Re: [CentOS] After BIND update owner changed and restart failed

[Ralph Angenendt]

Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> I just applied the BIND updates.
> 
> Then I fixed the one file that had a second include of named.ca 
> (remembered that from last time) and did a 'service named restart', and 
> it failed.  

Never heard about someone having to apply that fix - do you have a bug entry
from bugs.centos.org or bugzilla.redhat.com handy?


> In messages I found:
>
> Jan 10 21:31:17 z9m9z named[31001]: loading configuration from 
> '/etc/named.conf'
> Jan 10 21:31:17 z9m9z named[31001]: /etc/named.conf:11: open: 
> /etc/named.acl: permission denied
> Jan 10 21:31:17 z9m9z named[31001]: loading configuration: permission denied
> Jan 10 21:31:17 z9m9z named[31001]: exiting (due to fatal error)

named.acl isn't shipped by CentOS.

> Oh, I remember this from the last update...  So off to 
> /var/named/chroot/etc and do a 'chown named:named *' then named started.

The files under there belong to root:named and are 644 (except rndc.conf 
which is 640). No file there belongs to named:named. named.acl isn't shipped 
with bind.

> This apparent changing of file ownership in installing a new set of bind 
> updates so that named cannot access the files seems like something is 
> broken somewhere.

[r...@shutdown etc]# rpm -q --scripts bind|grep -E "chown|chmod"
[ -e /etc/rndc.key ] && chown root:named /etc/rndc.key
[ -e /etc/rndc.key ] && chmod 0640 /etc/rndc.key
[r...@shutdown etc]#

So where are other files ownerships changed after a bind update? If you think
you fond a bug, then please file it, but make sure that others can recreate
it.

Ralph

pgpoXjzNkpwyp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter

[Ralph Angenendt]

Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> What is there available for Centos?  

ffmpeg, mencoder.

> Now that Audacity is no longer available to us...

Have you tried helping to resolve that issue with rpmforge?

Ralph

pgpzqRDmiB4Uw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter

[Tosh]

Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> What is there available for Centos?  Now that Audacity is no longer
> available to us...
>
Which version of CentOS are you running? (version and architecture please)
I have audacity working perfectly, I do compile it myself, but can make 
it available in an rpm package
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [OT] Remote control of a WinXP machine from a Linux host

[James Bensley]

> No, the main problem is that A is behind my ISP's NAT. I want to access it
> from C (yes, I'll be travelling a lot and C might be just about anywhere).
> But the problem is that since A is behind a NAT, the connection must be
> initiated from A's side to C. Also, since C might be behind some other NAT,
> the connection must be initiated from C's side to A. This simply cannot work
> simultaneously, so I tried to make use of my public server B which can be
> used as a "bridge" between A and C. So, A connects to B, C connects to B, and
> then A and C communicate. Roughly speaking...
>
> That was my initial idea, but seems too complicated to work out, so I asked
> for a possible easier alternative. :-)
>
>> Or if want your own set up you could of course for example run some
>> sort of remote access service like VNC and just pay for a static IP
>> for Machine A from its ISP and set up Port Forwarding for VNC
>
> That would be the most obvious solution, if only the ISP were willing to give
> me a static IP. But they are not. :-(
>
>> (or if
>> you don't want to pay use http://www.no-ip.com/ and use their free dns
>> service where you can create a free dns name for use with dynamic
>> ip's. You just install their software on Machine A and it will login
>> to No-IP.info and check your ip is still current and if not update it
>> like if your IP changes because your dsl line drops for a minute and
>> you get a knew ip?).
>
> Hmmm... This is interesting. I'll look up to www.no-ip.com, but I think that
> such dns trick may work only with public IP numbers. And A's IP is of type
> 10.0.*.* which is a no-go, afaik.
>
> However, I might ask the ISP to provide me with a public IP. It could still be
> dynamic, but public rather than local, and in that case the trick with the
> dns just might work... ;-)
>
> Thanks for the pointer!
>
> Best, :-)
> Marko

I see now. Well in this case I would defiantly recommend something
like www.logmein.com then. All you need is http (tcp port 80) access
out, so web access and your sorted, from anywhere in the world! Just
goto www.logmein.com from Machine A and install the free version. Then
login from Machine C and connect back to your machine A and take it
over!

Or as you mentioned you could set something up like a crontab that
runs every 15 minutes and ssh's (using passwordless ssh, as in
public/shared keys?) to your static Machine B and look for a flagfile,
and if its found keep the connection open to tunnel through from
Machine C back to Machine A via static Machine B?

HTH and good luck!

Regards,
James ;)

-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
  Version: 3.1
GIT/MU/U dpu s: a--> C++>$ U+> L++> B-> P+> E?> W+++>$ N K W++ O M++>$ V-
PS+++ PE++ Y+ PGP t 5 X+ R- tv+ b+> DI D+++ G+ e(+) h--(++) r++ z++
--END GEEK CODE BLOCK--
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Dealing with 800x480 displays

[Robert Moskowitz]

Has anyone worked around the display size limit on units like the ASUS 
eee?  They list a 800x480 display resolution, and I have encountered 
Gnome dialogs that require at least 800x600 to see the  button on 
the bottom of the panel.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Dealing with 800x480 displays

[Kwan Lowe]

Not a fix, but holding down the ALT key on a few window managers will allow
moving the window without the title bar being present.

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:

> Has anyone worked around the display size limit on units like the ASUS
> eee?  They list a 800x480 display resolution, and I have encountered
> Gnome dialogs that require at least 800x600 to see the  button on
> the bottom of the panel.
>
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Dealing with 800x480 displays

[Anne Wilson]

On Sunday 11 January 2009 13:18:36 Kwan Lowe wrote:
> Not a fix, but holding down the ALT key on a few window managers will allow
> moving the window without the title bar being present.
>
Also, if you are running a distrubution with KDE4, there is  'laptop' theme 
that minimises decorations and gives you the greates possible display space.  
Oddly enough, I find that I can reduce the fonts and still read with much 
greater comfort than I would have expected at that size.

All these help, but you do still need the Alt+grab and move a window, 
sometimes.

Anne


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Stewart Williams]

John R Pierce wrote:
> Stewart Williams wrote:
>> I have just purchased an HP ProLiant HP ML110 G5 server and install ed 
>> CentOS 5.2 x86_64 on it.
>>
>> It has the following spec:
>>
>> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 3065  @ 2.33GHz
>> 4GB ECC memory
>> 4 x 250GB SATA hard disks running at 1.5GB/s
>>
>> Onboard RAID controller is enabled but at the moment I have used mdadm 
>> to configure the array.
>>
>> RAID bus controller: Intel Corporation 82801 SATA RAID Controller
>>
> 
> that is essentially desktop grade disk IO
> 
> 
>> For a simple striped array I ran:
>>
>> # mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
>> # mke2fs -j /dev/md0
>> # mount -t ext3 /dev/md0 /mnt
>>
>> Attached are the results of 2 bonnie++ tests I made to test the 
>> performance:
>>
>> # bonnie++ -s 256m -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>>
>> and
>>
>> # bonnie++ -s 1g -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>>
>> I also tried 3 of the drives in a RAID 5 setup with gave similar results.
>>
>> Is it me or are the results poor?
>>
>> Is this the best I can expect from the hardware or is something wrong?
>>
>> I would appreciate any advice or possible tweaks I can make to the 
>> system to make the performance better.
>>
>> The block I/O is the thing that concerns me as mostly I am serving a 
>> 650MB file via samba to 5 clients and I think this is where I need the 
>> speed.
> 
> is this a sequential or random access application thats using this 
> file?   is it read only/mostly, or is it random update?

I'm not sure, how can I find this out?

