with single transfer, but it's not hardware problem, but windows problem :) At some point (when I went to a DSL broadband connection) I replaced the above box with a K-6 II 500MHz with 384MB RAM. Same collection of multiple somehow comparable to my config with sligtly slower CPU, would perform similar in my case. services. This box was previously utilized for beta testing Windows NT 3.5, 3.51, and NT 4. So I was able to make a direct comparison between running Windows NT and FreeBSD on the exact same piece of hardware. FreeBSD simply there is no sense of any comparision ;) just made better use of the hardware and outperformed NT. In order to match what FreeBSD was capable of NT would require a more powerful hardware platform. No. it can't do most things that unix is capable of, unless you install cygwin ;) will work just fine for what he and his 4 users have in mind for their needs. I believe the performance characteristics of FreeBSD will maximize his return on CPU cycles. my home laptop (PIII-M/1133) is rarely limited by CPU power. ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
is really pentium 4 downlevel hardware? sound like a joke to me. Not really. But considering how everyone is buying Core Duos and quads these days, you can get decent P4s for free. could you please tell me where i can get P4 machine for free? :) ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
I think my file/print/mail server is a bit overkill: http://w3.mutehq.net:8008/sysinfo/ 2009/6/5 Valentin Bud valentin@gmail.com: Hello community, Â I have an old computer (ASRock P4Dual-915GL) with Intel P4 CPU at 3.0Ghz and 2Gb of RAM. Â I am asking the list maybe is somebody out there with a similar configuration and running FreeBSD on such a system as a File Server and Print Server using samba. Â What i mainly try to achieve, talking in storage space, is 2 HDD of 1TB in mirroring using gmirror(8) and 1 separate HDD of 500Gb. Â So do you think the system I've mentioned would handle the load? The server will be used by 4 people for storage of all sorts of files that can be found in Design and daily Office World (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc, Word Documents, etc). Thank you, v -- network warrior since 2005 ___ 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 -- Gabriel Lavoie glav...@gmail.com ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
2009/6/5 Gabriel Lavoie glav...@gmail.com: I think my file/print/mail server is a bit overkill: http://w3.mutehq.net:8008/sysinfo/ What a waste... How much power does that chug?? Chris -- A: Because it messes up 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 in a mailing list? ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
Much less than a Pentium 4! Exactly I don't know. This server is a normal PC with a 380W PSU (still too much for the hardware). The funny thing is that the CPU in it (Pentium Dual Core E5200 45nm) is supposed to draw under 4W of power when idle with EIST enabled. This power draw on Intel 45nm CPUs had been tested with a Core 2 Quad! What I can say is that this server uses a lot less power than the Pentium II (dual CPU) it replaced and it's much more powerful. It really made a difference in my electricity bill. 2009/6/5 Chris Rees utis...@googlemail.com: 2009/6/5 Gabriel Lavoie glav...@gmail.com: I think my file/print/mail server is a bit overkill: http://w3.mutehq.net:8008/sysinfo/ What a waste... How much power does that chug?? Chris -- A: Because it messes up 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 in a mailing list? -- Gabriel Lavoie glav...@gmail.com ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
On 6/5/09, Gabriel Lavoie glav...@gmail.com wrote: Much less than a Pentium 4! Exactly I don't know. This server is a normal PC with a 380W PSU (still too much for the hardware). The funny thing is that the CPU in it (Pentium Dual Core E5200 45nm) is supposed to draw under 4W of power when idle with EIST enabled. This power draw on Intel 45nm CPUs had been tested with a Core 2 Quad! What I can say is that this server uses a lot less power than the Pentium II (dual CPU) it replaced and it's much more powerful. It really made a difference in my electricity bill. 2009/6/5 Chris Rees utis...@googlemail.com: 2009/6/5 Gabriel Lavoie glav...@gmail.com: I think my file/print/mail server is a bit overkill: http://w3.mutehq.net:8008/sysinfo/ What a waste... How much power does that chug?? Chris -- A: Because it messes up 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 in a mailing list? And my ALIX based boards with 1 microdrives run just as well as a router, plus I got a CVS mirror on it, NFS server, and I will be adding webserver and maybe mail to it too. They're not GHz machines, but for a routing platform, how often do you even hit 200MHz? The 500MHz ALIX board is doing beautifully for me. silent, too. Have a good weekend, all. --TJ ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
Much less than a Pentium 4! Exactly I don't know. This server is a normal PC with a 380W PSU (still too much for the hardware). The funny thing is that the CPU in it (Pentium Dual Core E5200 45nm) is supposed to draw under 4W of power when idle with EIST enabled. This power draw unless CPU are constantly loaded it takes minor part of power. maybe your CPU takes 4W, but other chips on motherboard takes MUCH more. it would be good to measure it with electricity meter :) i bet close to 100W ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 12:43:23AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Much less than a Pentium 4! Exactly I don't know. This server is a normal PC with a 380W PSU (still too much for the hardware). The funny thing is that the CPU in it (Pentium Dual Core E5200 45nm) is supposed to draw under 4W of power when idle with EIST enabled. This power draw unless CPU are constantly loaded it takes minor part of power. maybe your CPU takes 4W, but other chips on motherboard takes MUCH more. A bit more perphaps, but not MUCH more. The main chipset itself will almost certainly not draw more than 20-25W when working. Less when idle. (If it is a chipset with integrated graphics you can add a few watts to that, but probably not much more than that.) Modern RAM-memory will draw perhaps 1-3W per DIMM, depending on size and technology. The remaing chips does not draw much. (After all they don't generate enough heat to require heatsinks.) The only really power hungry component in a modern system apart from the CPU is the graphic card - and that only when using the more high-end models. it would be good to measure it with electricity meter :) i bet close to 100W Not counting the CPU and its power circuitry, I would be very suprised if the other components on a normal motherboard pulled as much as half of that even when under load. In fact a typical modern desktop computer will, when idle, draw less than 100W for the whole system. It is not even difficult to put together a system that will stay under 100W even when under load. -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
Not counting the CPU and its power circuitry, I would be very suprised if the other components on a normal motherboard pulled as much as half of that even when under load. In fact a typical modern desktop computer will, when idle, draw less than 100W for the whole system. It is not even difficult to put together a system that will stay under 100W even when under load. but power supplies are not really efficient when used at small load. maybe some newer are better... ___ 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: Opinion request about a file server
