Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 bridging problem.

[Rafał Radecki]

ip route show
192.168.2.0/24 dev vmbr0  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.2.203
193.218.152.0/24 dev vmbr0  proto kernel  scope link  src 193.218.152.219
10.20.0.0/16 dev vmbr20  proto kernel  scope link  src 10.20.0.108
169.254.0.0/16 dev vmbr0  scope link  metric 1003
169.254.0.0/16 dev vmbr20  scope link  metric 1006
default via 193.218.152.1 dev vmbr0

ip addr show
1: lo:  mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
inet6 ::1/128 scope host
   valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
2: eth0:  mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast
state UNKNOWN qlen 1000
link/ether 00:25:22:0d:c2:2a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet6 fe80::225:22ff:fe0d:c22a/64 scope link
   valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
3: vmbr0:  mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue
state UNKNOWN
link/ether 00:25:22:0d:c2:2a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 193.218.152.219/24 brd 193.218.152.255 scope global vmbr0
inet 192.168.2.203/24 brd 192.168.2.255 scope global vmbr0:1
inet6 fe80::225:22ff:fe0d:c22a/64 scope link
   valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
4: venet0:  mtu 1500 qdisc
noqueue state UNKNOWN
link/void
inet6 fe80::1/128 scope link
   valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
5: eth0.20@eth0:  mtu 1500 qdisc
noqueue state UP
link/ether 00:25:22:0d:c2:2a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet6 fe80::225:22ff:fe0d:c22a/64 scope link
   valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
6: vmbr20:  mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue
state UNKNOWN
link/ether 00:25:22:0d:c2:2a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 10.20.0.108/16 brd 10.20.255.255 scope global vmbr20
inet6 fe80::225:22ff:fe0d:c22a/64 scope link
   valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

Any clue?

Best regards,
Rafal Radecki.

2012/6/25 Gordon Messmer :
> On 06/25/2012 05:22 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote:
>> Do you see an error in my configuration? Why is 10.20.0.108 not available?
>
> Not immediately, but check the output of the 'ip' tools.  ifconfig and
> route are deprecated:
>
> ip route show
> ip addr show
>
> Finally, see if there's any incoming traffic on the tagged interface:
>
> tcpdump -n -i eth0.20
>
> ... while you ping the assigned address.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

[CentOS] C-icap and squidclamav

[Nicole Hähnel]

Hi,

is anyone using c-icap and squidclamav on CentOS6 and can provide me 
some spec files to build rpms?

Thanks in advance!

Kind regards,
Nicole
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] kernel-debuginfo

[Tair Sabirgaliev]

Hi!

I'm trying systemtap on CentOS 6.2 kernel-2.6.32-220.23.1.el6.x86_64. My
problem is that I can't find kernel-debuginfo... corresponding to my kernel
version.

The systemtap docs suggest rebuilding the kernel from sources, but it looks
like I will have to install my own kernel, which is not acceptable on the
production machine.

Where can I find the debuginfo for the latest CentOS kernel?

Thanks!

-- 

Tair Sabirgaliev
"BEE Software" Ltd.

Republic of Kazakhstan, 01
Astana, Kabanbay Batyr str. 6/5, office 1

Tel.: +7 (7172) 92-64-99
Mob.: +7 (702) 2173359
e-mail: tair.sabirgal...@bee.kz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] RAID?

[Arun Khan]

On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 11:57 AM, hadi motamedi  wrote:
> Thank you very much for your reply. Sorry I meant software RAID to
> install the service of RAID how to enable and configure the RAID
> service.

The CentOS 6.2 default kernel and installation provide the mdadm (sw)
raid functionality.

The following 
contain the steps to configure mdadm RAID1.

The key thing would be to decide on the partition sizes and they
should be identical on both disks when you create the RAID device(s).

HTH,
-- Arun Khan
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] kernel-debuginfo

[Karanbir Singh]

On 06/26/2012 08:17 AM, Tair Sabirgaliev wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I'm trying systemtap on CentOS 6.2 kernel-2.6.32-220.23.1.el6.x86_64. My
> problem is that I can't find kernel-debuginfo... corresponding to my kernel
> version.
> 
> The systemtap docs suggest rebuilding the kernel from sources, but it looks
> like I will have to install my own kernel, which is not acceptable on the
> production machine.
> 
> Where can I find the debuginfo for the latest CentOS kernel?
> 
> Thanks!
> 

kernel-debug is included in the repos, you should be able to get that in
the same place as you got the kernel rpms from, using the same mechanism.

-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
ICQ: 2522219| Yahoo IM: z00dax  | Gtalk: z00dax
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 bridging problem.

[Rafał Radecki]

tcpdump -n -i eth0.20
shows that there is no traffic when I try to ping 10.20.0.108.

Best regards,
R.