> its rather hard to read your bonnie output logs as they aren't very 
> columnar. but it appears the sequetial read speed at least is really high.
> 
> i'm seeing 55MB/sec random(block) and 1.4GB/sec sequential reads on the 
> 1GB file,

Correct.

> so I dunno what your issues are...   of course, a 1GB file 
> sits entirely in the system cache assuming a reasonable amount of 
> otherwise idle memory

I'm not sure whether the performance would suffice as I've not tried 
putting it in production.

I am going to benchmark the old server (currently in production) that 
this is replacing.

Thanks,

Stewart
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Stewart Williams]

William Warren wrote:
> Stewart Williams wrote:
>> I have just purchased an HP ProLiant HP ML110 G5 server and install ed 
>> CentOS 5.2 x86_64 on it.
>>
>> It has the following spec:
>>
>> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 3065  @ 2.33GHz
>> 4GB ECC memory
>> 4 x 250GB SATA hard disks running at 1.5GB/s
>>
>> Onboard RAID controller is enabled but at the moment I have used mdadm 
>> to configure the array.
>>
>> RAID bus controller: Intel Corporation 82801 SATA RAID Controller
>>
>> For a simple striped array I ran:
>>
>> # mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
>> # mke2fs -j /dev/md0
>> # mount -t ext3 /dev/md0 /mnt
>>
>> Attached are the results of 2 bonnie++ tests I made to test the 
>> performance:
>>
>> # bonnie++ -s 256m -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>>
>> and
>>
>> # bonnie++ -s 1g -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>>
>> I also tried 3 of the drives in a RAID 5 setup with gave similar results.
>>
>> Is it me or are the results poor?
>>
>> Is this the best I can expect from the hardware or is something wrong?
>>
>> I would appreciate any advice or possible tweaks I can make to the 
>> system to make the performance better.
>>
>> The block I/O is the thing that concerns me as mostly I am serving a 
>> 650MB file via samba to 5 clients and I think this is where I need the 
>> speed.
>>
>> Plus I am hoping to run some virtualised guests on it eventually, but 
>> nothing too heavy.
>>
>> 
>>
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> That onbard raid is fakeraid..so when you dialup raid 5 you effectivly 
> put hte hdd's in pio mode since ALL data has to be routed through your 
> cpu.  Please get a raid card from HP or go get a 3ware card so you ahve 
> real hardware raid.
> 
> fake and real raid chpsets:
> http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Hardware/sata.html
> 
> Why using fakeraid at all is bad:
> http://thebs413.blogspot.com/2005/09/fake-raid-fraid-sucks-even-more-at.html
> 
> MDM under linux is kernel raid that does not use a binary 
> driver..however you don't want to do ANY software raid 5. 

Thanks William,

I am no expert on RAID, so you have opened my eyes to somethings I 
wasn't aware of.

I am considering disabling the onboard RAID in the BIOS and 
re-installing CentOS and configuring the 4 drives as RAID 10 just to see 
what the performance is like.

Or I may purchase a card as you advise. Would I benefit from buying a 
SCSI/or SAS card and drives for my requirements? Basically the main role 
of the machine is to serve a ~600MB file via samba to 5 Windows XP cient 
PC's on a gigabit network.

Stewart
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Dealing with 800x480 displays

[Adam Tauno Williams]

On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 08:12 -0500, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> Has anyone worked around the display size limit on units like the ASUS 
> eee?  They list a 800x480 display resolution, and I have encountered 
> Gnome dialogs that require at least 800x600 to see the  button on 
> the bottom of the panel.

Configure a virtual (panning) desktop that is larger than the physical
screen.  This used to be *very* common back when average display
resolutions where much lower and is well supported by X.  But I don't
think the installers provide this option anymore when configuring X so
you might have to play with "/etc/X11/xorg.conf".



Something like:

Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Videocard0"
Monitor "Monitor0"
DefaultDepth 16
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Virtual 1024 768
Depth 16
Modes "800x600"
EndSubSection
EndSection

- provides a 1024x768 virtual desktop on a 800x600 display.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Dealing with 800x480 displays

[Craig White]

On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 10:54 -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 08:12 -0500, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> > Has anyone worked around the display size limit on units like the ASUS 
> > eee?  They list a 800x480 display resolution, and I have encountered 
> > Gnome dialogs that require at least 800x600 to see the  button on 
> > the bottom of the panel.
> 
> Configure a virtual (panning) desktop that is larger than the physical
> screen.  This used to be *very* common back when average display
> resolutions where much lower and is well supported by X.  But I don't
> think the installers provide this option anymore when configuring X so
> you might have to play with "/etc/X11/xorg.conf".
> 
> 
> 
> Something like:
> 
> Section "Screen"
> Identifier "Screen0"
> Device "Videocard0"
> Monitor "Monitor0"
> DefaultDepth 16
> SubSection "Display"
> Viewport 0 0
> Virtual 1024 768
> Depth 16
> Modes "800x600"
> EndSubSection
> EndSection
> 
> - provides a 1024x768 virtual desktop on a 800x600 display.

agreed - I always have done something similar with my Sony Picturebook
C1X which apparently has finally bitten the dust.

The thing that I found though is that if you can only get 800 pixels
across, I might just go with an 800x600 virtual so that the only slide
was vertical because going virtual in both the X and Y axis might prove
unnerving and would be more awkward to get accustomed to.

Craig

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter

[John]

> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org 
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Angenendt
> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 5:13 AM
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter
> 
> Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> > What is there available for Centos?  
> 
> ffmpeg, mencoder.
> 
> > Now that Audacity is no longer available to us...
> 
> Have you tried helping to resolve that issue with rpmforge?
> 
> Ralph
--
This is the install process for Audacity.
Ccrma = planet ccrma 
rf = rpmforge

audacity-1.3.5-0.5.beta.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
compat-wxGTK26-2.6.4-2.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
jack-audio-connection-kit-0.102.20-3.0.el5.i386.rpm
libfreebob-1.0.0-3.0.el5.i386.rpm
libsamplerate-0.1.2-1.2.el5.rf.i386.rpm
soundtouch-1.3.1-6.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
soundtouch-devel-1.3.1-6.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
wxGTK-2.8.9-1.el5.rf.i386.rpm

Ralph, as I understood it the RPMForge Repo was not going to be fixed as I
think Dag posted weeks ago on it. This is the install process I done a a
clients machine after I posted to the list about the problem and was told of
the rpms deps being in the Planet CCRMA Repo and a few others. BTW to that
Poster Thanks

As conversion from Wave to MP3 and back seems of great interest is there any
possobility to get Audacity and the Dependancies in the Extras Repo?

JohnStanley

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] After BIND update owner changed and restart failed

[Kai Schaetzl]

Ralph Angenendt wrote on Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:10:54 +0100:

> The files under there belong to root:named and are 644 (except rndc.conf 
> which is 640). No file there belongs to named:named. named.acl isn't shipped 
> with bind.

I had named.conf with root.root (and it was working). That got changed by the 
update to root.named. Which apparently is the correct ownership according to 
you and it still works. When I installed bind just a few weeks ago I had to 
create all the files manually as there were none. So, that's why that file was 
root.root.

I didn't notice that before but I see that there are a lot of errors already 
before the update:

Jan 11 16:38:00 chacha named[11307]: client 192.168.1.228#1994: view internal: 
update 'bolera.lan/IN' denied

I don't need updates (and I think clients are not configured to try to update). 
Can you tell me how I can fix this? (If I wanted to allow updates and if I 
wanted to have this functionality not available at all.)

Kai

-- 
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Guidelines for CentOS Mailing List posts

[Kai Schaetzl]

david.mackint...@xdroop.com wrote on Sat, 10 Jan 2009 22:57:18 -0500:

> 

good answer.