On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 01:31:16AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Not counting the CPU and its power circuitry, I would be very suprised if the other components on a normal motherboard pulled as much as half of that even when under load. In fact a typical modern desktop computer will, when idle, draw less than 100W for the whole system. It is not even difficult to put together a system that will stay under 100W even when under load. but power supplies are not really efficient when used at small load. maybe some newer are better... It is true that most PSUs have their highest efficiency at about half their maximum load and that this efficiency tends to drop very noticeably at very low loads. The efficency of high-quality PSUs has improved quite a bit over the last couple of years though, to the extent that a modern high-quality PSU running at a low load will still have higher efficiency than an ordinary 5-year old PSU had at its best. Be that as it may, when I was talking about the power draw of the whole system, I meant the whole system, including PSU, so any power losses in the PSU are included in the 100W mentioned. -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se ___ 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
Building file server for multi-tera capacity
Hi we plan a FreeBSD server which can host at least 20 Terabyte of data. The system will be shipped with FreeBSD 7 or 8 and will be based on a NexSAN SAS Beast. We would like to know if anybody has tried FreeBSD with NexSAN products and particularly if he has a suggestion about a solid HBA. Also we would like to hear your opinion about ZFS with this configuration. Greetings Valerio Daelli --- Il tuo 5 X mille a favore della Ricerca della Fondazione IFOM Tutti coloro che presentano il modello Unico, il modello 730 o che ricevono dal proprio datore di lavoro il modello CUD, hanno la facoltà di scegliere la destinazione del proprio 5 X mille. Nella casella riservata al Finanziamento agli Enti della Ricerca Sanitaria inserisci il codice fiscale di IFOM (97358780159) e apponi la tua firma. Il tuo 5 X mille verrà destinato alla Ricerca contro il Cancro della Fondazione IFOM Per saperne di più vai al sito IFOM. http://www.ifom-firc.it/5x1000.php Segnala questa opportunità ai tuoi amici e al tuo commercialista --- Valerio Daelli Email valerio.dae...@ifom-ieo-campus.it Phone +39 02 574303006 c/o IFOM-IEO campus, building 1 -Via Adamello 16 - 20139 Milan Italy ___ 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: Shuttle for a BSD file server?
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Maxim Khitrov mkhit...@gmail.com wrote: Greetings, I'm planning to build a new home file server for myself, starting with about 2TB of RAID6 space, but with room to grow in the future. Most of that will be on SATA drives, but I may throw in two SAS drives in RAID1 for the base OS, hence the SAS raid controller and enclosure. The highest priority for this build is data security, followed by performance and uptime. Rather than go for server-grade components, I thought that I should instead try to separate storage from the server itself. It's cheaper (sort of), easier to upgrade in the future, and if the server goes down for some reason, I can just put the raid card into another machine and once again have access to my data. The other advantage with this build is that I already have a Q6600 and some DDR2 memory around, so that will save me money on having to get Xeons and ECC memory. With that in mind, I currently have the following components picked out (listed below). I would like to know whether anyone has used any of these with FreeBSD 7.x, or if you have some other suggestions for what I should look into (am I asking for trouble by using these parts for a 24/7 file server in terms of stability)? I know that the 3ware controller should be supported, but I'm not sure about the Shuttle. How does FreeBSD play with X48 chipset? The drive enclosure obviously doesn't interact with the OS, but I'd still like your opinion on it or maybe some alternatives. Please let me know what you think. - Max Barebone: Shuttle SX48P2 E http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856101070 Raid Card: 3ware 9690SA-8E-KIT http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816116062 SAS Enclosure: RAIDAGE iAge840ML2 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816702014 Ok, other components aside for now, I've been thinking about what video card to get. Since the raid controller will occupy one slot, and BBU another, I thought about using a usb video adapter. Can anyone please let me know if something like this is supported by FreeBSD: eVGA UV Plus USB VGA Adapter 100-U2-UV16-A1 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16815101001 - Max ___ 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: Shuttle for a BSD file server?
Maxim Khitrov wrote: Greetings, I'm planning to build a new home file server for myself, starting with about 2TB of RAID6 space, but with room to grow in the future. Most of that will be on SATA drives, but I may throw in two SAS drives in RAID1 for the base OS, hence the SAS raid controller and enclosure. The highest priority for this build is data security, followed by performance and uptime. Rather than go for server-grade components, I thought that I should instead try to separate storage from the server itself. It's cheaper (sort of), easier to upgrade in the future, and if the server goes down for some reason, I can just put the raid card into another machine and once again have access to my data. The other advantage with this build is that I already have a Q6600 and some DDR2 memory around, so that will save me money on having to get Xeons and ECC memory. With that in mind, I currently have the following components picked out (listed below). I would like to know whether anyone has used any of these with FreeBSD 7.x, or if you have some other suggestions for what I should look into (am I asking for trouble by using these parts for a 24/7 file server in terms of stability)? I know that the 3ware controller should be supported, but I'm not sure about the Shuttle. How does FreeBSD play with X48 chipset? The drive enclosure obviously doesn't interact with the OS, but I'd still like your opinion on it or maybe some alternatives. Please let me know what you think. [snip] I'm not really answering the direct question, per se, but there is a data point you may wish to know a little more about. There exists a difference in hard drives, ala Enterprise vs Desktop. The difference is in the length of the timeout experienced when an error condition such as a platter sector read/write error and resultant remap. Desktop drives have a fairly long period (something like 8, or more, seconds) while trying to handle the situation. With the Enterprise grade of drive this period is much shorter, something like 1 to 1.5 seconds max. Different hardware combinations ultimately behave differently, but the place where this matters most is with a RAID controller. A RAID controller is expecting this timeout to be very short. When paired with desktop drives sometimes a RAID controller will detach, or lose connection, to a drive and you may see lots of read_dma and/or write_dma errors. This is very problematic as it may not actually show itself for quite a while after drive(s) have been placed into service, e.g., everything will run just fine until a drive encounters the first time a sector fails and the drive remaps the sector to another location. A Desktop series of drive can take so long to handle this error condition that the controller assumes the entire drive is no longer present. In a datacenter environment the Enterprise grade of drives are commonly used. It is when the home user plugs up desktop drives to a RAID controller is where this problem is most likely to surface. It doesn't in all situations, as many people have done just this and experienced no trouble at all. Just one small data point to consider. -Mike ___ 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: Shuttle for a BSD file server?