2012/6/26 Rafał Radecki :
> ip route show
> 192.168.2.0/24 dev vmbr0  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.2.203
> 193.218.152.0/24 dev vmbr0  proto kernel  scope link  src 193.218.152.219
> 10.20.0.0/16 dev vmbr20  proto kernel  scope link  src 10.20.0.108
> 169.254.0.0/16 dev vmbr0  scope link  metric 1003
> 169.254.0.0/16 dev vmbr20  scope link  metric 1006
> default via 193.218.152.1 dev vmbr0
>
> ip addr show
> 1: lo:  mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN
>    link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
>    inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
>    inet6 ::1/128 scope host
>       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 2: eth0:  mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast
> state UNKNOWN qlen 1000
>    link/ether 00:25:22:0d:c2:2a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>    inet6 fe80::225:22ff:fe0d:c22a/64 scope link
>       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 3: vmbr0:  mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue
> state UNKNOWN
>    link/ether 00:25:22:0d:c2:2a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>    inet 193.218.152.219/24 brd 193.218.152.255 scope global vmbr0
>    inet 192.168.2.203/24 brd 192.168.2.255 scope global vmbr0:1
>    inet6 fe80::225:22ff:fe0d:c22a/64 scope link
>       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 4: venet0:  mtu 1500 qdisc
> noqueue state UNKNOWN
>    link/void
>    inet6 fe80::1/128 scope link
>       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 5: eth0.20@eth0:  mtu 1500 qdisc
> noqueue state UP
>    link/ether 00:25:22:0d:c2:2a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>    inet6 fe80::225:22ff:fe0d:c22a/64 scope link
>       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> 6: vmbr20:  mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue
> state UNKNOWN
>    link/ether 00:25:22:0d:c2:2a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>    inet 10.20.0.108/16 brd 10.20.255.255 scope global vmbr20
>    inet6 fe80::225:22ff:fe0d:c22a/64 scope link
>       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>
> Any clue?
>
> Best regards,
> Rafal Radecki.
>
> 2012/6/25 Gordon Messmer :
>> On 06/25/2012 05:22 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote:
>>> Do you see an error in my configuration? Why is 10.20.0.108 not available?
>>
>> Not immediately, but check the output of the 'ip' tools.  ifconfig and
>> route are deprecated:
>>
>> ip route show
>> ip addr show
>>
>> Finally, see if there's any incoming traffic on the tagged interface:
>>
>> tcpdump -n -i eth0.20
>>
>> ... while you ping the assigned address.
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] CentOS 6 bridging problem.

[John R Pierce]

On 06/26/12 12:47 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote:
> tcpdump -n -i eth0.20
> shows that there is no traffic when I try to ping 10.20.0.108.

try just tcpdump -n -i eth0

I am not sure you can packet sniff a virtual interface, more likely you 
can only sniff an actual physical interface.



-- 
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast


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

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 bridging problem.

[Rafał Radecki]

tcpdump -n -i eth0 icmp and src host 10.20.0.98

does not give any results when ping is invoked.

2012/6/26 John R Pierce :
> On 06/26/12 12:47 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote:
>> tcpdump -n -i eth0.20
>> shows that there is no traffic when I try to ping 10.20.0.108.
>
> try just tcpdump -n -i eth0
>
> I am not sure you can packet sniff a virtual interface, more likely you
> can only sniff an actual physical interface.
>
>
>
> --
> john r pierce                            N 37, W 122
> santa cruz ca                         mid-left coast
>
>
> ___
> 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] kernel-debuginfo

[Tair Sabirgaliev]

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:

> On 06/26/2012 08:17 AM, Tair Sabirgaliev wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'm trying systemtap on CentOS 6.2 kernel-2.6.32-220.23.1.el6.x86_64. My
> > problem is that I can't find kernel-debuginfo... corresponding to my
> kernel
> > version.
> >
> > The systemtap docs suggest rebuilding the kernel from sources, but it
> looks
> > like I will have to install my own kernel, which is not acceptable on the
> > production machine.
> >
> > Where can I find the debuginfo for the latest CentOS kernel?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
>
> kernel-debug is included in the repos, you should be able to get that in
> the same place as you got the kernel rpms from, using the same mechanism.
>

I'm very sorry, now I see it's there, but I can swear, it wasn't yesterday
:) Thanks!


> --
> Karanbir Singh
> +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
> ICQ: 2522219| Yahoo IM: z00dax  | Gtalk: z00dax
> GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



-- 
с уважением,

Таир Сабыргалиев
ТОО "BEE Software"

Республика Казахстан, 01
г.Астана, ул.Кабанбай батыра 6/5, офис 1
Тел.: +7 (7172) 92-64-99
Сот.: +7 (702) 2173359
e-mail: tair.sabirgal...@bee.kz

Tair Sabirgaliev
"BEE Software" Ltd.

Republic of Kazakhstan, 01
Astana, Kabanbay Batyr str. 6/5, office 1

Tel.: +7 (7172) 92-64-99
Mob.: +7 (702) 2173359
e-mail: tair.sabirgal...@bee.kz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] kernel-debuginfo

[Karanbir Singh]

On 06/26/2012 09:30 AM, Tair Sabirgaliev wrote:
>>> I'm trying systemtap on CentOS 6.2 kernel-2.6.32-220.23.1.el6.x86_64. My
>>> problem is that I can't find kernel-debuginfo... corresponding to my
>> kernel
>> kernel-debug is included in the repos, you should be able to get that in
>> the same place as you got the kernel rpms from, using the same mechanism.
> I'm very sorry, now I see it's there, but I can swear, it wasn't yesterday
> :) Thanks!

that is strange, the kernel-debug is released at the same time as the
kernels are . Also,

1) trim your replies to a mailing list
2) do you really need a 21 line signature for every email you post here ?

thanks

-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
ICQ: 2522219| Yahoo IM: z00dax  | Gtalk: z00dax
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[Rafał Radecki]

Hi all.