Kai

-- 
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter

[John]

> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org 
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Angenendt
> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 5:13 AM
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter
> 
> Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> > What is there available for Centos?  
> 
> ffmpeg, mencoder.
> 
> > Now that Audacity is no longer available to us...
> 
> Have you tried helping to resolve that issue with rpmforge?
> 
> Ralph
-
My post to the list and response.
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-December/069936.html

JohnStanley

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Guidelines for CentOS Mailing List posts

[Vandaman]

David Mackintosh wrote:

> From: david.mackint...@xdroop.com 
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:14:22AM +, Vandaman wrote:
> 
> > Its not the time to be nannying people
> > over how to behave on mailing list.
> 
> 

What is your contribution to the topic? Or are you one of those who 
has been top-posting and posting in html?

Regards, 
Vandaman.


  

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Ross Walker]

On Jan 11, 2009, at 10:13 AM, Stewart Williams  
 wrote:

> William Warren wrote:
>> Stewart Williams wrote:
>>> I have just purchased an HP ProLiant HP ML110 G5 server and  
>>> install ed
>>> CentOS 5.2 x86_64 on it.
>>>
>>> It has the following spec:
>>>
>>> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 3065  @ 2.33GHz
>>> 4GB ECC memory
>>> 4 x 250GB SATA hard disks running at 1.5GB/s
>>>
>>> Onboard RAID controller is enabled but at the moment I have used  
>>> mdadm
>>> to configure the array.
>>>
>>> RAID bus controller: Intel Corporation 82801 SATA RAID Controller
>>>
>>> For a simple striped array I ran:
>>>
>>> # mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdb1 / 
>>> dev/sdc1
>>> # mke2fs -j /dev/md0
>>> # mount -t ext3 /dev/md0 /mnt
>>>
>>> Attached are the results of 2 bonnie++ tests I made to test the
>>> performance:
>>>
>>> # bonnie++ -s 256m -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> # bonnie++ -s 1g -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>>>
>>> I also tried 3 of the drives in a RAID 5 setup with gave similar  
>>> results.
>>>
>>> Is it me or are the results poor?
>>>
>>> Is this the best I can expect from the hardware or is something  
>>> wrong?
>>>
>>> I would appreciate any advice or possible tweaks I can make to the
>>> system to make the performance better.
>>>
>>> The block I/O is the thing that concerns me as mostly I am serving a
>>> 650MB file via samba to 5 clients and I think this is where I need  
>>> the
>>> speed.
>>>
>>> Plus I am hoping to run some virtualised guests on it eventually,  
>>> but
>>> nothing too heavy.
>>>
>>> --- 
>>> --- 
>>> --
>>>
>>> ___
>>> CentOS mailing list
>>> CentOS@centos.org
>>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>> That onbard raid is fakeraid..so when you dialup raid 5 you  
>> effectivly
>> put hte hdd's in pio mode since ALL data has to be routed through  
>> your
>> cpu.  Please get a raid card from HP or go get a 3ware card so you  
>> ahve
>> real hardware raid.
>>
>> fake and real raid chpsets:
>> http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Hardware/sata.html
>>
>> Why using fakeraid at all is bad:
>> http://thebs413.blogspot.com/2005/09/fake-raid-fraid-sucks-even-more-at.html
>>
>> MDM under linux is kernel raid that does not use a binary
>> driver..however you don't want to do ANY software raid 5.
>
> Thanks William,
>
> I am no expert on RAID, so you have opened my eyes to somethings I
> wasn't aware of.
>
> I am considering disabling the onboard RAID in the BIOS and
> re-installing CentOS and configuring the 4 drives as RAID 10 just to  
> see
> what the performance is like.
>
> Or I may purchase a card as you advise. Would I benefit from buying a
> SCSI/or SAS card and drives for my requirements? Basically the main  
> role
> of the machine is to serve a ~600MB file via samba to 5 Windows XP  
> cient
> PC's on a gigabit network.

If all your doing is serving a single file to a handful of PCs then a  
2 drive mirror will be more then enough.

You should stick with the OS RAID though as the onboard RAID will  
bring nothing but pain.

For sequential IO expect 60MB/s read and 40MB/s write (with the  
drive's write cache enabled) per drive. Random IO is an order of  
magnitude less.

-Ross
  
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Guidelines for CentOS Mailing List posts

[Jim Perrin]

*Whut do U mean? I don't get it lol.*

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:57 PM,   wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:14:22AM +, Vandaman wrote:
>
>> Its not the time to be nannying people
>> over how to behave on mailing list.
>
> 
>
> --
>  /\oo/\
> / /()\ \ David Mackintosh |
> d...@xdroop.com  | http://www.xdroop.com
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>



-- 
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary
act.
George Orwell
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] After BIND update owner changed and restart failed

[Vandaman]

Kai Schaetzl  wrote:
 
> I had named.conf with root.root (and it was working). That
> got changed by the 
> update to root.named. Which apparently is the correct
> ownership according to 
> you and it still works. When I installed bind just a few
> weeks ago I had to 
> create all the files manually as there were none. So,
> that's why that file was 
> root.root.
> 
> I didn't notice that before but I see that there are a
> lot of errors already 
> before the update:
> 
> Jan 11 16:38:00 chacha named[11307]: client
> 192.168.1.228#1994: view internal: 
> update 'bolera.lan/IN' denied
> 
> I don't need updates (and I think clients are not
> configured to try to update). 
> Can you tell me how I can fix this? (If I wanted to allow
> updates and if I 
> wanted to have this functionality not available at all.)
> 

You are not making any sense at all. Are you asking a question?
If so I missed it.

Regards,
Vandaman.


  

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Rainer Duffner]

Am 11.01.2009 um 18:36 schrieb Ross Walker:
>
> If all your doing is serving a single file to a handful of PCs then a
> 2 drive mirror will be more then enough.
>


Actually, he could put it on a swap-backed tmpfs and serve it directly  
from RAM.

Seeing that he has 4GB of it...

If it's really only a single file, he could serve it via NGINX ;-)




cheers,
Rainer


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] After BIND update owner changed and restart failed

[Ralph Angenendt]

Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> I didn't notice that before but I see that there are a lot of errors already 
> before the update:
> 
> Jan 11 16:38:00 chacha named[11307]: client 192.168.1.228#1994: view 
> internal: 
> update 'bolera.lan/IN' denied

You have a windows machine on the network and it gets its address by dhcp?
If so it now tries to tell the name server that it has a new fancy shiny
address! 

Ralph

pgpEjzOfrmEAz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Stewart Williams]

Ross Walker wrote:
> On Jan 11, 2009, at 10:13 AM, Stewart Williams  
>  wrote:
> 
>> William Warren wrote:
>>> Stewart Williams wrote:
 I have just purchased an HP ProLiant HP ML110 G5 server and  
 install ed
 CentOS 5.2 x86_64 on it.

 It has the following spec:

 Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 3065  @ 2.33GHz
 4GB ECC memory
 4 x 250GB SATA hard disks running at 1.5GB/s

 Onboard RAID controller is enabled but at the moment I have used  
 mdadm
 to configure the array.

 RAID bus controller: Intel Corporation 82801 SATA RAID Controller

 For a simple striped array I ran:

 # mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdb1 / 
 dev/sdc1
 # mke2fs -j /dev/md0
 # mount -t ext3 /dev/md0 /mnt

 Attached are the results of 2 bonnie++ tests I made to test the
 performance:

 # bonnie++ -s 256m -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0

 and

 # bonnie++ -s 1g -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0

 I also tried 3 of the drives in a RAID 5 setup with gave similar  
 results.