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Michael Powell nightre...@verizon.net wrote: I'm not really answering the direct question, per se, but there is a data point you may wish to know a little more about. There exists a difference in hard drives, ala Enterprise vs Desktop. The difference is in the length of the timeout experienced when an error condition such as a platter sector read/write error and resultant remap. I'm aware of that fact. In my workstation I'm using four Seagate Barracuda ES drives in RAID5. For this build I will likely go with with ES.2 (ST31000340NS). - Max ___ 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: Shuttle for a BSD file server?
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Maxim Khitrov mkhit...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Michael Powell nightre...@verizon.net wrote: I'm not really answering the direct question, per se, but there is a data point you may wish to know a little more about. There exists a difference in hard drives, ala Enterprise vs Desktop. The difference is in the length of the timeout experienced when an error condition such as a platter sector read/write error and resultant remap. I'm aware of that fact. In my workstation I'm using four Seagate Barracuda ES drives in RAID5. For this build I will likely go with with ES.2 (ST31000340NS). - Max On second thought, given all the problems Seagate has been having lately, including with that particular model, I may go for WD RE3 drives instead. - Max ___ 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
Shuttle for a BSD file server?
Greetings, I'm planning to build a new home file server for myself, starting with about 2TB of RAID6 space, but with room to grow in the future. Most of that will be on SATA drives, but I may throw in two SAS drives in RAID1 for the base OS, hence the SAS raid controller and enclosure. The highest priority for this build is data security, followed by performance and uptime. Rather than go for server-grade components, I thought that I should instead try to separate storage from the server itself. It's cheaper (sort of), easier to upgrade in the future, and if the server goes down for some reason, I can just put the raid card into another machine and once again have access to my data. The other advantage with this build is that I already have a Q6600 and some DDR2 memory around, so that will save me money on having to get Xeons and ECC memory. With that in mind, I currently have the following components picked out (listed below). I would like to know whether anyone has used any of these with FreeBSD 7.x, or if you have some other suggestions for what I should look into (am I asking for trouble by using these parts for a 24/7 file server in terms of stability)? I know that the 3ware controller should be supported, but I'm not sure about the Shuttle. How does FreeBSD play with X48 chipset? The drive enclosure obviously doesn't interact with the OS, but I'd still like your opinion on it or maybe some alternatives. Please let me know what you think. - Max Barebone: Shuttle SX48P2 E http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856101070 Raid Card: 3ware 9690SA-8E-KIT http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816116062 SAS Enclosure: RAIDAGE iAge840ML2 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816702014 ___ 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: Unstable File Server
I have had those exact problems with my removable tray. Try eliminating the tray for a while and see... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek Ragona Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:23 PM To: Marcel Grandemange Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Unstable File Server At 10:59 AM 6/25/2008, Marcel Grandemange wrote: The raid card is an Adaptec 2420sa, however devices on that controller never have shown troubles. To give a breakdown: Mount points: /dev/ad0s1e on /tmp (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1f on /usr (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1d on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad6s1d on /mnt/750sg (ufs, local, noatime, soft-updates) /dev/aacd0s1d on /mnt/RaidVolume (ufs, local, noatime, soft-updates) /dev/ad2s1d on /mnt/250GbMax (ufs, local, noatime, soft-updates) DMESG: ad0: 114472MB Seagate ST3120026A 3.06 at ata0-master UDMA100 ad2: 239372MB Maxtor 6L250R0 BAH41G10 at ata1-master UDMA133 acd0: DVDROM SAMSUNG DVD-ROM SD-616F/E104 at ata1-slave UDMA33 ad6: 715404MB Seagate ST3750330AS SD15 at ata3-master SATA150 aacd0: Volume on aac0 aacd0: 523996MB (1073143808 sectors) pciconf -vl [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:0: class=0x06 card=0x02961106 chip=0x02961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:1: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x12961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:2: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x22961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:3: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x32961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:4: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x42961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:7: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x72961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:1:0: class=0x060400 card=0x chip=0xb1981106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x01 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'ProSavageDDR P4X600,Apollo KT400/A/600 CPU to AGP Bridge' class = bridge subclass = PCI-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:5:0: class=0x060700 card=0x chip=0x04751180 rev=0x81 hdr=0x02 vendor = 'Ricoh Company, Ltd.' device = 'RL5c475 Cardbus Controller' class = bridge subclass = PCI-CardBus [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:6:0: class=0x010400 card=0x029d9005 chip=0x02869005 rev=0x02 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Adaptec Inc' device = 'AAC-RAID (Rocket)' class = mass storage subclass = RAID [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:7:0: class=0x02 card=0x43001186 chip=0x43001186 rev=0x10 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'D-Link System Inc' device = 'dlg10028 Used on DGE-528T Gigabit adaptor' class = network subclass = ethernet [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:15:0: class=0x010400 card=0x71041462 chip=0x31491106 rev=0x80 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT8237 VT6410 SATA RAID Controller' class = mass storage subclass = RAID [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:15:1: class=0x01018a card=0x71041462 chip=0x05711106 rev=0x06 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT82C586A/B/VT82C686/A/B/VT823x/A/C Bus Master IDE Controller' class = mass storage subclass = ATA [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:0: class=0x0c0300 card=0x71041462 chip=0x30381106 rev=0x81 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT83C572, VT6202 VIA Rev 5 or later USB Universal Host Controller' class = serial bus subclass = USB [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:1: class=0x0c0300 card=0x71041462 chip=0x30381106 rev=0x81 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT83C572, VT6202 VIA Rev 5 or later USB Universal Host Controller' class = serial bus subclass = USB [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:2: class=0x0c0300 card=0x71041462 chip=0x30381106 rev=0x81 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT83C572, VT6202 VIA Rev 5 or later USB Universal Host Controller' class = serial bus subclass = USB [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:3: class=0x0c0300 card=0x71041462 chip=0x30381106 rev=0x81 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT83C572, VT6202 VIA Rev 5 or later USB Universal Host Controller' class = serial bus subclass = USB [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:4: class=0x0c0320 card=0x71041462 chip=0x31041106 rev=0x86 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT6202/12 USB 2.0 Enhanced Host Controller' class = serial bus subclass = USB [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:17:0: class=0x060100 card=0x32271106 chip=0x32271106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT8237 PCI-to-ISA Bridge' class = bridge subclass = PCI-ISA [EMAIL