I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
would like to use in our server infrastructure.
The platform should have:
- possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
- at least 6 SATA ports;
- the possibility to use SAS disks;
- at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add another one;
- size of 2 or 3U;
- hot swap for disks.
We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
All servers will be based on CentOS5/6 :)

Best regards,
Rafal Radecki.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[John Doe]

From: Rafał Radecki 

> We are looking for something rather not expensive but reliable which has a 
> good support.


Something reliable, good and not expensive... hum... We all do!

But quite a few people recommend Supermicro.


JD

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[John R Pierce]

On 06/26/12 6:40 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote:
> - at least 6 SATA ports;
> - the possibility to use SAS disks;

if the system supports SAS disks, you don't need any SATA ports. you can 
plug SATA drives into SAS hotswap bays with most any SAS controllers.



-- 
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast


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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[m . roth]

Hi, Rafal,

Rafał Radecki wrote:
>
> I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
> searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
> would like to use in our server infrastructure.
> The platform should have:
> - possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
> - at least 6 SATA ports;
> - the possibility to use SAS disks;
> - at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add another
> one;
> - size of 2 or 3U;
> - hot swap for disks.
> We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
> basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
> and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
> to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
> of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
> Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
> something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
> All servers will be based on CentOS5/6 :)

Are you looking for full servers, or to build from parts? Someone just
recommended Supermicro; I'm not a big fan of them just now - we have a
good number of servers from Penguin Computing that use that, and the 64
core systems seem to have a lot of problems. Their 48 core servers seem
fine.

Btw, all the above are 1U, have 3 hot swap bays, and are all SATA. Their
support has been quite decent.

More expensive, Dell. An R41x, R61x, or, for heavy duty work, an R81x, are
really serious, the last two take eight, I think, SAS drives (the small
ones - 2.5"?). Their service is outstanding.

*All* of the above, both Dell and Penguin, have two NICs. All will take
well beyond 64G of memory (we have a Penguin Altus 1804 and a Dell R815, I
think it is, with (excuse me, my mind SEGVs every time I think of this)
250G of memory

Under no circumstances should you buy Sun/Oracle. Service... here in the
Washington, DC area, about a year and a half ago, it took me a MONTH to
get one server fixed w/ on-site support. They're there to make a profit -
I mean, how do you *think* Larry Ellison pays for his fighter jet, yacht,
and Hawaiian island? - *NOT* to sell you hardware and service that serves
your purposes.

 mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[Ken godee]

> From: Rafał Radecki 
>
>> We are looking for something rather not expensive but reliable which has a 
>> good support.
>

I'd add a few more things to the list.

Redundant power supplies
dual gig nics
"dual" quad core cpu's
raid support w/battery backed cache
remote management

pick up a 2nd(err..3rd) generation HP DL380G5

There's a lot of equipment around
and can be had for a good price.

Save enough to even pick up a second one
and keep on site for R&D and equipment/parts backup.






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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[m . roth]

m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Hi, Rafal,
>
> Rafał Radecki wrote:
>>
>> I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
>> searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
>> would like to use in our server infrastructure.
>> The platform should have:
>> - possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
>> - at least 6 SATA ports;
>> - the possibility to use SAS disks;
>> - at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add
>> another
>> one;
>> - size of 2 or 3U;
>> - hot swap for disks.
>> We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
>> basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
>> and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
>> to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
>> of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
>> Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
>> something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
>> All servers will be based on CentOS5/6 :)
>
> Are you looking for full servers, or to build from parts? Someone just
> recommended Supermicro; I'm not a big fan of them just now - we have a
> good number of servers from Penguin Computing that use that, and the 64
> core systems seem to have a lot of problems. Their 48 core servers seem
> fine.
>
> Btw, all the above are 1U, have 3 hot swap bays, and are all SATA. Their
> support has been quite decent.
>
> More expensive, Dell. An R41x, R61x, or, for heavy duty work, an R81x, are
> really serious, the last two take eight, I think, SAS drives (the small
> ones - 2.5"?). Their service is outstanding.
>
> *All* of the above, both Dell and Penguin, have two NICs. All will take
> well beyond 64G of memory (we have a Penguin Altus 1804 and a Dell R815, I
> think it is, with (excuse me, my mind SEGVs every time I think of this)
> 250G of memory
>
> Under no circumstances should you buy Sun/Oracle. Service... here in the
> Washington, DC area, about a year and a half ago, it took me a MONTH to
> get one server fixed w/ on-site support. They're there to make a profit -
> I mean, how do you *think* Larry Ellison pays for his fighter jet, yacht,
> and Hawaiian island? - *NOT* to sell you hardware and service that serves
> your purposes.