 Is it me or are the results poor?

 Is this the best I can expect from the hardware or is something  
 wrong?

 I would appreciate any advice or possible tweaks I can make to the
 system to make the performance better.

 The block I/O is the thing that concerns me as mostly I am serving a
 650MB file via samba to 5 clients and I think this is where I need  
 the
 speed.

 Plus I am hoping to run some virtualised guests on it eventually,  
 but
 nothing too heavy.

 --- 
 --- 
 --

 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>> That onbard raid is fakeraid..so when you dialup raid 5 you  
>>> effectivly
>>> put hte hdd's in pio mode since ALL data has to be routed through  
>>> your
>>> cpu.  Please get a raid card from HP or go get a 3ware card so you  
>>> ahve
>>> real hardware raid.
>>>
>>> fake and real raid chpsets:
>>> http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Hardware/sata.html
>>>
>>> Why using fakeraid at all is bad:
>>> http://thebs413.blogspot.com/2005/09/fake-raid-fraid-sucks-even-more-at.html
>>>
>>> MDM under linux is kernel raid that does not use a binary
>>> driver..however you don't want to do ANY software raid 5.
>> Thanks William,
>>
>> I am no expert on RAID, so you have opened my eyes to somethings I
>> wasn't aware of.
>>
>> I am considering disabling the onboard RAID in the BIOS and
>> re-installing CentOS and configuring the 4 drives as RAID 10 just to  
>> see
>> what the performance is like.
>>
>> Or I may purchase a card as you advise. Would I benefit from buying a
>> SCSI/or SAS card and drives for my requirements? Basically the main  
>> role
>> of the machine is to serve a ~600MB file via samba to 5 Windows XP  
>> cient
>> PC's on a gigabit network.
> 
> If all your doing is serving a single file to a handful of PCs then a  
> 2 drive mirror will be more then enough.

That is what I currently have setup on the old server, but it only has 
1GB ram and AMD Duron 1300MHz CPU.

The performance on the clients gets slower as the file size grows and 
now it has got very slow - hence the new server.

> 
> You should stick with the OS RAID though as the onboard RAID will  
> bring nothing but pain.

That is what I have read. So understood :-)

> 
> For sequential IO expect 60MB/s read and 40MB/s write (with the  
> drive's write cache enabled) per drive. Random IO is an order of  
> magnitude less.

Should that be OK for my needs or for the clients to be happy should I 
be wanting more? what figure should I be looking at?

> 
> -Ross

Sorry for all the questions and thanks for the help.

Stewart
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Ross Walker]

On Jan 11, 2009, at 12:49 PM, Rainer Duffner   
wrote:

>
> Am 11.01.2009 um 18:36 schrieb Ross Walker:
>>
>> If all your doing is serving a single file to a handful of PCs then a
>> 2 drive mirror will be more then enough.
>>
>
>
> Actually, he could put it on a swap-backed tmpfs and serve it directly
> from RAM.

That would end badly if the OS crashed...

For reads the whole file would end up in page cache right away anyways  
and would get re-cached right after a write.

> Seeing that he has 4GB of it...
>
> If it's really only a single file, he could serve it via NGINX ;-)

NGINX? I'll have to google that one...

-Ross

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Ross Walker]

On Jan 11, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Stewart Williams   
wrote:

> Ross Walker wrote:
>> On Jan 11, 2009, at 10:13 AM, Stewart Williams
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> William Warren wrote:
 Stewart Williams wrote:
> I have just purchased an HP ProLiant HP ML110 G5 server and
> install ed
> CentOS 5.2 x86_64 on it.
>
> It has the following spec:
>
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 3065  @ 2.33GHz
> 4GB ECC memory
> 4 x 250GB SATA hard disks running at 1.5GB/s
>
> Onboard RAID controller is enabled but at the moment I have used
> mdadm
> to configure the array.
>
> RAID bus controller: Intel Corporation 82801 SATA RAID Controller
>
> For a simple striped array I ran:
>
> # mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdb1 /
> dev/sdc1
> # mke2fs -j /dev/md0
> # mount -t ext3 /dev/md0 /mnt
>
> Attached are the results of 2 bonnie++ tests I made to test the
> performance:
>
> # bonnie++ -s 256m -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>
> and
>
> # bonnie++ -s 1g -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>
> I also tried 3 of the drives in a RAID 5 setup with gave similar
> results.
>
> Is it me or are the results poor?
>
> Is this the best I can expect from the hardware or is something
> wrong?
>
> I would appreciate any advice or possible tweaks I can make to the
> system to make the performance better.
>
> The block I/O is the thing that concerns me as mostly I am  
> serving a
> 650MB file via samba to 5 clients and I think this is where I need
> the
> speed.
>
> Plus I am hoping to run some virtualised guests on it eventually,
> but
> nothing too heavy.
>
> ---
> ---
> --
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 That onbard raid is fakeraid..so when you dialup raid 5 you
 effectivly
 put hte hdd's in pio mode since ALL data has to be routed through
 your
 cpu.  Please get a raid card from HP or go get a 3ware card so you
 ahve
 real hardware raid.

 fake and real raid chpsets:
 http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Hardware/sata.html

 Why using fakeraid at all is bad:
 http://thebs413.blogspot.com/2005/09/fake-raid-fraid-sucks-even-more-at.html

 MDM under linux is kernel raid that does not use a binary
 driver..however you don't want to do ANY software raid 5.
>>> Thanks William,
>>>
>>> I am no expert on RAID, so you have opened my eyes to somethings I
>>> wasn't aware of.
>>>
>>> I am considering disabling the onboard RAID in the BIOS and
>>> re-installing CentOS and configuring the 4 drives as RAID 10 just to
>>> see
>>> what the performance is like.
>>>
>>> Or I may purchase a card as you advise. Would I benefit from  
>>> buying a
>>> SCSI/or SAS card and drives for my requirements? Basically the main
>>> role
>>> of the machine is to serve a ~600MB file via samba to 5 Windows XP
>>> cient
>>> PC's on a gigabit network.
>>
>> If all your doing is serving a single file to a handful of PCs then a
>> 2 drive mirror will be more then enough.
>
> That is what I currently have setup on the old server, but it only has
> 1GB ram and AMD Duron 1300MHz CPU.
>
> The performance on the clients gets slower as the file size grows and
> now it has got very slow - hence the new server.

Sounds like the file is getting more and more fragmented and the io is  
turning into random io over it.

Once a week disable access to the file, copy it to a new name then  
move it back over the top of the old one and that'll defrag it.

>> You should stick with the OS RAID though as the onboard RAID will
>> bring nothing but pain.
>
> That is what I have read. So understood :-)
>
>>
>> For sequential IO expect 60MB/s read and 40MB/s write (with the
>> drive's write cache enabled) per drive. Random IO is an order of
>> magnitude less.
>
> Should that be OK for my needs or for the clients to be happy should I
> be wanting more? what figure should I be looking at?

That's what to expect with standard file io operations (4k) some apps  
use larger ios so they will get better throughput (backups 64k, video  
editing 128k+) which can max the network throughput (115MB/s on Gbe).

>>
> Sorry for all the questions and thanks for the

Not a problem, that's what the lists are for!

-Ross

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Dealing with 800x480 displays

[Kwan Lowe]

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Robert Moskowitz  wrote:
> Has anyone worked around the display size limit on units like the ASUS
> eee?  They list a 800x480 display resolution, and I have encountered
> Gnome dialogs that require at least 800x600 to see the  button on
> the bottom of the panel.