RE: Unstable File Server
Ad2 is the only one out of the troubled drives that is in a bay that seems to be giving issues. And when replacing it with the 20gb issues went away. Im considering changing motherboards from the MSI im using to an intel. Mabey FreeBSD has issues with the via chipset used for the IDE Sata controllers. Any input there? Also it would be nice if someone can explain to me exactly what the errors meen that ive been experiencing, seeing as they seem to be different depending on drive. Thank You. -Original Message- From: George Vagner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 4:44 PM To: 'Derek Ragona'; 'Marcel Grandemange' Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Unstable File Server I have had those exact problems with my removable tray. Try eliminating the tray for a while and see... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek Ragona Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:23 PM To: Marcel Grandemange Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Unstable File Server At 10:59 AM 6/25/2008, Marcel Grandemange wrote: The raid card is an Adaptec 2420sa, however devices on that controller never have shown troubles. To give a breakdown: Mount points: /dev/ad0s1e on /tmp (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1f on /usr (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1d on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad6s1d on /mnt/750sg (ufs, local, noatime, soft-updates) /dev/aacd0s1d on /mnt/RaidVolume (ufs, local, noatime, soft-updates) /dev/ad2s1d on /mnt/250GbMax (ufs, local, noatime, soft-updates) DMESG: ad0: 114472MB Seagate ST3120026A 3.06 at ata0-master UDMA100 ad2: 239372MB Maxtor 6L250R0 BAH41G10 at ata1-master UDMA133 acd0: DVDROM SAMSUNG DVD-ROM SD-616F/E104 at ata1-slave UDMA33 ad6: 715404MB Seagate ST3750330AS SD15 at ata3-master SATA150 aacd0: Volume on aac0 aacd0: 523996MB (1073143808 sectors) pciconf -vl [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:0: class=0x06 card=0x02961106 chip=0x02961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:1: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x12961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:2: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x22961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:3: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x32961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:4: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x42961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:7: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x72961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:1:0: class=0x060400 card=0x chip=0xb1981106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x01 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'ProSavageDDR P4X600,Apollo KT400/A/600 CPU to AGP Bridge' class = bridge subclass = PCI-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:5:0: class=0x060700 card=0x chip=0x04751180 rev=0x81 hdr=0x02 vendor = 'Ricoh Company, Ltd.' device = 'RL5c475 Cardbus Controller' class = bridge subclass = PCI-CardBus [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:6:0: class=0x010400 card=0x029d9005 chip=0x02869005 rev=0x02 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Adaptec Inc' device = 'AAC-RAID (Rocket)' class = mass storage subclass = RAID [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:7:0: class=0x02 card=0x43001186 chip=0x43001186 rev=0x10 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'D-Link System Inc' device = 'dlg10028 Used on DGE-528T Gigabit adaptor' class = network subclass = ethernet [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:15:0: class=0x010400 card=0x71041462 chip=0x31491106 rev=0x80 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT8237 VT6410 SATA RAID Controller' class = mass storage subclass = RAID [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:15:1: class=0x01018a card=0x71041462 chip=0x05711106 rev=0x06 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT82C586A/B/VT82C686/A/B/VT823x/A/C Bus Master IDE Controller' class = mass storage subclass = ATA [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:0: class=0x0c0300 card=0x71041462 chip=0x30381106 rev=0x81 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT83C572, VT6202 VIA Rev 5 or later USB Universal Host Controller' class = serial bus subclass = USB [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:1: class=0x0c0300 card=0x71041462 chip=0x30381106 rev=0x81 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT83C572, VT6202 VIA Rev 5 or later USB Universal Host Controller' class = serial bus subclass = USB [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:2: class=0x0c0300 card=0x71041462 chip=0x30381106 rev=0x81 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT83C572, VT6202 VIA Rev 5
FW: Unstable File Server
Good day! I hope someone might be able to assist me over here! I have a multipurpose FreeBSD server, and one of the roles is being a file server. This role however seems to continuously bring the machine to it's knees. I have tried seeking help elsewhere namely http://www.daemonforums.org/showthread.php?t=980 But still can't seem to get this going. Id really appreciate some input, thank you! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unstable File Server
Good day! I hope someone might be able to assist me over here! I have a multipurpose FreeBSD server, and one of the roles is being a file server. This role however seems to continuously bring the machine to it's knees. I have tried seeking help elsewhere namely http://www.daemonforums.org/showthread.php?t=980 But still can't seem to get this going. Id really appreciate some input, thank you! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unstable File Server
Marcel Grandemange wrote: Good day! I hope someone might be able to assist me over here! I have a multipurpose FreeBSD server, and one of the roles is being a file server. This role however seems to continuously bring the machine to it's knees. I have tried seeking help elsewhere namely http://www.daemonforums.org/showthread.php?t=980 But still can't seem to get this going. Id really appreciate some input, thank you! Have you tried swapping out the drive cables with new/UDMA133 ones. Every time I think I've found a problem w/FBSD disk handling it ends up being the cables :) __ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Unstable File Server