Sorry, need to follow myself up: *just* after I hit , I forgot the
obvious disclaimer: I have no idea what any of these folks are allowed to
export to Poland.

   mark

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

[CentOS] SNDS: root@ emails problem

[Gustavo Lacoste]

HI guys, I have a question related to outing  root@ emails  from my server.
 I have a centos server with sendmail and I have installed fail2ban and
iptables firewall recently.

The problem is: SNDS by hotmail (microsoft) has listed my server on RED
color claiming  sending SPAM from my server, but I completely secure but I
am quite sure you have blocked sending emails from the root account 'on the
server,  I tried it. I really not understand what the problem is, does
anyone know who might be happening? How I can finally stop sending emails
from my server root @?

Thanks in advance.


With Kind Regards,

 Gustavo A. Lacoste Z.
 Curacautín - Chile
 Skype: knxroot
 Msn & Gtalk: knx.root [at] gmail.com
 Home page: http://www.lacosox.org
- -
*Por favor, evite enviarme documentos adjuntos en formato Word o PowerPoint.
Lea http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.es.html*
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 bridging problem.

[Gordon Messmer]

On 06/26/2012 12:02 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote:
> Any clue?

Are you absolutely sure that the switch port connected to eth0 is 
configured to deliver tagged packets for VLAN 20 (and that the ping 
source is also on that VLAN)?


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

[CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 88, Issue 15

[centos-announce-request]

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ...@centos.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
centos-announce-ow...@centos.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. CESA-2012:1036 Moderate CentOS 5 postgresql Update (Johnny Hughes)
   2. CESA-2012:1037 Moderate CentOS 5 postgresql84 Update
  (Johnny Hughes)


--

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:25:31 +
From: Johnny Hughes 
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2012:1036 Moderate CentOS 5 postgresql
Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: <20120625222531.ga21...@chakra.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2012:1036 Moderate

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-1036.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

i386:
068825619d5167000cb31c985932b60d79424045d1324d92fe986e95ec93e29a  
postgresql-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
890f3603e5356455b3182f54461cd19c7d41116a09ec6db74ca5ef9c42b22e48  
postgresql-contrib-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
82d884b1830063574adf5f0a24e4596fd17b15f7784ed415411d7be4c06dd61b  
postgresql-devel-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
1c8d12378717bdb45aba7c683e25070a290c511f70bdadcff3cfe60cc3f2621d  
postgresql-docs-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
f9323d2bbe23685c2aeb791ccd5bbe52b6148aeba58b3d17f44e1a0fc01398a9  
postgresql-libs-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
bff4b250013135713e2de5c2b876b5474efb13ccd184532ab6329488b3d086e7  
postgresql-pl-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
54d78562eca1304b6adfca3dbdf8f5a2a43d18da5e155de086732234557b4f33  
postgresql-python-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
289f3342f293349da036336247f687f2c7c5be33131988c384106672b9516cdd  
postgresql-server-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
c3489d03276c8d0d02b75fba30cb7a67e08627fb3dd45c66b2c7af52c9a241b7  
postgresql-tcl-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
e80d31dc3c3739b27cd721f804049c1d4d70e3e919da823f39c10940759a2387  
postgresql-test-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm

x86_64:
a6c75984db6199a2465d9dc1aa854ebac156a70ecc770dbcdd7604b61df8f64b  
postgresql-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm
bb9ac507c3c11fb95931b8616a9ba6d63dc2d0ff3b65d5255aa553d4ca0a042d  
postgresql-contrib-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm
82d884b1830063574adf5f0a24e4596fd17b15f7784ed415411d7be4c06dd61b  
postgresql-devel-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
1ba605e0b2b78ea82bf0a47039afb1815d88e543bdf81fa21a7bf6c99daf3245  
postgresql-devel-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm
b64fc85e7e4e3b31cdeaff6696977b958e3e5cb870dc4f29c4e8bbeda005160d  
postgresql-docs-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm
f9323d2bbe23685c2aeb791ccd5bbe52b6148aeba58b3d17f44e1a0fc01398a9  
postgresql-libs-8.1.23-5.el5_8.i386.rpm
9420dd46e63dab27dee995466599792ba2a25375061514fdd74d897115fcda2a  
postgresql-libs-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm
036f57360cd8811a247b4142ad6a460afa8f44e53746123e3bd6c2d4d432604d  
postgresql-pl-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm
747ba5539a1d0e4d522509dcb3577faca157b81312fe7d89a3cbdf9d5a0c8bb3  
postgresql-python-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm
aa7d55e0c047114cc3e5df3abe0e58014c0aa893f62ab3b883abc84fbf738b23  
postgresql-server-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm
e01c08c8b102d8a67bea5480af1724fededb70895d098337fbaa5a93d1a93745  
postgresql-tcl-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm
af054867d22c03a46ece113ed28b19185701a38ad769bc0fd1fd3005e7be52ad  
postgresql-test-8.1.23-5.el5_8.x86_64.rpm

Source:
123ff671d4e58c9ead292f621a491ee2515db40dadb740b52e01c4c7df030cd6  
postgresql-8.1.23-5.el5_8.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net