There's also the MatchBox window manager project. The goal is to
create a wm for smaller displays (mobile devices, watches, etc.).

http://matchbox-project.org/documentation/manual/rational.html

I've not used it, but have noticed that Gnome in particular uses lots
of screen real-estate versus other WMs.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[John R Pierce]

Stewart Williams wrote:
> John R Pierce wrote:
>   
>> Stewart Williams wrote:
>> 
>>> The block I/O is the thing that concerns me as mostly I am serving a 
>>> 650MB file via samba to 5 clients and I think this is where I need the 
>>> speed.
>>>   
>> is this a sequential or random access application thats using this 
>> file?   is it read only/mostly, or is it random update?
>> 
>
> I'm not sure, how can I find this out?
>   

well, what is the nature of the application thats using this file? 
do you really mean just a single 650MB (sub 1GB) file?
is this something like a quickbooks file? (thats kind of what it sounds 
like from your other answers).

given what you have now, and what information we've been given, I would

A) disable BIOS raid, configuring it for JBOD w/ ACHI enabled
B) mdadm mirror disks 0 and 1, and put the OS on that
C) mdadm mirror disks 2 and 3, and put your shared SMB filesystem on 
that



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Guidelines for CentOS Mailing List posts

[David . Mackintosh]

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 05:35:38PM +, Vandaman wrote:
 
> What is your contribution to the topic? Or are you one of those who 
> has been top-posting and posting in html?

Hmmm... I appear to be:

 - posting in non-HTML text
 - bottom posting
 - trimming

I presume that if you are truely interested in my transgressions, ten
minutes with google will provide you with ample evidence for a
summary execution.

I merely found it ironic that you concluded a nag about people's
behavior on a mailing list by saying it wasn't the time to be
complaining about people's behavior on a mailing list.

True, it would have been MORE ironic if your rant had been in HTML,
but I guess that's too much to hope for.

Would you like the joke explained to you in more detail?

-- 
 /\oo/\
/ /()\ \ David Mackintosh | 
 d...@xdroop.com  | http://www.xdroop.com


pgp1yhfcFLAXs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Les Mikesell]

Stewart Williams wrote:
>
> I am no expert on RAID, so you have opened my eyes to somethings I 
> wasn't aware of.
> 
> I am considering disabling the onboard RAID in the BIOS and 
> re-installing CentOS and configuring the 4 drives as RAID 10 just to see 
> what the performance is like.

Yes, unless you have an expensive hardware raid with its own cpu and 
buffers on board, software raid 1 or 10 is better.  I like to stick to 
raid1 where practical size-wise so that you can recover data from any 
single disk and you can keep seeks on different filesystems from 
competing with each other.

> Or I may purchase a card as you advise. Would I benefit from buying a 
> SCSI/or SAS card and drives for my requirements? Basically the main role 
> of the machine is to serve a ~600MB file via samba to 5 Windows XP cient 
> PC's on a gigabit network.

After the 1st read, that should live entirely in RAM cache and the speed 
you can serve it won't be limited to the underlying disk except for 
writes that eventually have to flush back.  At least until you consume 
the RAM doing something else.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Guidelines for CentOS Mailing List posts

[Vandaman]

David Mackintosh wrote:

> 
> Would you like the joke explained to you in more detail?
> 

What time will your mummy come home. You should not be playing 
on a mailing list like this. :-) 

We have the serious business of CentOS to talk about.

Regards, 
Vandaman.


  

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Stewart Williams]

John R Pierce wrote:
> Stewart Williams wrote:
>> John R Pierce wrote:
>>   
>>> Stewart Williams wrote:
>>> 
 The block I/O is the thing that concerns me as mostly I am serving a 
 650MB file via samba to 5 clients and I think this is where I need the 
 speed.
   
>>> is this a sequential or random access application thats using this 
>>> file?   is it read only/mostly, or is it random update?
>>> 
>> I'm not sure, how can I find this out?
>>   
> 
> well, what is the nature of the application thats using this file? 
> do you really mean just a single 650MB (sub 1GB) file?
> is this something like a quickbooks file? (thats kind of what it sounds 
> like from your other answers).

It is indeed a quickbooks file. The file is currently at 645MB and grows 
about 20MB per week.

> given what you have now, and what information we've been given, I would
> 
> A) disable BIOS raid, configuring it for JBOD w/ ACHI enabled
> B) mdadm mirror disks 0 and 1, and put the OS on that
> C) mdadm mirror disks 2 and 3, and put your shared SMB filesystem on 
> that

Is that a better choice than RAID 1+0?




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Rob Kampen]

Stewart Williams wrote:

John R Pierce wrote:
  

Stewart Williams wrote:


John R Pierce wrote:
  
  

Stewart Williams wrote:


The block I/O is the thing that concerns me as mostly I am serving a 
650MB file via samba to 5 clients and I think this is where I need the 
speed.
  
  
is this a sequential or random access application thats using this 
file?   is it read only/mostly, or is it random update?



I'm not sure, how can I find this out?
  
  
well, what is the nature of the application thats using this file? 
do you really mean just a single 650MB (sub 1GB) file?
is this something like a quickbooks file? (thats kind of what it sounds 
like from your other answers).



It is indeed a quickbooks file. The file is currently at 645MB and grows 
about 20MB per week.


  

given what you have now, and what information we've been given, I would

A) disable BIOS raid, configuring it for JBOD w/ ACHI enabled
B) mdadm mirror disks 0 and 1, and put the OS on that
C) mdadm mirror disks 2 and 3, and put your shared SMB filesystem on 
that



Is that a better choice than RAID 1+0?




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
  
Hi, I too run quickbooks (2007) and offer the following scenario - 5 
user licences (actually 2 times three user package were purchased).
Previously I used version 2004 and this allows much better sharing of 
the data file, unfortunately I got sucked into an upgrade that in 
reality was a significant downgrade!! Anyway - my set-up:-/
For multiple simultaneous users, one machine has to be the defacto 
"server", i.e. it opens the file and shares access to the underlying 
data store on behalf of other users. (why they can't develop a decent 
client server product defies understanding).
So what I have done is establish a W2K client running in virtualbox 
(thanks to Sun for keeping this product FOSS). This client accesses the 
data file from my main server (running a HW based raid 5  disk array). I 
have lots of ram on my virtual box client, and allocate sufficient to 
ensure all is in ram. Thus far the system has been very robust and no 
data loss. I keep this client running in share mode 24x7 and only go 
single user to create backups. Unfortunately Quickbooks does not provide 
an automated method of backing up (another gross over-sight).


All the other users (on Windoze XP at this time) access the virtualbox 
W2K for the data file.
Performance while not stellar is adequate, my file is only 10% the size 
of yours, but it runs basically from ram, and only save writes
Apparently Quickbooks do offer more expensive products that may work 
better from a client server perspective but only on Windoze and MAC, but 
for my small business the cost is WAY TOO HIGH and I love FOSS and Linux.