If you see in forum I had replaced all cables with brand new ones, upgraded the PSU three times, and even tried multiple PCI controllers. The only place I have not picked up issues yet is with the aacd array, almost everything else has been giving issues on and off, however only under heavy data transfer. The drive im receiving the most issues from is also brand new and worked perfectly under windows. The 250gb Maxtor drive also works without hassels under windows. I have also recently replaced the DVD rom because for no apparent reason it started giving issues aswell. (Even though it wasn't in use or even mounted) I havant had issues with small drives, the boot drive has never reported any form of errors and I replaced the Maxtor 250 with an old 20gb Seagate to test and that worked flawlessly aswell. I have no idea anymore of what to do. -Original Message- From: Tim Daneliuk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:19 PM To: Marcel Grandemange Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unstable File Server Marcel Grandemange wrote: Good day! I hope someone might be able to assist me over here! I have a multipurpose FreeBSD server, and one of the roles is being a file server. This role however seems to continuously bring the machine to it's knees. I have tried seeking help elsewhere namely http://www.daemonforums.org/showthread.php?t=980 But still can't seem to get this going. Id really appreciate some input, thank you! Have you tried swapping out the drive cables with new/UDMA133 ones. Every time I think I've found a problem w/FBSD disk handling it ends up being the cables :) __ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ NOD32 3205 (20080621) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Unstable File Server
At 09:37 AM 6/25/2008, Marcel Grandemange wrote: If you see in forum I had replaced all cables with brand new ones, upgraded the PSU three times, and even tried multiple PCI controllers. The only place I have not picked up issues yet is with the aacd array, almost everything else has been giving issues on and off, however only under heavy data transfer. The drive im receiving the most issues from is also brand new and worked perfectly under windows. The 250gb Maxtor drive also works without hassels under windows. I have also recently replaced the DVD rom because for no apparent reason it started giving issues aswell. (Even though it wasn't in use or even mounted) I havant had issues with small drives, the boot drive has never reported any form of errors and I replaced the Maxtor 250 with an old 20gb Seagate to test and that worked flawlessly aswell. I have no idea anymore of what to do. What RAID card are you using? Or is it built into the motherboard, in which case what RAID chip is in use? Is the older 20gb drive using the same drive interface? -Derek -Original Message- From: Tim Daneliuk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:19 PM To: Marcel Grandemange Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unstable File Server Marcel Grandemange wrote: Good day! I hope someone might be able to assist me over here! I have a multipurpose FreeBSD server, and one of the roles is being a file server. This role however seems to continuously bring the machine to it's knees. I have tried seeking help elsewhere namely http://www.daemonforums.org/showthread.php?t=980 But still can't seem to get this going. Id really appreciate some input, thank you! Have you tried swapping out the drive cables with new/UDMA133 ones. Every time I think I've found a problem w/FBSD disk handling it ends up being the cables :) __ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ NOD32 3205 (20080621) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Unstable File Server
VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8378 [S3 UniChrome] Graphics Adapter' class = display subclass = VGA Now the issues im having: Jun 20 15:40:24 gw2 kernel: ad2: WARNING - WRITE_DMA48 UDMA ICRC error (retrying request) LBA=367592031 Jun 20 15:40:24 gw2 kernel: ad2: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA48 status=51READY,DSC,ERROR error=4ABORTED LBA=367592031 Jun 20 15:40:24 gw2 kernel: g_vfs_done():ad2s1d[WRITE(offset=188207087616, length=131072)]error = 5 Jun 20 15:40:41 gw2 kernel: ad2: WARNING - WRITE_DMA48 UDMA ICRC error (retrying request) LBA=368639871 Jun 20 15:40:41 gw2 kernel: ad2: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA48 status=51READY,DSC,ERROR error=4ABORTED LBA=368639871 Jun 20 15:40:41 gw2 kernel: g_vfs_done():ad2s1d[WRITE(offset=188743516160, length=131072)]error = 5 Jun 20 15:50:45 gw2 kernel: ad2: WARNING - WRITE_DMA48 UDMA ICRC error (retrying request) LBA=402834719 Jun 20 15:50:45 gw2 kernel: ad2: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA48 status=51READY,DSC,ERROR error=4ABORTED LBA=402834719 Jun 20 15:50:45 gw2 kernel: g_vfs_done():ad2s1d[WRITE(offset=206251343872, length=131072)]error = 5 Jun 20 15:58:05 gw2 kernel: ad2: WARNING - WRITE_DMA48 UDMA ICRC error (retrying request) LBA=431801119 Jun 20 15:58:05 gw2 kernel: ad2: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA48 status=51READY,DSC,ERROR error=4ABORTED LBA=431801119 Jun 20 15:58:05 gw2 kernel: g_vfs_done():ad2s1d[WRITE(offset=221082075136, length=131072)]error = 5 AND Jun 25 10:11:34 gw2 kernel: acd0: WARNING - unknown CMD (0x4a ) read data overrun 188 Jun 25 10:11:55 gw2 kernel: acd0: WARNING - TEST_UNIT_READY t askqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 10:13:54 gw2 kernel: acd0: WARNING - PREVENT_ALLOW tas kqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 10:13:55 gw2 kernel: pid 2998 (hald-addon-mouse-sy), u id 0: exited on signal 11 (core dumped) Jun 25 10:14:15 gw2 kernel: acd0: WARNING - TEST_UNIT_READY t askqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 10:16:15 gw2 kernel: acd0: WARNING - PREVENT_ALLOW tas kqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 10:18:15 gw2 kernel: acd0: WARNING - TEST_UNIT_READY t askqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 10:20:15 gw2 kernel: acd0: WARNING - READ_TOC taskqueu e timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 10:22:15 gw2 kernel: acd0: WARNING - READ_TOC taskqueue timeout - completing request directly AND Jun 25 13:46:00 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES ENABLE RCACHE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:04 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES ENABLE WCACHE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:08 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SET_MULTI taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:08 gw2 kernel: ad6: FAILURE - WRITE_DMA48 timed out LBA=1358069247 Jun 25 13:46:17 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES SET TRANSFER MODE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:21 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES SET TRANSFER MODE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:25 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES ENABLE RCACHE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:29 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES ENABLE WCACHE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:33 