--

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:38:39 +
From: Johnny Hughes 
Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2012:1037 Moderate CentOS 5
postgresql84Update
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Message-ID: <20120625223839.ga23...@chakra.karan.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2012:1037 Moderate

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-1037.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

i386:
0aee8850022e9bba9d1781143410fd2e0e0256def64dfb283c9577ebf202ed36  
postgresql84-8.4.12-1.el5_8.i386.rpm
4474a797b726419a4963c23c0f385b6f040f6385c37dcac4780f0636d3d355ca  
postgresql84-contrib-8.4.12-1.el5_8.i386.rpm
08abc8b6064d36b758afbad45e3f2ccf36fa955ccf71d2e467f36c3c49c76cde  
postgresql84-devel-8.4.12-1.el5_8.i386.rpm
ac8eead8d47c067c62e0a314bd548d6e9f5bbe56e4205550b58bc329a8c46bfa  
postgresql84-docs-8.4.12-1.el5_8.i386.rpm
29bea2c35cd9e7ab7eec6e352d44d6ea6f7448756564c8a37bc9d8b344ca70f5  
postgresql84-libs-8

Re: [CentOS] SNDS: root@ emails problem

[Gordon Messmer]

On 06/26/2012 07:40 AM, Gustavo Lacoste wrote:
> The problem is: SNDS by hotmail (microsoft) has listed my server on RED
> color claiming  sending SPAM from my server, but I completely secure

First, look at /var/log/maillog.  If you're sending or relaying spam, it 
will probably be pretty obvious.

Second, the listing may apply to your entire network, and could be the 
result of some other system, or it could be an old listing from a system 
which previously used your address.  If your system is secure, follow 
hotmail's process for de-listing your address.
http://mail.live.com/mail/troubleshooting.aspx

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

Re: [CentOS] Question about storage for virtualisation

[Gordon Messmer]

On 06/25/2012 06:05 PM, Nicolas Ross wrote:
>
> If I set vcpu let's say to 2-3 for a single vm, does this mean that
> those CPU are dedicated to that vm or many vm can share the same
> physicial cpus ?

Normally, they won't be dedicated.  You cannot assign more CPUs to a 
guest than there are in the host system, but you can overcommit CPUs in 
general.  That is, if you have 8 cores, you can create two guests with 6 
virtual CPUs each.  If the guests both become busy enough to fully 
utilize 6 CPUs, the performance of each will naturally be degraded 
relative to only one guest being busy enough to fully utilize 6 CPUs.

While CPUs cannot be overcommitted, memory can.  Again, if you 
overcommit memory, the host will swap excess utilization and severely 
degrade guest performance.  Take care to avoid doing this.

> So, I was wondering what's the best for managing storage for VMs ? I see
> mostly recomandations for LV for storing VM's disks. It seem to helps to
> create snapshots for backup purposes. Is this the fastest way of
> creating backups ? And will data access be faster that if I use regular
> files ?

Yes, performance of guests backed by LVs will be significantly better 
than the performance of guests backed by regular files.

No, you cannot make reliable backups of guests using snapshots of the 
LV.  A snapshot taken at any given time may have inconsistent data.  Run 
your backup software in the guest rather than in the host.  Under a 
Linux guest, you're able to snapshot filesystems and make backups.

When you make a snapshot under LVM, the file system contained therein is 
made consistent (though I'm having trouble finding actual documentation 
to that effect) before the snapshot is taken.  If you have open files, 
you may need to take additional steps to make that data consistent (as 
you would if you were backing up a MySQL database).  Taking a snapshot 
of a running KVM guest will not make data consistent, so you won't be 
able to reliably make a backup that way.

Finally, do not use snapshots as your primary means of backup.  If your 
media fails, you will lose your data.

> As for the guest paritions, I am accustomed of separating my servers
> disks with separate /, /usr, /var, /home and /data partitions. I can't
> recall today why I started doing this, 15 years ago, but I still like it
> that way and continue to do so. Do I still "need" to do this with VMs ?

I don't believe there's any more or less need to do so.  I would 
strongly recommend that you not segregate / and /usr.  Fedora and future 
versions of RHEL/CentOS will expect a unified / and /usr.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 6 bridging problem.

[Gordon Messmer]

On 06/26/2012 08:51 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> Are you absolutely sure that the switch port connected to eth0 is
> configured to deliver tagged packets for VLAN 20 (and that the ping
> source is also on that VLAN)?

...and I should follow that up with:

If you create a tagged ethernet interface on this system, with NO 
BRIDGES AT ALL, does the tagged interface work as expected?

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[John R Pierce]

On 06/26/12 7:37 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Are you looking for full servers, or to build from parts? Someone just
> recommended Supermicro; I'm not a big fan of them just now - we have a
> good number of servers from Penguin Computing that use that, and the 64
> core systems seem to have a lot of problems. Their 48 core servers seem
> fine.

The SuperMicro Intel stuff seems just fine.   I'd be more leary of AMD.