I must say, it took me many dozens of hours to get this working properly 
(mostly due to my ignorance, and Quickbooks poor design), so I hope this 
may assist you.
begin:vcard
fn:Rob Kampen
n:Kampen;Rob
email;internet:rkam...@kampensonline.com
tel;home:407-876-4854
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Stewart Williams]

Stewart Williams wrote:
> John R Pierce wrote:
>> Stewart Williams wrote:
>>> I have just purchased an HP ProLiant HP ML110 G5 server and install ed 
>>> CentOS 5.2 x86_64 on it.
>>>
>>> It has the following spec:
>>>
>>> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 3065  @ 2.33GHz
>>> 4GB ECC memory
>>> 4 x 250GB SATA hard disks running at 1.5GB/s
>>>
>>> Onboard RAID controller is enabled but at the moment I have used mdadm 
>>> to configure the array.
>>>
>>> RAID bus controller: Intel Corporation 82801 SATA RAID Controller
>>>
>> that is essentially desktop grade disk IO
>>
>>
>>> For a simple striped array I ran:
>>>
>>> # mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
>>> # mke2fs -j /dev/md0
>>> # mount -t ext3 /dev/md0 /mnt
>>>
>>> Attached are the results of 2 bonnie++ tests I made to test the 
>>> performance:
>>>
>>> # bonnie++ -s 256m -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> # bonnie++ -s 1g -d /mnt -u 0 -r 0
>>>
>>> I also tried 3 of the drives in a RAID 5 setup with gave similar results.
>>>
>>> Is it me or are the results poor?
>>>
>>> Is this the best I can expect from the hardware or is something wrong?
>>>
>>> I would appreciate any advice or possible tweaks I can make to the 
>>> system to make the performance better.
>>>
>>> The block I/O is the thing that concerns me as mostly I am serving a 
>>> 650MB file via samba to 5 clients and I think this is where I need the 
>>> speed.
>> is this a sequential or random access application thats using this 
>> file?   is it read only/mostly, or is it random update?
> 
> I'm not sure, how can I find this out?
> 
>> its rather hard to read your bonnie output logs as they aren't very 
>> columnar. but it appears the sequetial read speed at least is really high.
>>
>> i'm seeing 55MB/sec random(block) and 1.4GB/sec sequential reads on the 
>> 1GB file,
> 
> Correct.
> 
>> so I dunno what your issues are...   of course, a 1GB file 
>> sits entirely in the system cache assuming a reasonable amount of 
>> otherwise idle memory
> 
> I'm not sure whether the performance would suffice as I've not tried 
> putting it in production.
> 
> I am going to benchmark the old server (currently in production) that 
> this is replacing.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Stewart

I've ran the same bonnie++ test on my old server using a 1GB file.

The machine has only 1GB ram and 2 IDE ATA100 hard disks in a RAID 1 
mirror on seperate IDE channels on the motherboard.

I got about 38MB/s write w/ 13% CPU and  80MB/s read w/ 97% CPU. Also if 
I watch `top` with only one user, and run a quick-report in quickbooks 
on a stock item, the iowait is about 50% and the cached ram fills to 
around 200-300MB. So with 5 users I expect it that to go up quite 
dramatically.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Stewart Williams]

Hi Rob,

Rob Kampen wrote:
> Hi, I too run quickbooks (2007) and offer the following scenario - 5 
> user licences (actually 2 times three user package were purchased).
> Previously I used version 2004 and this allows much better sharing of 
> the data file, unfortunately I got sucked into an upgrade that in 
> reality was a significant downgrade!!

Yeah I know exactly what you mean. We are currently on 2005 Pro and got 
"sucked into" upgrading from 2003 Pro, which was working fine for us; 
but 2005 did have a couple of features we liked the sound of. Little did 
we know that 2005 was a zillion times slower than 2003 (in our 
experience) and once you convert your data file and work with it for a 
week or so, adding information, there is no way back and the data you've 
added since is too precious to loose, that you can't afford to revert to 
a week old backup. If only the files were version independent.

> Anyway - my set-up:-/
> For multiple simultaneous users, one machine has to be the defacto 
> "server", i.e. it opens the file and shares access to the underlying 
> data store on behalf of other users. (why they can't develop a decent 
> client server product defies understanding).

I've always been annoyed by this too, as it has never really been made 
into a proper networkable application. They also say that the company 
file should never reach to a size greater than 125MB. Ha! no chance.

> So what I have done is establish a W2K client running in virtualbox 
> (thanks to Sun for keeping this product FOSS). This client accesses the 
> data file from my main server (running a HW based raid 5  disk array). I 
> have lots of ram on my virtual box client, and allocate sufficient to 
> ensure all is in ram. Thus far the system has been very robust and no 
> data loss. I keep this client running in share mode 24x7 and only go 
> single user to create backups. Unfortunately Quickbooks does not provide 
> an automated method of backing up (another gross over-sight).
> 

I can't really see the benefit in this, samba shares the company file 
just as well as Windows as long as you configure the permissions 
correctly and set oplock settings in smb.conf

That said, I have read, when spending endless hours googling for tips on 
running QB from a server, that it can be best to serve it from a Windows 
box and intuit only supports that method.

> All the other users (on Windoze XP at this time) access the virtualbox 
> W2K for the data file.
> Performance while not stellar is adequate, my file is only 10% the size 
> of yours, but it runs basically from ram, and only save writes
> Apparently Quickbooks do offer more expensive products that may work 
> better from a client server perspective but only on Windoze and MAC, but 
> for my small business the cost is WAY TOO HIGH and I love FOSS and Linux.

I think the performance difference would be far worse in this 
configuration with the size of our file.

> I must say, it took me many dozens of hours to get this working properly 
> (mostly due to my ignorance, and Quickbooks poor design), so I hope this 
> may assist you.

Thanks for your reply Rob.

It's a shame that there are these issues, as it's an excellent program 
and suit's our needs perfectly in every other way than that mentioned.

And like you, I'd rather use FOSS and GNU/Linux. And that's not through 
cost, but through choice!

Stewart
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Poor RAID performance new Xeon server?

[Rob Kampen]

Hi Stuart

Stewart Williams wrote:

Hi Rob,

Rob Kampen wrote:
  
Hi, I too run quickbooks (2007) and offer the following scenario - 5 
user licences (actually 2 times three user package were purchased).
Previously I used version 2004 and this allows much better sharing of 
the data file, unfortunately I got sucked into an upgrade that in 
reality was a significant downgrade!!



Yeah I know exactly what you mean. We are currently on 2005 Pro and got 
"sucked into" upgrading from 2003 Pro, which was working fine for us; 
but 2005 did have a couple of features we liked the sound of. Little did 
we know that 2005 was a zillion times slower than 2003 (in our 
experience) and once you convert your data file and work with it for a 
week or so, adding information, there is no way back and the data you've 
added since is too precious to loose, that you can't afford to revert to 
a week old backup. If only the files were version independent.
  

You too, sounds exactly like what happened to me.
  

Anyway - my set-up:-/
For multiple simultaneous users, one machine has to be the defacto 
"server", i.e. it opens the file and shares access to the underlying 
data store on behalf of other users. (why they can't develop a decent 
client server product defies understanding).



I've always been annoyed by this too, as it has never really been made 
into a proper networkable application. They also say that the company 
file should never reach to a size greater than 125MB. Ha! no chance.


  
So what I have done is establish a W2K client running in virtualbox 
(thanks to Sun for keeping this product FOSS). This client accesses the 
data file from my main server (running a HW based raid 5  disk array). I 
have lots of ram on my virtual box client, and allocate sufficient to 
ensure all is in ram. Thus far the system has been very robust and no 
data loss. I keep this client running in share mode 24x7 and only go 
single user to create backups. Unfortunately Quickbooks does not provide 
an automated method of backing up (another gross over-sight).





I can't really see the benefit in this, samba shares the company file 
just as well as Windows as long as you configure the permissions 
correctly and set oplock settings in smb.conf


That said, I have read, when spending endless hours googling for tips on 
running QB from a server, that it can be best to serve it from a Windows 
box and intuit only supports that method.


  
All the other users (on Windoze XP at this time) access the virtualbox 
W2K for the data file.
Performance while not stellar is adequate, my file is only 10% the size 
of yours, but it runs basically from ram, and only save writes
Apparently Quickbooks do offer more expensive products that may work 
better from a client server perspective but only on Windoze and MAC, but 
for my small business the cost is WAY TOO HIGH and I love FOSS and Linux.



I think the performance difference would be far worse in this 
configuration with the size of our file.