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SET_MULTI taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:33 gw2 kernel: ad6: TIMEOUT - WRITE_DMA48 retrying (1 retry left) LBA=1358069375 Jun 25 13:46:42 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES SET TRANSFER MODE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:46 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES SET TRANSFER MODE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:50 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES ENABLE RCACHE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:54 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES ENABLE WCACHE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:58 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SET_MULTI taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Jun 25 13:46:58 gw2 kernel: ad6: TIMEOUT - WRITE_DMA retrying (1 retry left) LBA=191 Jun 25 13:47:07 gw2 kernel: ad6: WARNING - SETFEATURES SET TRANSFER MODE taskqueue timeout - completing request directly Device ad2 is an IDE device and is on same cable as DVDROM however the Drive itself is master. I replaced ad2 with an old 20Gb and it behaved itself however other devices still giving hassels.. (Ad2 is in a removable bay), so same cables etc. Thank You kindly for assistance so far! From: Derek Ragona [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:08 PM To: Marcel Grandemange; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Unstable File Server At 09:37 AM 6/25/2008, Marcel Grandemange wrote: If you see in forum I had replaced all cables with brand new ones, upgraded the PSU three times, and even tried multiple PCI controllers. The only place I have not picked up issues yet is with the aacd array, almost everything else has been
RE: Unstable File Server
with FreeBSD. I would say your problem is either the RAID card or the drive(s). I would try diagnostics on the drives from the manufacturer's websites. If the drives pass these tests I would replace the RAID card since you already tried new cables. -Derek From: Derek Ragona [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:08 PM To: Marcel Grandemange; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Unstable File Server At 09:37 AM 6/25/2008, Marcel Grandemange wrote: If you see in forum I had replaced all cables with brand new ones, upgraded the PSU three times, and even tried multiple PCI controllers. The only place I have not picked up issues yet is with the aacd array, almost everything else has been giving issues on and off, however only under heavy data transfer. The drive im receiving the most issues from is also brand new and worked perfectly under windows. The 250gb Maxtor drive also works without hassels under windows. I have also recently replaced the DVD rom because for no apparent reason it started giving issues aswell. (Even though it wasn't in use or even mounted) I havant had issues with small drives, the boot drive has never reported any form of errors and I replaced the Maxtor 250 with an old 20gb Seagate to test and that worked flawlessly aswell. I have no idea anymore of what to do. What RAID card are you using? Or is it built into the motherboard, in which case what RAID chip is in use? Is the older 20gb drive using the same drive interface? -Derek -Original Message- From: Tim Daneliuk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:19 PM To: Marcel Grandemange Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unstable File Server Marcel Grandemange wrote: Good day! I hope someone might be able to assist me over here! I have a multipurpose FreeBSD server, and one of the roles is being a file server. This role however seems to continuously bring the machine to it's knees. I have tried seeking help elsewhere namely http://www.daemonforums.org/showthread.php?t=980 But still can't seem to get this going. Id really appreciate some input, thank you! Have you tried swapping out the drive cables with new/UDMA133 ones. Every time I think I've found a problem w/FBSD disk handling it ends up being the cables :) __ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ NOD32 3205 (20080621) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com http://www.eset.com/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. __ NOD32 3205 (20080621) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by http://www.mailscanner.info/ MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Unstable File Server
The adaptec card is the only one not giving issues. Besides its a real hardware raid card, cost me more alone than the entire pc! It's all the onboard controllers that the issues are coming from. According to FreeBSD [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:15:0:class=0x010400 card=0x71041462 chip=0x31491106 rev=0x80 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT8237 VT6410 SATA RAID Controller' class = mass storage subclass = RAID vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT82C586A/B/VT82C686/A/B/VT823x/A/C Bus Master IDE Controller' class = mass storage subclass = ATA [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:6:0:class=0x010400 card=0x029d9005 chip=0x02869005 rev=0x02 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Adaptec Inc' device = 'AAC-RAID (Rocket)' class = mass storage subclass = RAID I have the following adapters, the first two are onboard and I seem to have issues with certain drives on them. The adaptec has two drives setup as a single volume and ive never had a single issue with it. Thank You. From: Derek Ragona [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:23 PM To: Marcel Grandemange Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Unstable File Server At 10:59 AM 6/25/2008, Marcel Grandemange wrote: The raid card is an Adaptec 2420sa, however devices on that controller never have shown troubles. To give a breakdown: Mount points: /dev/ad0s1e on /tmp (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1f on /usr (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad0s1d on /var (ufs, local, soft-updates) /dev/ad6s1d on /mnt/750sg (ufs, local, noatime, soft-updates) /dev/aacd0s1d on /mnt/RaidVolume (ufs, local, noatime, soft-updates) /dev/ad2s1d on /mnt/250GbMax (ufs, local, noatime, soft-updates) DMESG: ad0: 114472MB Seagate ST3120026A 3.06 at ata0-master UDMA100 ad2: 239372MB Maxtor 6L250R0 BAH41G10 at ata1-master UDMA133 acd0: DVDROM SAMSUNG DVD-ROM SD-616F/E104 at ata1-slave UDMA33 ad6: 715404MB Seagate ST3750330AS SD15 at ata3-master SATA150 aacd0: Volume on aac0 aacd0: 523996MB (1073143808 sectors) pciconf -vl [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:0: class=0x06 card=0x02961106 chip=0x02961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:1: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x12961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:2: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x22961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:3: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x32961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:4: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x42961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:0:7: class=0x06 card=0x chip=0x72961106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'P4M800 Standard Host Bridge' class = bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:1:0: class=0x060400 card=0x chip=0xb1981106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x01 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'ProSavageDDR P4X600,Apollo KT400/A/600 CPU to AGP Bridge' class = bridge subclass = PCI-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:5:0: class=0x060700 card=0x chip=0x04751180 rev=0x81 hdr=0x02 vendor = 'Ricoh Company, Ltd.' device = 'RL5c475 Cardbus Controller' class = bridge subclass = PCI-CardBus [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:6:0: class=0x010400 card=0x029d9005 chip=0x02869005 rev=0x02 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Adaptec Inc' device = 'AAC-RAID (Rocket)' class = mass storage subclass = RAID [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:7:0: class=0x02 card=0x43001186 chip=0x43001186 rev=0x10 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'D-Link System Inc' device = 'dlg10028 Used on DGE-528T Gigabit adaptor' class = network subclass = ethernet [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:15:0: class=0x010400 card=0x71041462 chip=0x31491106 rev=0x80 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT8237 VT6410 SATA RAID Controller' class = mass storage subclass = RAID [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:15:1: class=0x01018a card=0x71041462 chip=0x05711106 rev=0x06 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT82C586A/B/VT82C686/A/B/VT823x/A/C Bus Master IDE Controller' class = mass storage subclass = ATA [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:0: class=0x0c0300 card=0x71041462 chip=0x30381106 rev=0x81 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT83C572, VT6202 VIA Rev 5 or later USB Universal Host Controller' class = serial bus subclass = USB [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:16:1: class=0x0c0300 card=0x71041462 chip=0x30381106 rev=0x81 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT83C572, VT6202 VIA Rev 5
Re: FreeBSD SAMBA file server performance - strange behaviour
I found it. I'll try it out, and see what we get. Interesting thing is, that i went again to verify the finds that i wrote in my letter, and it is not the ping itself that increases performance, but the fact of multiple connections - while pinging from console (ping -f), the behaviour stays the same, 5-13 Mb/sec varying, when i log in through ssh and do the ping -f , it seems to me that the fact of the second _active_ connection actually improves the things. Nenad SNIP ... On the other hand, i experienced that when i try PING on the File server's IP address from the fileserver, i get performance increase in the transfer speed - the bigger the traffic i generate, the better the results, which max out at 25-27 MB/sec with flood ping. Has anyone else experienced any similar behaviour? Regards, Nenad Just as an FYI, you may find it better to use FreeNAS, which is based on FreeBSD. http://www.freenas.org/ -Derek ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 2900 (20080225) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. - End message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD SAMBA file server performance - strange behaviour
Hi all, Recently I have received the reuest from the colleague to create the homebrewn NAS for his small office, so I started checking the possible options, and having good, stable and long relationship with FreeBSD I've settled again for it. Machine is not something special, Pentium D with 1G RAM and single SATA150 disk, 3Com 1G server card in the PCI slot, connected to the desktop though 1Gbps unmanaged switch. If needed I'll provide the full config and setup information. After installing the bare FreeBSD 7.0RC3 and Samba 3.x.xx - whichewer was included in the packages - I wanted to have the job done quickly, the machine appeared on the network and everyone seemed to be happy and live happily everafter. Until dear friend of mine started using the machine to do the actual work - basic editing of the wedding videos. When trying to upload the single file to file server, he was getting the varying speed of 5-13 MBps, from his machine to file server - which is unacceptably low for any kind of transfer speed. Interestingly enough, when he tried to copy _TWO_ files to file server, the transfer speed vould jump to the 25-27 MB/sec and keep permanent, without much fluctuation. After I tried to copy the files from one directory to another, iostat has shown me the speed in excess of 29 MB/sec while copying the files between two directories on the same server, so the disk access should not be the problem. On the other hand, i experienced that when i try PING on the File server's IP address from the fileserver, i get performance increase in the transfer speed - the bigger the traffic i generate, the better the results, which max out at 25-27 MB/sec with flood ping. Has anyone else experienced any similar behaviour? Regards, Nenad ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD SAMBA file server performance - strange behaviour
At 09:38 AM 2/25/2008, Nenad Mihajlovic wrote: Hi all, Recently I have received the reuest from the colleague to create the homebrewn NAS for his small office, so I started checking the possible options, and having good, stable and long relationship with FreeBSD I've settled again for it. Machine is not something special, Pentium D with 1G RAM and single SATA150 disk, 3Com 1G server card in the PCI slot, connected to the desktop though 1Gbps unmanaged switch. If needed I'll provide the full config and setup information. After installing the bare FreeBSD 7.0RC3 and Samba 3.x.xx - whichewer was included in the packages - I wanted to have the job done quickly, the machine appeared on the network and everyone seemed to be happy and live happily everafter. Until dear friend of mine started using the machine to do the actual work - basic editing of the wedding videos. When trying to upload the single file to file server, he was getting the varying speed of 5-13 MBps, from his machine to file server - which is unacceptably low for any kind of transfer speed. Interestingly enough, when he tried to copy _TWO_ files to file server, the transfer speed vould jump to the 25-27 MB/sec and keep permanent, without much fluctuation. After I tried to copy the files from one directory to another, iostat has shown me the speed in excess of 29 MB/sec while copying the files between two directories on the same server, so the disk access should not be the problem. On the other hand, i experienced that when i try PING on the File server's IP address from the fileserver, i get performance increase in the transfer speed - the bigger the traffic i generate, the better the results, which max out at 25-27 MB/sec with flood ping. Has anyone else experienced any similar behaviour? Regards, Nenad Just as an FYI, you may find it better to use FreeNAS, which is based on FreeBSD. http://www.freenas.org/ -Derek ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 2900 (20080225) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD SAMBA file server performance - strange behaviour