-- 
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[m . roth]

John R Pierce wrote:
> On 06/26/12 7:37 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Are you looking for full servers, or to build from parts? Someone just
>> recommended Supermicro; I'm not a big fan of them just now - we have a
>> good number of servers from Penguin Computing that use that, and the 64
>> core systems seem to have a lot of problems. Their 48 core servers seem
>> fine.
>
> The SuperMicro Intel stuff seems just fine.   I'd be more leary of AMD.

We've had a number of servers fail, and it *seems* to be related to the
motherboard. In fact, I just got the pass, and asked the secretary to call
Fed Ex today to ship another one back to the vendor.

   mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Question about storage for virtualisation

[John R Pierce]

On 06/26/12 9:29 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>> As for the guest paritions, I am accustomed of separating my servers
>> >disks with separate /, /usr, /var, /home and /data partitions. I can't
>> >recall today why I started doing this, 15 years ago, but I still like it
>> >that way and continue to do so. Do I still "need" to do this with VMs ?
> I don't believe there's any more or less need to do so.  I would
> strongly recommend that you not segregate / and /usr.  Fedora and future
> versions of RHEL/CentOS will expect a unified / and /usr.
> ___

I concur.   I'll definitely put /home on a seperate volume if there's 
going to be a need for a large /home (some of my servers have hardly any 
/home as there are no interactive users to speak of, others use nfs 
mounted /home dirs for interactive logins). /var I'm kind of on the 
fence on.   things like postgres, which like to put the databases in 
/var/lib/pgsql/x.y/data, I've been recently mounting my dedicated raid10 
database volumes as such, so /var itself has very little.   but we all 
know spools, logs can grow unexpectedly large, so constraining /var to a 
dedicated LV is probably a good idea.

-- 
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast

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

[CentOS] abrtd problems

[m . roth]

We're trying to debug a problem: a server that reboots spontaneously when
this user's large, multithreaded program's running. Sometimes it won't do
it for hours, other times it's literally every 10 min. I've run iostat,
netstat, have top running, tail -f /var/log/dmesg, *nada*. Nothing out of
the ordinary.

One thing that's constant: as the system's coming back up, we see a segv
of pbs_mom (we're using torque for clustering), and every time it saves
the core dump, then a second or so later,
Jun 26 14:29:58  abrtd: Package 'torque-mom' isn't signed with
proper key
Jun 26 14:29:58  abrtd: Corrupted or bad dump
/var/spool/abrt/ccpp-2012-06-26-14:29:57-3086 (res:2), deleting

I've changed /etc/abrt/abrtd.conf to tell it to save cores from programs
not associated with packages (his program's not), and still; neither the
man page nor googling has found anything.

So, does anyone know either why it thinks it's corrupt, or how I can make
it *stop* deleting it?

   mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[Steve Thompson]

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

> We've had a number of servers fail, and it *seems* to be related to the
> motherboard.

I too have had bad experiences with SuperMicro motherboards; never had one
last more than three years.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[Eero Volotinen]

2012/6/26 Rafał Radecki :
> Hi all.
>
> I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
> searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
> would like to use in our server infrastructure.
> The platform should have:
> - possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
> - at least 6 SATA ports;
> - the possibility to use SAS disks;
> - at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add another one;
> - size of 2 or 3U;
> - hot swap for disks.
> We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
> basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
> and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
> to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
> of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
> Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
> something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
> All servers will be based on CentOS5/6 :)

Dell?

Something like Dell Poweredge R710 ?

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[m . roth]

Steve Thompson wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>> We've had a number of servers fail, and it *seems* to be related to the
>> motherboard.
>
> I too have had bad experiences with SuperMicro motherboards; never had one
> last more than three years.

These are with AMDs, but we have a good number of 48-core servers that
have been pretty good (with a few exceptions); there are more problems
with the 64 core servers.

mark

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

[CentOS] Request for recommendations for dynamic dns daemon

[Max Pyziur]

Greetings,

I'm trying to configure dynamic dns on my test/backup machine (CentOS 
5.8). I'm using Zoneedit DNS.

I've been trying to setup ddclient; the error message that I get is:
Jun 26 15:20:09 xx ddclient[28467]: WARNING:  file 
/var/cache/ddclient/ddclient.cache, line 3: Invalid Value for keyword 'ip' 
= ''

Or should I use ez-ipupdate?

Thank you.

Max Pyziur
p...@brama.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] FreeIPA on Centos 6

[Boris Epstein]

Hello all,

Is anybody using http://freeipa.org on a CentOS 6 server? Is it working
well?

Thanks.

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[David Hrbáč]

Dne 26.6.2012 15:40, Rafał Radecki napsal(a):
> Hi all.
>
> I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
> searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
> would like to use in our server infrastructure.
> The platform should have:
> - possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
> - at least 6 SATA ports;
> - the possibility to use SAS disks;
> - at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add another one;
> - size of 2 or 3U;
> - hot swap for disks.
> We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
> basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
> and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
> to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
> of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
> Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
> something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
> All servers will be based on CentOS5/6 :)
>

Cisco UCS? :o) Kidding, too pricey for these requirements. Your
requirements are quite low and almost every desktop motherboard is ok
nowadays.  If your infra is built with failure in mind, you can go
Google way. No special HW, just HA sw solution.
Regards,
David Hrbáč
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[m . roth]

David Hrbáč wrote:
> Dne 26.6.2012 15:40, Rafał Radecki napsal(a):
>> Hi all.
>>
>> I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
>> searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
>> would like to use in our server infrastructure.
>> The platform should have:
>> - possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
>> - at least 6 SATA ports;
>> - the possibility to use SAS disks;
>> - at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add
>> another one;
>> - size of 2 or 3U;
>> - hot swap for disks.
>> We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
>> basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
>> and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
>> to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
>> of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
>> Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
>> something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
>> All servers will be based on CentOS5/6 :)
>
> Cisco UCS? :o) Kidding, too pricey for these requirements. Your
> requirements are quite low and almost every desktop motherboard is ok
> nowadays.  If your infra is built with failure in mind, you can go
> Google way. No special HW, just HA sw solution.

I do not think you want any desktop m/b, not for a hosting provider
server. Spend a bit more and get server-class machines. That's right, you
*did* mention 2 or 4 U servers. Really, for what you want, you can get in
a 1U box. The Penguins I mentioned were, I think (I didn't order them)
under $10k or $12kUSD, or the Dells, were all under $20k each, maybe under
$15kUSD.

   mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[Patrick McEvoy]

On 06/26/2012 08:40 AM, Rafał Radecki wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I am working for a hosting provider in Poland. We are currently
> searching for an universal, extensible hardware platform which we
> would like to use in our server infrastructure.
> The platform should have:
> - possibility to install up to 32GB of RAM and at least 4 slots for it;
> - at least 6 SATA ports;
> - the possibility to use SAS disks;
> - at least one 1Gb/s network interface and the possibility to add another one;
> - size of 2 or 3U;
> - hot swap for disks.
> We are looking for a solution in which we would be able to deploy a
> basic server with for example 2 SATA disks, 8GB of RAM, 1 NIC, 4 cors
> and to be able to use the same enclosure and motherboard and extend it
> to deploy a more heavy-duty server with for example 6 SATA disks, 24GB
> of RAM, 2 NICs, 8 cors.
> Which manufacturer can you recommend and why? We are looking for
> something rather not expensive but reliable which has a good support.
> All servers will be based on CentOS5/6 :)
>
> Best regards,
> Rafal Radecki.
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

We have a few machines where I work from Pogo Linux which work really
well, http://www.pogolinux.com/

Patrick




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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[John R Pierce]

On 06/26/12 1:15 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> That's right, you
> *did*  mention 2 or 4 U servers. Really, for what you want, you can get in
> a 1U box.

the decision of 1U vs 2U is largely driven by disk and IO card requirements.

a 1U Intel server can take up to 4 3.5" or 8 2.5" hotswap drives, 2 CPU 
sockets (4 to 24 cores total), 18 or 24 dimms, and has 1-2 PCI-E slots

a 2U can take as many as 12 3.5" or 24 2.5" drives, the same CPU/memory, 
and typically 4 PCI-E slots, although I've seen more.

3U/4U stuff is generally quad socket and a lot more expensive.


-- 
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[m . roth]

John R Pierce wrote:
> On 06/26/12 1:15 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> That's right, you
>> *did*  mention 2 or 4 U servers. Really, for what you want, you can get
>> in a 1U box.
>
> the decision of 1U vs 2U is largely driven by disk and IO card
> requirements.
>
> a 1U Intel server can take up to 4 3.5" or 8 2.5" hotswap drives, 2 CPU
> sockets (4 to 24 cores total), 18 or 24 dimms, and has 1-2 PCI-E slots
>
> a 2U can take as many as 12 3.5" or 24 2.5" drives, the same CPU/memory,
> and typically 4 PCI-E slots, although I've seen more.
>
> 3U/4U stuff is generally quad socket and a lot more expensive.

Heh, heh. We have a cluster of 22 servers. One has "only" eight cores. 11
more, I think, have 48 cores, and the latest 10 have 64 cores; I think
that's 12 core dies ("chips"). Everything except the first are all 1U.

mark

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

Re: [CentOS] FreeIPA on Centos 6

[James Hogarth]

>
> Is anybody using http://freeipa.org on a CentOS 6 server? Is it working
> well?
>

Yes and yes I suggest checking out the FreeIPA mailing list and
IRC channel if you have any trouble as you'll find quite a few people
there.

As a heads up IPA 2.2 will be coming in CentOS 6.3 which includes SSH
key maintenance in IPA and form based authentication for when you
don't have a kerberos token to pass to the IPA interface.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Terminfo ansi-m entry missing

[Hugh E Cruickshank]

Hi All:

It appears that the terminfo ansi-m file is no longer distributed with
the CentOS 6.2 (along with many others). Can anyone advise how I can
obtain this file? As a work around I have copied the file from a CentOS
4 box but that is probably not the "proper" way to do it.

TIA

Regards, Hugh

-- 
Hugh E Cruickshank, Forward Software, www.forward-software.com

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[KevinO]

On 06/26/2012 12:03 PM, Steve Thompson wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> 
>> We've had a number of servers fail, and it *seems* to be related to the
>> motherboard.
> 
> I too have had bad experiences with SuperMicro motherboards; never had one
> last more than three years.
That runs counter to my experience; I've run several 24/7 for years and just
retired one that was still running flawlessly after more than 12 years.

Apparently, YMMV

-- 
KevinO


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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[Karl Vogel]

>> John R Pierce wrote:

J> The SuperMicro Intel stuff seems just fine.  I'd be more leary of AMD.

>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 13:39:06 -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us said:

M> We've had a number of servers fail, and it *seems* to be related to the
M> motherboard.  In fact, I just got the pass, and asked the secretary to
M> call Fed Ex today to ship another one back to the vendor.

   Second that.  We bought three servers, and two failed due to motherboard
   problems.  A third one has performed beautifully for around 5 years.

   We had warranty support, but not directly from SuperMicro.  The reseller
   didn't return our calls, and after a short time their phone was disconnected
   because they went bankrupt.  No more warranty for us, too bad, so sad.

   Another thing to consider is the BIOS software; it was old when we bought
   the server, too old to handle drives > 1Tb 18 months after said drives
   had hit the market.

   I'd also second the "don't buy Sun/Oracle" recommendation.  Oracle isn't
   interested in anything but Fortune 50 business, and it shows.

-- 
Karl Vogel  I don't speak for the USAF or my company

Linus Torvalds surfs the web using nothing but netcat.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] XFS-in-a-file

[Boris Epstein]

Hello listmates,

Has anybody attempted to run an XFS in a file mounted via -o loop? The file
size is about 20 TB and it resides in a larger XFS filesystem residing on a
disk. That filesystem's size is about 25 TB. What sort of degradation
should one expect under that sort of scenario?

The reason I am asking is that I am trying to run a MooseFS chunkserver in
that filesystem-in-a-file and looks like I am getting some pretty bad
delays.

Thanks.

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

Re: [CentOS] Universal server hardware platform - which to choose?

[John R Pierce]

On 06/26/12 7:59 PM, Karl Vogel wrote:
> I'd also second the "don't buy Sun/Oracle" recommendation.  Oracle isn't
> interested in anything but Fortune 50 business, and it shows.

its a shame, really, as Sun had some nice kit prior to the buyout.

re: Oracle's interest... they are only interested in getting your money, 
EVERYthing else is secondary, and thats true even if you're a global 
fortune 50 size company.   I work for one and we get atrocious support.



-- 
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast

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

Re: [CentOS] Terminfo ansi-m entry missing

[Hugh E Cruickshank]

From: Hugh E Cruickshank Sent: June 26, 2012 16:01
> 
> It appears that the terminfo ansi-m file is no longer distributed with
> the CentOS 6.2 (along with many others). Can anyone advise how I can
> obtain this file? As a work around I have copied the file from a
> CentOS 4 box but that is probably not the "proper" way to do it.

To follow up on my original post I have found that the following also
works:

  wget http://www.catb.org/~esr/terminfo/termtypes.ti.gz
  gunzip termtypes.ti.gz
  tic -e ansi-m termtypes.ti

This would actually appear to be "the proper way" to go.

HTH

Regards, Hugh

-- 
Hugh E Cruickshank, Forward Software, www.forward-software.com

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

Re: [CentOS] FreeIPA on Centos 6

[Laurent Wandrebeck]

2012/6/26 James Hogarth :
>>
>> Is anybody using http://freeipa.org on a CentOS 6 server? Is it working
>> well?
>>
>
> Yes and yes I suggest checking out the FreeIPA mailing list and
> IRC channel if you have any trouble as you'll find quite a few people
> there.
>
> As a heads up IPA 2.2 will be coming in CentOS 6.3 which includes SSH
> key maintenance in IPA and form based authentication for when you
> don't have a kerberos token to pass to the IPA interface.
Hi,

deployed it at work, two (kvm) instances for HA, with DNS.
Named segfaulted here and there, and when the master instance failed,
takeover didn't work for whatever reason.
A really nice piece of software i'd have liked to continue to use, but
not yet prod ready imho.
I guess I'll have another look after 6.3.
HTH,
Laurent.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] FreeIPA on Centos 6

[James Hogarth]

> Named segfaulted here and there, and when the master instance failed,
> takeover didn't work for whatever reason.
>

I have four IPAs replicating together across two DCs with full DNS and CA
integration plus using it for sudo management as well fully stable.

Have never seen the behaviour you describe and there is no 'master' to take
over from since it is multi master so no take over even exists much
less is required
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] FreeIPA on Centos 6

[Rob Kampen]

On 06/27/2012 06:39 PM, James Hogarth wrote:

Named segfaulted here and there, and when the master instance failed,
takeover didn't work for whatever reason.


I have four IPAs replicating together across two DCs with full DNS and CA
integration plus using it for sudo management as well fully stable.

Have never seen the behaviour you describe and there is no 'master' to take
over from since it is multi master so no take over even exists much
less is required
__

Is there a HOWTO for this somewhere? Sounds like a very useful setup.


_
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