  
I must say, it took me many dozens of hours to get this working properly 
(mostly due to my ignorance, and Quickbooks poor design), so I hope this 
may assist you.



Thanks for your reply Rob.

It's a shame that there are these issues, as it's an excellent program 
and suit's our needs perfectly in every other way than that mentioned.


And like you, I'd rather use FOSS and GNU/Linux. And that's not through 
cost, but through choice!


Stewart
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
  
I too used the samba share method with QB2004 as this allowed any of the 
machines to access the file in multi-user mode, what's more I could do 
automatic back-ups of the samba file system each night and have a 
working backup.
However QB2007 does not allow this at all, only a single user could open 
the file and the other users had to access via that machine, hence the 
elaborate scheme I now use.
My memory fails me as to all the convoluted things I tried, to get it 
working like it did under QB2004, I was not fit to live with for about a 
week when this hit around Christmas 2006.
QB does my payroll as well and while not the cheapest, it just works. I 
only need and use the basic functions of QB.
Just be very careful if you upgrade again, I got sucked in as I use 
turbo-tax and they only allow data transfer from QB <= three years old.
From now on I'll just manually do the turbo-tax data input learned 
the hard way.
I was MD of a UK based software development company, also spent many 
years in a large corporation heading IT strategy and have seen the 
issues of proprietary software vs FOSS, there's no going back for me.

Hope you get something that works ok for your situation.
I note that at 20Mb per week growth, you will probably have other issues 
heading your way real soon.
begin:vcard
fn:Rob Kampen
n:Kampen;Rob
email;internet:rkam...@kampensonli

Re: [CentOS] Dealing with 800x480 displays

[Adam Tauno Williams]

> I've not used it, but have noticed that Gnome in particular uses lots
> of screen real-estate versus other WMs.

"GNOME" is not a window manager.  The real-estate required by various
applications and dialogs won't change by switching window managers; all
window managers do is decorate windows.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Creating an iso image of a audio CD with K3B

[Robert Moskowitz]

Can you do this?  I have not found the options to get this to happen.

So far I have seen how to read the Audio CD and make a directory of WAV 
files with a control file for later burning to CD, but I want an iso 
image that I can archive and burn audio CDs to use as they get used up.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter

[Robert Moskowitz]

John wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: centos-boun...@centos.org 
>> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Angenendt
>> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 5:13 AM
>> To: centos@centos.org
>> Subject: Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter
>>
>> Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>> 
>>> What is there available for Centos?  
>>>   
>> ffmpeg, mencoder.
>>
>> 
>>> Now that Audacity is no longer available to us...
>>>   
>> Have you tried helping to resolve that issue with rpmforge?
>>
>> Ralph
>> 
> --
> This is the install process for Audacity.
> Ccrma = planet ccrma 
>   

Can you provide the content of a ccrma.repo file please?

> rf = rpmforge
>
> audacity-1.3.5-0.5.beta.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
> compat-wxGTK26-2.6.4-2.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
> jack-audio-connection-kit-0.102.20-3.0.el5.i386.rpm
> libfreebob-1.0.0-3.0.el5.i386.rpm
> libsamplerate-0.1.2-1.2.el5.rf.i386.rpm
> soundtouch-1.3.1-6.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
> soundtouch-devel-1.3.1-6.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
> wxGTK-2.8.9-1.el5.rf.i386.rpm
>
> Ralph, as I understood it the RPMForge Repo was not going to be fixed as I
> think Dag posted weeks ago on it. This is the install process I done a a
> clients machine after I posted to the list about the problem and was told of
> the rpms deps being in the Planet CCRMA Repo and a few others. BTW to that
> Poster Thanks
>
> As conversion from Wave to MP3 and back seems of great interest is there any
> possobility to get Audacity and the Dependancies in the Extras Repo?
>
> JohnStanley
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>   
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Dealing with 800x480 displays

[Robert Moskowitz]

Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Sunday 11 January 2009 13:18:36 Kwan Lowe wrote:
>   
>> Not a fix, but holding down the ALT key on a few window managers will allow
>> moving the window without the title bar being present.
>>
>> 
> Also, if you are running a distrubution with KDE4, there is  'laptop' theme 
> that minimises decorations and gives you the greates possible display space.  
> Oddly enough, I find that I can reduce the fonts and still read with much 
> greater comfort than I would have expected at that size.
>
> All these help, but you do still need the Alt+grab and move a window, 
> sometimes.

OK, got the Alt+grab.  Learned something new today.

Though I am going to work on the Virtual settings as well...


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter

[Mark Pryor]

Robert,


--- On Sun, 1/11/09, Robert Moskowitz  wrote:

> From: Robert Moskowitz 
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter
> To: "CentOS mailing list" 
> Date: Sunday, January 11, 2009, 4:53 PM
> John wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: centos-boun...@centos.org 
> >> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of
> Ralph Angenendt
> >> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 5:13 AM
> >> To: centos@centos.org
> >> Subject: Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter
> >>
> >> Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> >> 
> >>> What is there available for Centos?  
>
> > This is the install process for Audacity.
> > Ccrma = planet ccrma 
> >   
> 
> Can you provide the content of a ccrma.repo file please?
> 
> > rf = rpmforge
> >
> > audacity-1.3.5-0.5.beta.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
> > compat-wxGTK26-2.6.4-2.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
> > jack-audio-connection-kit-0.102.20-3.0.el5.i386.rpm
> > libfreebob-1.0.0-3.0.el5.i386.rpm
> > libsamplerate-0.1.2-1.2.el5.rf.i386.rpm
> > soundtouch-1.3.1-6.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
> > soundtouch-devel-1.3.1-6.el5.ccrma.i386.rpm
> > wxGTK-2.8.9-1.el5.rf.i386.rpm
> >

go here for C5 packages
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/installplanetcentosfive.html

-- 
Mark


  
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Dealing with 800x480 displays

[Kwan Lowe]

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Adam Tauno Williams
 wrote:
>> I've not used it, but have noticed that Gnome in particular uses lots
>> of screen real-estate versus other WMs.
>
> "GNOME" is not a window manager.  The real-estate required by various
> applications and dialogs won't change by switching window managers; all
> window managers do is decorate windows.

Educate yourself:
http://tuxtraining.com/2008/12/20/how-to-best-utilize-screen-real-estate-in-gnome

Window managers do a lot more than decorate windows. The toolbars, the
icon sets, the layout and placement of widgets "brands" the particular
window manager. And sure, if you want to be pedantic, the Gnome
desktop is more than the window manager.

Since this is a CentOS list, compare the default "Gnome" desktop
(i.e., choose Gnome from the display manager) and the default setting
has a couple toolbars, large window decorations, large fonts, etc.. On
my 24" monitor it won't make much difference, but on my 1280x800
laptop it's wasteful.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [OT] Remote control of a WinXP machine from a Linux host