In response to Nenad Mihajlovic [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi all, Recently I have received the reuest from the colleague to create the homebrewn NAS for his small office, so I started checking the possible options, and having good, long and stable relationship with FreeBSD I've settled again for it. Machine is not something special, Pentium D with 1G RAM and single SATA150 disk, 3Com 1G server card in the PCI slot, connected to the desktop though 1Gbps unmanaged switch. If needed I'll provide the full config and setup information. After installing the bare FreeBSD 7.0RC3 and Samba 3.x.xx - whichewer was included in the packages - I wanted to have the job done quickly, the machine appeared on the network and everyone seemed to be happy and live happily everafter. Until dear friend of mine started using the machine to do the actual work - basic editing of the wedding videos. When trying to upload the single file to file server, he was getting the varying speed of 5-13 MBps, from his machine to file server - which is unacceptably low for any kind of transfer speed. Interestingly enough, when he tried to copy _TWO_ files to file server, the transfer speed vould jump to the 25-27 MB/sec and keep permanent, without much fluctuation. After I tried to copy the files from one directory to another, iostat has shown me the speed in excess of 29 MB/sec while copying the files between two directories on the same server, so the disk access should not be the problem. On the other hand, i experienced that when i try PING on the File server's IP address from the fileserver, i get performance increase in the transfer speed - the bigger the traffic i generate, the better the results, which max out at 25-27 MB/sec with flood ping. Has anyone else experienced any similar behaviour? This is a pretty wild guess, but can you verify that the ethernet settings are correct? If the interface is set to autoneg, can you verify that both ends (the FreeBSD machine and the switch itself) have negotiated the same speed/duplex? Wouldn't be the first time I saw a switch negotiate a different speed/ duplex than the NIC on the other end. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD SAMBA file server performance - strange behaviour
Hi all, Recently I have received the reuest from the colleague to create the homebrewn NAS for his small office, so I started checking the possible options, and having good, long and stable relationship with FreeBSD I've settled again for it. Machine is not something special, Pentium D with 1G RAM and single SATA150 disk, 3Com 1G server card in the PCI slot, connected to the desktop though 1Gbps unmanaged switch. If needed I'll provide the full config and setup information. After installing the bare FreeBSD 7.0RC3 and Samba 3.x.xx - whichewer was included in the packages - I wanted to have the job done quickly, the machine appeared on the network and everyone seemed to be happy and live happily everafter. Until dear friend of mine started using the machine to do the actual work - basic editing of the wedding videos. When trying to upload the single file to file server, he was getting the varying speed of 5-13 MBps, from his machine to file server - which is unacceptably low for any kind of transfer speed. Interestingly enough, when he tried to copy _TWO_ files to file server, the transfer speed vould jump to the 25-27 MB/sec and keep permanent, without much fluctuation. After I tried to copy the files from one directory to another, iostat has shown me the speed in excess of 29 MB/sec while copying the files between two directories on the same server, so the disk access should not be the problem. On the other hand, i experienced that when i try PING on the File server's IP address from the fileserver, i get performance increase in the transfer speed - the bigger the traffic i generate, the better the results, which max out at 25-27 MB/sec with flood ping. Has anyone else experienced any similar behaviour? Regards, Nenad ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD SAMBA file server performance - strange behaviour
Hi all, Recently I have received the reuest from the colleague to create the homebrewn NAS for his small office, so I started checking the possible options, and having good, long and stable relationship with FreeBSD I've settled again for it. Machine is not something special, Pentium D with 1G RAM and single SATA150 disk, 3Com 1G server card in the PCI slot, connected to the desktop though 1Gbps unmanaged switch. If needed I'll provide the full config and setup information. After installing the bare FreeBSD 7.0RC3 and Samba 3.x.xx - whichewer was included in the packages - I wanted to have the job done quickly, the machine appeared on the network and everyone seemed to be happy and live happily everafter. Until dear friend of mine started using the machine to do the actual work - basic editing of the wedding videos. When trying to upload the single file to file server, he was getting the varying speed of 5-13 MBps, from his machine to file server - which is unacceptably low for any kind of transfer speed. Interestingly enough, when he tried to copy _TWO_ files to file server, the transfer speed vould jump to the 25-27 MB/sec and keep permanent, without much fluctuation. After I tried to copy the files from one directory to another, iostat has shown me the speed in excess of 29 MB/sec while copying the files between two directories on the same server, so the disk access should not be the problem. On the other hand, i experienced that when i try PING on the File server's IP address from the fileserver, i get performance increase in the transfer speed - the bigger the traffic i generate, the better the results, which max out at 25-27 MB/sec with flood ping. Has anyone else experienced any similar behaviour? Regards, Nenad ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD SAMBA file server performance - strange behaviour
address from the fileserver, i get performance increase in the transfer speed - the bigger the traffic i generate, the better the results, which max out at 25-27 MB/sec with flood ping. Has anyone else experienced any similar behaviour? yes. there was (but at 100Mbit/s) autonegotiation problems, switch got half duplex while computer worked full duplex - which lead to packet losses. setting manually to 100Mbit/s half-duplex (on server) fixed this. but check, it may not be your case ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
quota on samba file server
Hello, I have Freebsd 6.2 installed with file quota on. Today I have installed samba and enbaled network share for Windows machines. Now I would like to set quota for this share. I am not sure if I should do this from the swat panel or set the quota via command line in freebsd? All hints gladly welcome. Thank you in advance! -- Zbigniew Szalbot ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Kernel Options fo a File Server
man tuning? Cheers, Lars. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ivan Carey Posted At: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:28 PM Posted To: FreeBSD-Questions Conversation: Kernel Options fo a File Server Subject: Kernel Options fo a File Server Hello, What would be the best Kernel options to run a file server? I will be using an Intel server mother board with one Xeon quad core CPU installed (this mother board has 2 CPU sockets) 2GB RAM and dual 500Gb SATA HDD's I am thinking of options that would make the kernel efficient as a pure file server. Thanks, Ivan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