[Scott Silva]

on 1-9-2009 12:41 PM Marko Vojinovic spake the following:
> Sorry for an off topic post, but a lot of you folks are sysadmins here or 
> there, and just might have a suggestion... ;-)
> 
> I have a WinXP machine that is to be unattended for a period of 3 years (yes, 
> I know, it sounds ridiculous, but still...). What I need is remote access to 
> it to perform regular system maintenance, virus cleanups, occasional software 
> installations, reboots, config changes, etc.
> 
> Of course, rdesktop would do it, or vnc server or something else. The problem 
> is that this machine is behind a NAT, and I cannot access it remotely from 
> outside (and I need access from whereever on the planet I may happen to be).
> 
> Basically, I need to setup some type of ssh tunnelling from XP (machine A) to 
> my static-IP-24/7-high-bandwidth-CentOS server (machine B) and then further 
> to my laptop (machine C, Fedora 10) located elsewhere (possibly behind 
> another NAT, I can't know in advance). I have root access for all three 
> machines (A, B and C). Of course, all three are on different LANs.
> 
> However, I have never done anything like this before, so I wonder what is the 
> best method of creating such a setup?
> 
> One of my ideas was to make some script on A which would connect to B once 
> every 15 minutes or so, look for a flagfile, and if present, initiate 
> connection with C directly or through B if necessary. That means, if I want 
> access from C to A, I ssh from C to B and create a flagfile, wait 15 minutes 
> or so, and a rdesktop (or vnc or other) appears on my laptop. In theory.
> 
> Or is there some other XP-tool that might do what I want out of the box? 
> However, it need be absolutely automatic, there will be nobody around to do 
> anything locally on A once I leave it.
> 
> Another idea I had was to have machine A running as a virtual machine on a 
> CentOS host (vmware or such would suffice). Then I could easily configure the 
> above A-to-B-to-C scenario, shutdown the virtual A, pull its hard disk file 
> to C, start it locally, perform maintenance, push it back to host A and run 
> it again as a vm. But this is highly complicated, takes too much time and 
> bandwidth, so I hope something simpler is available.
> 
> Yet another idea is to ask A's ISP to provide a static IP for that machine, 
> or 
> to forward some available port to A, which could be used by rdesktop in some 
> customized fashion. But the ISP may refuse such requests, and I need a robust 
> solution.
> 
> Yet even another idea is to put another CentOS machine (D) between A and A's 
> ISP (create a local LAN). Then initiate ssh -X connection from C to D 
> (somehow, via flagfile scenario or such), and then rdesktop from D to A over 
> a local LAN.
> 
> The main problem is NAT, if machine A had a world-accessible IP, I would just 
> rdesktop from C to A, but alas, it doesn't... :-(
> 
> Any suggestions about the best way of doing this?
> 
> Thanks, :-)
> Marko
There is an application based on VNC called teamviewer that can be set to
start automatically and points to a central server so that you can always find
the system. It crosses NAT easily and can be set with a fixed password.

Maybe it will help you.



-- 
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Guidelines for CentOS Mailing List posts

[Scott Silva]

on 1-11-2009 9:49 AM Jim Perrin spake the following:
> *Whut do U mean? I don't get it lol.*
> 
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:57 PM,
>   > wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:14:22AM +, Vandaman wrote:
>>
>>> Its not the time to be nannying people
>>> over how to behave on mailing list.
>>
>> 
>>
ROTFLMAO!

+1 for Jim!


-- 
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Guidelines for CentOS Mailing List posts

[Ross Walker]

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Vandaman  wrote:
> David Mackintosh wrote:
>
>> 
>> Would you like the joke explained to you in more detail?
>>
>
> What time will your mummy come home. You should not be playing
> on a mailing list like this. :-)
>
> We have the serious business of CentOS to talk about.

You must chill, you must chill.

This is just a mailing list, one of millions, not the UN General Assembly.

-Ross
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [OT] Remote control of a WinXP machine from a Linux host

[Christopher Chan]

> the connection must be initiated from C's side to A. This simply cannot work 
> simultaneously, so I tried to make use of my public server B which can be 
> used as a "bridge" between A and C. So, A connects to B, C connects to B, and 
> then A and C communicate. Roughly speaking...
> 
> That was my initial idea, but seems too complicated to work out, so I asked 
> for a possible easier alternative. :-)
> 

Easy. John R Pierce's idea works no problem. Just do it the other way 
round for A.

A will run ssh (or putty) and connect to B with a ssh key and do port 
forwarding.

So instead of ssh -L as suggested by John, do the equivalent of ssh -R on A.

Then your problem will become: how do I secure B:3389 against 
unauthorized connections. Again, ssh (or putty) on C -> B to the rescue.

Back to John's suggestion. C will do ssh -L and B will firewall all 
access to port 3389 except from localhost.


  A ssh -R3389(or whateverA):localhost:3389
  |
  |
\|/

  B

/|\
  |
  |
  C -L3389(or whateverB):localhost:3389(or whateverA)

rdesktop or Remote Desktop on C connections to localhost port 3389 (or 
whateverB)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter

[Robert]

Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> John wrote:
>   
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: centos-boun...@centos.org 
>>> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Angenendt
>>> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 5:13 AM
>>> To: centos@centos.org
>>> Subject: Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter
>>>
>>> Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>> 
>>>   
 What is there available for Centos?  
 


If you can tolerate a CLI solution, mpg123 will do the conversion, 
assuming you live long enough to get the options right.  There is a 
script at http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-212079.html that 
takes care of the options, calling mpg123 for every mp3 file in a directory.


-- 
It is now 10:36:06 PM Sun, Jan 11 -- 8 days, 12 hours, 23 minutes and 54 
seconds until the coronation of The Messiah, HRH King Barack Hussein 
Obamau.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Creating an iso image of a audio CD with K3B

[Jay Leafey]

Robert Moskowitz wrote:

Can you do this?  I have not found the options to get this to happen.

So far I have seen how to read the Audio CD and make a directory of WAV 
files with a control file for later burning to CD, but I want an iso 
image that I can archive and burn audio CDs to use as they get used up.




I think cdrdao will do what you want.  It's in the base repository, so 
no extra repos needed.


--
Jay Leafey - Memphis, TN
jay.lea...@mindless.com


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] After BIND update owner changed and restart failed

[German Andres Pulido]

On Saturday 10 January 2009 9:37:43 pm Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> I just applied the BIND updates.
>
> Then I fixed the one file that had a second include of named.ca
> (remembered that from last time) and did a 'service named restart', and
> it failed.  In messages I found:
>
> Jan 10 21:31:17 z9m9z named[31001]: loading configuration from
> '/etc/named.conf'
> Jan 10 21:31:17 z9m9z named[31001]: /etc/named.conf:11: open:
> /etc/named.acl: permission denied
> Jan 10 21:31:17 z9m9z named[31001]: loading configuration: permission
> denied Jan 10 21:31:17 z9m9z named[31001]: exiting (due to fatal error)
>
>
> Oh, I remember this from the last update...  So off to
> /var/named/chroot/etc and do a 'chown named:named *' then named started.
>
> This apparent changing of file ownership in installing a new set of bind
> updates so that named cannot access the files seems like something is
> broken somewhere.
>

Hi!

This is really strange, I run two different servers with Centos 5.2 and the 
bind provided by centos, and after aplying the latest bind updates, the 
service restarted with no issues at all, so it seems the updates are not 
broken for everybody.


Cordialmente,


GERMAN ANDRES PULIDO F.
Ingeniero de Proyectos
GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY SERVICES - GTS S.A.
-
Tel: (571) 658 34 10 ext 110
Carrera 7b No. 123-46
Bogotá-Colombia
Sitio Web: www.gtscolombia.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter

[John]

> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org 
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Robert Moskowitz
> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 7:54 PM
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter
> 
> John wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: centos-boun...@centos.org 
> >> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Angenendt
> >> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 5:13 AM
> >> To: centos@centos.org
> >> Subject: Re: [CentOS] mp3 to wav converter



> Can you provide the content of a ccrma.repo file please?

http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/installplanetcentosfive.html

Although I manually installed them. Didn't use the yum repo config file from
there because this was a trial and error type of install to make sure my
client liked it.
You should be able to just do yum install audacity --enablerepo=*\ccrma
after the repo install.


rpm -Uvh
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/mirror/centos/linux/planetccrma/5/i386
/planetccrma-repo-1.1-1.el5.ccrma.noarch.rpm




JohnStanley

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos