[CentOS] [CentOS7] switching workspace on external monitor

[Martin Moravcik]

Hi,

I just installed CentOS 7 on my NB and I'm experiencing problem during 
switching the workspace in GNOME3 environment. The workspace on my NB 
display is working correctly after change from one workspace to another. 
But the windows placed on the external/second display stay on the active 
workspace.


I found the description and solution of this problem here:
http://gregcor.com/2011/05/07/fix-dual-monitors-in-gnome-3-aka-my-workspaces-are-broken/
but I can't find the key "workspaces_only_on_primary" in my installation.

Does anybody have a tip for solving this problem?

Thanks

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

[CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Richard Zimmerman]

>-Original Message-
>From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf 
>Of m.r...@5-cent.us
>Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 4:31 PM
>To: CentOS mailing list
>Subject: Re: [CentOS] *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]
>
>Ok, folks,
>
>   Here's the answer: making a software RAID on a bare drive with no GPT works 
> fine. If it has a GPT, and no partition, it fails on reboot, even with an 
> /etc/mdadm.conf.
>
>   I've proved this:
>   first, I created the array on the bare drive, rebooted, and
>/dev/md0 was there;
>   then, I used parted to create a gpt, then the array, reboot, no md0, 
> even with mdadm --assemble, even with /etc/mdadm.conf.
>   finally, I got rid of the disk label (parted to make an msdos label, 
> the zeroing out the beginning of the disk), and again made the RAID on the 
> bare drives, reboot, and md0 is there.
>
>   So that's what killed me. Admins, take heed
>mark

If you all would mind...

Until I read this thread, I've never heard of building RAIDs on bare metal 
drives. I'm assuming no partition table, just a disk label?

What is the advantage of doing this?

Many thanks,

Richard


___
---
Richard Zimmerman
Systems / Network Administrator
River Bend Hose Specialty, Inc.
 S Main Street
South Bend, IN   46601-3337
(574) 233-1133
(574) 280-7284 Fax
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Warren Young]

On 9/5/2014 07:18, Richard Zimmerman wrote:


Until I read this thread, I've never heard of building RAIDs on bare
metal drives. I'm assuming no partition table, just a disk label?


I don't know what you mean by a disk label.  BSD uses that term for 
their alternative to MBR and GPT partition tables, but I think you must 
mean something else.


In Linux terms, we're talking about /dev/sda, rather than /dev/sda1, for 
example.



What is the advantage of doing this?


The whole idea of a RAID is that you're going to take a bunch of member 
disks and combine them into a larger entity.  On top of *that* you may 
wish to create partitions, LVMs, or whatever.


So the real question is, why do you believe you need to make each RAID 
member a *partition* on a disk, instead of just take over the entire 
disk?  Unless you're going to do something insane like:


/dev/md0
   /dev/sda1
   /dev/sdb1
/dev/md1
   /dev/sda2
   /dev/sdb2

...you're not going to get any direct utility from composing a RAID from 
partitions on the RAID member drives.


(Why "insane?"  Because now any I/O to /dev/md1 interferes with I/O to 
/dev/md0, because you only have two head assemblies, so you've wiped out 
the speed advantages you get from RAID-0 or -1.)


There are ancillary benefits, like the fact that a RAID element that 
spans the entire partition is inherently 4k-aligned.  When there is a 
partition table taking space at the start of the first cylinder, you 
have to leave the rest of that cylinder unused in order to get back into 
4k alignment.


The only downside I saw in this thread is that when you pull such a disk 
out of a Linux software RAID and put it into another machine, you don't 
see a clear Linux partition table, so you might think it is an empty 
drive.  But the same thing is true of a hardware RAID member, too.

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

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Scott Robbins]

On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:01:05AM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
> On 9/5/2014 07:18, Richard Zimmerman wrote:
> >
> >Until I read this thread, I've never heard of building RAIDs on bare
> >metal drives. I'm assuming no partition table, just a disk label?
> 
> I don't know what you mean by a disk label.  BSD uses that term for
> their alternative to MBR and GPT partition tables, but I think you
> must mean something else.

There is another method of disk naming, I think it gained popularity
between /dev/sda and UUID, that was something like LABEL=swap or
LABEL=root.  I haven't used it in years so don't remember the details.

As for building on bare metal, as it stands, during installation, the
RedHat way is you make, for example, a /boot, / and swap, then make the
same partitions on drive 2 (for a RAID-1).  You then create 3 RAID devices,
one for each partition.  Then, when a drive fails, you have three devices
to worry about.  In contrast, as mentioned on the CentOS wiki, one can just
do a normal install, then mirror the drive with just one RAID device. I'm
guessing that is what was meant.  



-- 
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6

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

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Warren Young]

On 9/5/2014 08:18, Scott Robbins wrote:

On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:01:05AM -0600, Warren Young wrote:

I don't know what you mean by a disk label.


There is another method of disk naming, I think it gained popularity
between /dev/sda and UUID, that was something like LABEL=swap or
LABEL=root.


That's a property of the filesystem, not the disk or partition.  See 
tune2fs/mke2fs -L.



As for building on bare metal, as it stands, during installation, the
RedHat way is you make, for example, a /boot, / and swap, then make the
same partitions on drive 2 (for a RAID-1).


The system disk must be partitioned because you need a boot loader, 
which means you're already going to be taking over some space on 
cylinder 0, so the arguments in favor of raw disks have already gone out 
the window.


I'm only talking about data volumes here.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Les Mikesell]

On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Warren Young  wrote:
>
> So the real question is, why do you believe you need to make each RAID
> member a *partition* on a disk, instead of just take over the entire disk?
> Unless you're going to do something insane like:
>
> /dev/md0
>/dev/sda1
>/dev/sdb1
> /dev/md1
>/dev/sda2
>/dev/sdb2
>
> ...you're not going to get any direct utility from composing a RAID from
> partitions on the RAID member drives.
>
> (Why "insane?"  Because now any I/O to /dev/md1 interferes with I/O to
> /dev/md0, because you only have two head assemblies, so you've wiped out the
> speed advantages you get from RAID-0 or -1.)

Well, to exactly the same extent that putting multiple partitions and
filesystems on a non-raid drive is insane for those reasons...   And
you generally can't avoid this if you want to boot from the same disks
where you store data with mirroring.   And the very nice up side is
that you can now pull your drives out, put them in different bays, add
others, etc. and the system will still assemble the right partitions
into the right raid devices and mount them correctly.  Or at least it
would in the < 2TB days...

> There are ancillary benefits, like the fact that a RAID element that spans
> the entire partition is inherently 4k-aligned.  When there is a partition
> table taking space at the start of the first cylinder, you have to leave the
> rest of that cylinder unused in order to get back into 4k alignment.

Isn't it possible to duplicate that when you make a single partition
and use the partition as a raid member?   And get autoassembly if it
is less than 2TB?I consider it a real loss that autoassembly
doesn't work on large drives.  People will almost certainly lose data
in some scenarios as a result.

> The only downside I saw in this thread is that when you pull such a disk out
> of a Linux software RAID and put it into another machine, you don't see a
> clear Linux partition table, so you might think it is an empty drive.  But
> the same thing is true of a hardware RAID member, too.

I've always liked software raid1 just because you can recover the data
from any single drive on any machine with a similar interface.   But,
I guess that's why we have backups...

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] FW: Dell basic Server SR# 898596786 SVTG: 3CJM1P1 <<#2039741-9051508#>>

[Jason Pyeron]

That's problem. AHCI is the standard for SATA, running modern SATA drives, 
especially SSD require the AHCI command structure. Running modern SATA drives 
in IDE (ATA) mode is not readily supported.

-Jason

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-   -
- Jason Pyeron  PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant  10 West 24th Street #100-
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
-   -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00.
-Original Message-
From: Emmanuel Pagan Gonzalez [mailto:us_basicserver_te...@dell.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 13:49
To: jpye...@pdinc.us
Subject: RE: Dell basic Server SR# 898596786 SVTG: 3CJM1P1 <<#2039741-9051508#>>

   

 



  

Enterprise Service Request 

Hello Jason, 

  

yea, it only supports ATA.

  

  

Thank you for choosing Dell. 

Emmanuel Pagan Gonzalez 
Enterprise Technical Support Specialist 

Dell | Enterprise 

Toll Free 1-800-822-8965 ( 1-800-387-5757 Dell Canada ) 

My work schedule is M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM EST 

Our support queue is open 8am - 8pm Monday - Friday Eastern Standard Time 

Customer feedback | How am I doing? Please contact my manager 
us_ent_mana...@dell.com 

  

  

 

 

  

  

 

 

Diagnose an issue   

Research a topic 

  

Get order support 
  

Contact us   

Support for other Dell brands 

  

  



  


--- Original Message ---
From: Jason Pyeron 
Received: 9/5/14 11:21:00 AM CDT
To: US_BasicServer_Team1 
Subject: RE: Dell basic Server SR# 898596786 SVTG: 3CJM1P1

Are you saying it does not support Advanced Host Controller Interface (AHCI)? 

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 
- - 
- Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - 
- Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 - 
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - 
- - 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. 

> -Original Message- 
> From: Emmanuel Pagan Gonzalez [mailto:us_basicserver_te...@dell.com] 
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 12:05 
> To: jpye...@pdinc.us 
> Subject: RE: Dell basic Server SR# 898596786 SVTG: 3CJM1P1 
> <<#2039741-9051508#>> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Enterprise Service Request 
> 
> Hello Jason, 
> 
> 
> 
> No there isn't the only option that you have is off or ATA, 
> and if you connect a drive to the port it will show the info 
> of the drive. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for choosing Dell. 
> 
> Emmanuel Pagan Gonzalez 
> Enterprise Technical Support Specialist 
> 
> Dell | Enterprise 
> 
> Toll Free 1-800-822-8965 ( 1-800-387-5757 Dell Canada ) 
> 
> My work schedule is M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM EST 
> 
> Our support queue is open 8am - 8pm Monday - Friday Eastern 
> Standard Time 
> 
> Customer feedback | How am I doing? Please contact my manager 
> us_ent_mana...@dell.com 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  support> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Diagnose an issue  
> 
> Research a topic 
>  
> 
> Get order support 
>  support> 
> 
> Contact us 
>  
> 
> Support for other Dell brands 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- Original Message --- 
> From: Jason Pyeron  
> Received: 9/4/14 10:14:31 PM C

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS7] switching workspace on external monitor

[Nux!]

Hi,

Check the Gnome Tweak tool, in the Display section, if memory doesn't trick me.

HTH



--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro


- Original Message -
> From: "Martin Moravcik" 
> To: "CentOS mailing list" 
> Sent: Friday, 5 September, 2014 9:30:55 AM
> Subject: [CentOS] [CentOS7] switching workspace on external monitor
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I just installed CentOS 7 on my NB and I'm experiencing problem during
> switching the workspace in GNOME3 environment. The workspace on my NB
> display is working correctly after change from one workspace to another.
> But the windows placed on the external/second display stay on the active
> workspace.
> 
> I found the description and solution of this problem here:
> http://gregcor.com/2011/05/07/fix-dual-monitors-in-gnome-3-aka-my-workspaces-are-broken/
> but I can't find the key "workspaces_only_on_primary" in my installation.
> 
> Does anybody have a tip for solving this problem?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> martin
> ___
> 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] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)

[Jason Pyeron]

> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Pyeron 
> Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2014 18:16
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: centos-boun...@centos.org 
> > [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
> > Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2014 17:34
> > To: centos@centos.org
> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell 
> > PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)
> > 
> > On 8/31/2014 2:03 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
> > > Yes. They support internal SATA drives, we are changing 
> > from spinning drives to SSD. I am working with Dell to get a 
> > BIOS patch, but I wont hold my breath.
> > 
> > is the SATA interface in AHCI mode or legacy IDE emulation?
> 
> Good question, I will ask Dell. The BIOS only has Off and 
> Auto as choices. Is there a preference I should shoot for?

So the dell tech says it only supports ATA (IDE) mode. [Sorry for the 
accidental forward]

Now I have to find an alternative to supporting a SSD boot device on a SATA 
port in IDE (ATA) mode.

-Jason


--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-   -
- Jason Pyeron  PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant  10 West 24th Street #100-
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
-   -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. 


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

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Richard Zimmerman]

-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of 
Les Mikesell
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 12:54 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue 
[Solved, badly]

On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Warren Young  wrote:
>
> So the real question is, why do you believe you need to make each RAID 
> member a *partition* on a disk, instead of just take over the entire disk?
> Unless you're going to do something insane like:
>
> /dev/md0
>/dev/sda1
>/dev/sdb1
> /dev/md1
>/dev/sda2
>/dev/sdb2
>
> ...you're not going to get any direct utility from composing a RAID 
> from partitions on the RAID member drives.
>
> (Why "insane?"  Because now any I/O to /dev/md1 interferes with I/O to 
> /dev/md0, because you only have two head assemblies, so you've wiped 
> out the speed advantages you get from RAID-0 or -1.)

Well, to exactly the same extent that putting multiple partitions and
filesystems on a non-raid drive is insane for those reasons...   And
you generally can't avoid this if you want to boot from the same disks
where you store data with mirroring.   And the very nice up side is
that you can now pull your drives out, put them in different bays, add others, 
etc. and the system will still assemble the right partitions into the right 
raid devices and mount them correctly.  Or at least it would in the < 2TB 
days...

> There are ancillary benefits, like the fact that a RAID element that 
> spans the entire partition is inherently 4k-aligned.  When there is a 
> partition table taking space at the start of the first cylinder, you 
> have to leave the rest of that cylinder unused in order to get back into 4k 
> alignment.

Isn't it possible to duplicate that when you make a single partition
and use the partition as a raid member?   And get autoassembly if it
is less than 2TB?I consider it a real loss that autoassembly
doesn't work on large drives.  People will almost certainly lose data in some 
scenarios as a result.

> The only downside I saw in this thread is that when you pull such a 
> disk out of a Linux software RAID and put it into another machine, you 
> don't see a clear Linux partition table, so you might think it is an 
> empty drive.  But the same thing is true of a hardware RAID member, too.

I've always liked software raid1 just because you can recover the data
from any single drive on any machine with a similar interface.   But,
I guess that's why we have backups...

I just wanted to say thank you for the replies Wow, I got schooled today 
(in a good way). Much learning going on in my corner of the world...

Richard


---
Richard Zimmerman
Systems / Network Administrator
River Bend Hose Specialty, Inc.
 S Main Street
South Bend, IN   46601-3337
(574) 233-1133
(574) 280-7284 Fax

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

Re: [CentOS] FW: Dell basic Server SR# 898596786 SVTG: 3CJM1P1 <<#2039741-9051508#>>

[m . roth]

First, let me note that I wouldn't consider it cool to forward email with
tech support to a mailing list, complete with your s/n's, etc.

Jason Pyeron wrote:
> That's problem. AHCI is the standard for SATA, running modern SATA drives,
> especially SSD require the AHCI command structure. Running modern SATA
> drives in IDE (ATA) mode is not readily supported.


I also missed the beginning of this thread: what model Dell server is this?

 mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)

[m . roth]

Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jason Pyeron
>> Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2014 18:16
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: centos-boun...@centos.org
>> > [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
>> > Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2014 17:34
>> > To: centos@centos.org
>> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell
>> > PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)
>> >
>> > On 8/31/2014 2:03 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> > > Yes. They support internal SATA drives, we are changing
>> > from spinning drives to SSD. I am working with Dell to get a
>> > BIOS patch, but I wont hold my breath.
>> >
>> > is the SATA interface in AHCI mode or legacy IDE emulation?
>>
>> Good question, I will ask Dell. The BIOS only has Off and
>> Auto as choices. Is there a preference I should shoot for?
>
> So the dell tech says it only supports ATA (IDE) mode. [Sorry for the
> accidental forward]
>
> Now I have to find an alternative to supporting a SSD boot device on a
> SATA port in IDE (ATA) mode.
>
Ok, I see - it's an old 2970 - I see the manuals on Dell's site were last
revised in 2011. We got rid of all our 2950's (except for one, I think, or
two, and they're another team's). IIRC, they did have a choice of AHCI or
RAID, and I think there may have been one other option. Unless this is
*really* old, I can't imagine that they actually have a physical IDE or
EIDE interface, so there should be some way around this.

   mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)

[Jason Pyeron]

> -Original Message-
> From: m.r...@5-cent.us
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 14:50
> 
> Jason Pyeron wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Jason Pyeron
> >> Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2014 18:16
> >>
> >> > -Original Message-
> >> > From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> >> > [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
> >> > Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2014 17:34
> >> > To: centos@centos.org
> >> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell
> >> > PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)
> >> >
> >> > On 8/31/2014 2:03 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
> >> > > Yes. They support internal SATA drives, we are changing
> >> > from spinning drives to SSD. I am working with Dell to get a
> >> > BIOS patch, but I wont hold my breath.
> >> >
> >> > is the SATA interface in AHCI mode or legacy IDE emulation?
> >>
> >> Good question, I will ask Dell. The BIOS only has Off and
> >> Auto as choices. Is there a preference I should shoot for?
> >
> > So the dell tech says it only supports ATA (IDE) mode. 
> [Sorry for the
> > accidental forward]
> >
> > Now I have to find an alternative to supporting a SSD boot 
> device on a
> > SATA port in IDE (ATA) mode.
> >
> Ok, I see - it's an old 2970 - I see the manuals on Dell's 
> site were last
> revised in 2011. We got rid of all our 2950's (except for 
> one, I think, or
> two, and they're another team's). IIRC, they did have a 
> choice of AHCI or
> RAID, and I think there may have been one other option. Unless this is

I think that is on the PERC contoller. The Onboard SATA A/B ports are the issue.

> *really* old, I can't imagine that they actually have a 
> physical IDE or
> EIDE interface, so there should be some way around this.

We have some with 40 pin IDE, but I am ignoring them.

Both IDE and SATA mother boards have the same BIOS version!?!?!

-Jason 

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-   -
- Jason Pyeron  PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant  10 West 24th Street #100-
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
-   -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. 


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

Re: [CentOS] FW: Dell basic Server SR# 898596786 SVTG: 3CJM1P1 <<#2039741-9051508#>>

[Jason Pyeron]

> -Original Message-
> From: m.r...@5-cent.us
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 14:45
> 
> First, let me note that I wouldn't consider it cool to 
> forward email with
> tech support to a mailing list, complete with your s/n's, etc.

Problem between the keyboard and chair. I pasted the centos mailing list in the 
to field and the engineer's email in the centos mail. This email was supposed 
to go to Dell.

-Jason

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-   -
- Jason Pyeron  PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant  10 West 24th Street #100-
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
-   -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. 


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

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Stephen Harris]

On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:01:05AM -0600, Warren Young wrote:

> So the real question is, why do you believe you need to make each RAID 
> member a *partition* on a disk, instead of just take over the entire 
> disk?  Unless you're going to do something insane like:

For me I have things like
  sda1
  sdb2
  sdc3
  sdd4
and I align the partitions to the physical slot.

This makes it easier to see what is the failed disk; "sdc3 has fallen out of
the array; that's the disk in slot 3".

Because today's sdc may be tomorrow's sdf depending on any additional disks
that have been added or kernel device discover order changes or whatever.

-- 

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

[CentOS] Could not resolve host: mirror.centos.org

[Александр Кириллов]

There seems to be a problem with my local dns server resolving 
mirror.centos.org.
I know something about dns but obviously not enough to figure out what 
might be wrong here or how to fix
this in bind configs. The SERVFAIL errors below seem to be related to 
 and MX queries for the domain.

Please advise. TIA.


# host mirror.centos.org 8.8.8.8
Using domain server:
Name: 8.8.8.8
Address: 8.8.8.8#53
Aliases:

mirror.centos.org has address 69.167.139.9


# host mirror.centos.org
mirror.centos.org has address 66.109.26.212
Host mirror.centos.org not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
Host mirror.centos.org not found: 2(SERVFAIL)


# tail -F /var/named/chroot/var/named/data/named.run
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org//IN': 85.12.30.226#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org//IN': 93.113.36.66#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org//IN': 94.46.190.42#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org//IN': 85.12.30.226#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org//IN': 93.113.36.66#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org//IN': 94.46.190.42#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org/MX/IN': 85.12.30.226#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org/MX/IN': 93.113.36.66#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org/MX/IN': 94.46.190.42#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org/MX/IN': 85.12.30.226#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org/MX/IN': 93.113.36.66#53
error (FORMERR) resolving 'mirror.centos.org/MX/IN': 94.46.190.42#53

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

Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)

[m . roth]

Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> From: m.r...@5-cent.us
>> Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> >> From: Jason Pyeron
>> >> > [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
>> >> > On 8/31/2014 2:03 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote:

>> >> > > Yes. They support internal SATA drives, we are changing
>> >> > from spinning drives to SSD. I am working with Dell to get a
>> >> > BIOS patch, but I wont hold my breath.

Dumb question: these machines are getting very long in the tooth, but
you're putting SSD's in them? New, or newer machines, would solve a lot of
problems

>> >> >
>> >> > is the SATA interface in AHCI mode or legacy IDE emulation?
>> >>
>> >> Good question, I will ask Dell. The BIOS only has Off and
>> >> Auto as choices. Is there a preference I should shoot for?
>> >
>> > So the dell tech says it only supports ATA (IDE) mode.
>> [Sorry for the
>> > accidental forward]
>> >
>> > Now I have to find an alternative to supporting a SSD boot
>> > device on a SATA port in IDE (ATA) mode.
>> >
>> Ok, I see - it's an old 2970 - I see the manuals on Dell's
>> site were last revised in 2011. We got rid of all our 2950's (except for
>> one, I think, or two, and they're another team's). IIRC, they did have a
>> choice of AHCI or RAID, and I think there may have been one other option.
>> Unless this is
>
> I think that is on the PERC contoller. The Onboard SATA A/B ports are the
> issue.

Nope. That's the kind of stuff that's only in the BIOS - it's certainly
not on a PERC.

> We have some with 40 pin IDE, but I am ignoring them.

And to that I have one response: MTBF. You need to talk to management
about spending some money
>
> Both IDE and SATA mother boards have the same BIOS version!?!?!
>
Presumably from when the switchover was happening.

H... have you spoken to Dell, or looked on their website, for a
firmware update for the BIOS?

mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)

[m . roth]

By the bye, about firmware updates: I like Dell's the best of all. HP, run
it from some kind of DOS, and hope. Dell, you can do from a running CentOS
system (I've done it a few times), and unlike everyone else's firmware
updates, it says, "collecting information", then *tells* you that a) this
update is, in fact, for this hardware (and so won't brick it), and b)
whether it's newer than what's installed.

mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)

[Jason Pyeron]

> -Original Message-
> From: m.r...@5-cent.us
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 15:19
> To: CentOS mailing list
> 
> Jason Pyeron wrote:
> >> From: m.r...@5-cent.us
> >> Jason Pyeron wrote:
> >> >> From: Jason Pyeron
> >> >> > [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
> >> >> > On 8/31/2014 2:03 PM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
> 
> >> >> > > Yes. They support internal SATA drives, we are changing
> >> >> > from spinning drives to SSD. I am working with Dell to get a
> >> >> > BIOS patch, but I wont hold my breath.
> 
> Dumb question: these machines are getting very long in the tooth, but
> you're putting SSD's in them? New, or newer machines, would 

32GB SSD for the boot device, not on the raid arrays.

> solve a lot of
> problems

Their warrantees are good for another few years... And the money is not :)

> 
> >> >> >
> >> >> > is the SATA interface in AHCI mode or legacy IDE emulation?
> >> >>
> >> >> Good question, I will ask Dell. The BIOS only has Off and
> >> >> Auto as choices. Is there a preference I should shoot for?
> >> >
> >> > So the dell tech says it only supports ATA (IDE) mode.
> >> [Sorry for the
> >> > accidental forward]
> >> >
> >> > Now I have to find an alternative to supporting a SSD boot
> >> > device on a SATA port in IDE (ATA) mode.
> >> >
> >> Ok, I see - it's an old 2970 - I see the manuals on Dell's
> >> site were last revised in 2011. We got rid of all our 
> 2950's (except for
> >> one, I think, or two, and they're another team's). IIRC, 
> they did have a
> >> choice of AHCI or RAID, and I think there may have been 
> one other option.
> >> Unless this is
> >
> > I think that is on the PERC contoller. The Onboard SATA A/B 
> ports are the
> > issue.
> 
> Nope. That's the kind of stuff that's only in the BIOS - it's 
> certainly
> not on a PERC.

Will go over it again with a fine tooth comb.

> 
> > We have some with 40 pin IDE, but I am ignoring them.
> 
> And to that I have one response: MTBF. You need to talk to management
> about spending some money

Step 1. Make more money.
Step 2. Replace 40 of them when the support contract expires.

> >
> > Both IDE and SATA mother boards have the same BIOS version!?!?!
> >
> Presumably from when the switchover was happening.
> 
> H... have you spoken to Dell, or looked on their website, for a
> firmware update for the BIOS?

Running the latest BIOS.

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


--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-   -
- Jason Pyeron  PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant  10 West 24th Street #100-
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
-   -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)

[m . roth]

Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> From: m.r...@5-cent.us

>> Dumb question: these machines are getting very long in the tooth, but
>> you're putting SSD's in them? New, or newer machines, would
>
>> solve a lot of problems
>
> Their warrantees are good for another few years... And the money is not :)

Warning: danger, Will Robinson.

One of the main things that pushed us to surplus ours was interesting:
inside of a month, 4? 5? more? of them had the PERC fail, fatally. Amazing
quality control (and they were in about three different rooms, including
one or more in the datacenter, so it wasn't the environment).

Refurbed machines are also an option

   mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Valeri Galtsev]

On Fri, September 5, 2014 2:02 pm, Stephen Harris wrote:

> For me I have things like
>   sda1
>   sdb2
>   sdc3
>   sdd4
> and I align the partitions to the physical slot.

What do you do when it comes to 5,... (as MBR only supports 4 primary
partitions ;-) ?

> This makes it easier to see what is the failed disk; "sdc3 has fallen out
> of
> the array; that's the disk in slot 3".
>
> Because today's sdc may be tomorrow's sdf depending on any additional
> disks
> that have been added or kernel device discover order changes or whatever.
>

That's why I like the [block] device naming strictly derived from topology
of machine (e.g. FreeBSD does it that way), then you know, which physical
drive (or other block device, e.g. attached hardware RAID) a device
/dev/da[x] is. I remember hassle when Linux switched numbering of network
interfaces eth0, eth1,... from order the are "detected" in to reverse
order (which probably stemmed from pushing them into stack then pulling
them back) - or was it other way around?

Valeri


Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247





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

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[m . roth]

Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> On Fri, September 5, 2014 2:02 pm, Stephen Harris wrote:
>
>> For me I have things like
>>   sda1
>>   sdb2
>>   sdc3
>>   sdd4
>> and I align the partitions to the physical slot.
>
> What do you do when it comes to 5,... (as MBR only supports 4 primary
> partitions ;-) ?

Then you make something an extended partition.
>
>> This makes it easier to see what is the failed disk; "sdc3 has fallen
>> out of the array; that's the disk in slot 3".
>>
>> Because today's sdc may be tomorrow's sdf depending on any additional
>> disks that have been added or kernel device discover order changes or
>> whatever.
>
> That's why I like the [block] device naming strictly derived from topology
> of machine (e.g. FreeBSD does it that way), then you know, which physical
> drive (or other block device, e.g. attached hardware RAID) a device
> /dev/da[x] is. I remember hassle when Linux switched numbering of network

How? I've had them move around on a non-RAID m/b (for example, a drive
fails, and you put one in an unused bay, and then you've got, say, sda,
sdc and sdd, no sdb, until reboot), and even then, it's *still* a guessing
game as to whether hot-swap bay upper left, lower left, upper right lower
right are sda, sdb, sdc, sdd, or sda, sdc, sdb, sdd, or, for the fun one,
lower right is sda

 mark

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

Re: [CentOS] Install Centos 6 x86_64 on Dell PowerEdge 2970 and aSSD (hardware probing issues)

[John Plemons]

Hey just coming into this conversation. Here is an Idea.. Why not 
install a SATA card into the machine, one that supports AHCI. I'm 
guessing there is a free PCI or PCI-E slot.


They are made, here is a link, I found quickly with a google search..  
Bang for buck, it could be the cheapest option.


http://www.lycom.com.tw/PE-126.htm

http://www.lycom.com.tw/PE-125.htm  ( Better card )

It could save a bunch of headaches.

On your 2970 which series are you running?  II or III

John


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

[CentOS] USB 3.0 Driver

[Matt]

http://www.inateck.com/inateck-kt4005-4-port-usb-3-0-pci-express-card-no-additional-power-connection-needed/

Will these work under Centos 6.x?  Can I just boot my home system with
a CentOS 6.x live CD to test?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Keith Keller]

On 2014-09-05, Richard Zimmerman  wrote:
>
> Until I read this thread, I've never heard of building RAIDs on bare metal 
> drives. I'm assuming no partition table, just a disk label?
>
> What is the advantage of doing this?

For just my purposes, the advantage is that I can treat my md RAID
drives in the same way I treat my hardware RAID drives, which are
bare drives.  It's just easier conceptually for me to not have to
remember to create a partition.  As Warren said, this is for data
volumes, not for arrays that need to host /boot or /.

--keith

-- 
kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us


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

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Bob Marcan]

On Fri, 5 Sep 2014 10:18:13 -0400
Scott Robbins  wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:01:05AM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
> > On 9/5/2014 07:18, Richard Zimmerman wrote:
> > >
> > >Until I read this thread, I've never heard of building RAIDs on bare
> > >metal drives. I'm assuming no partition table, just a disk label?
> > 

When the disk dies, the replacement disk must be exactly the same size.
Been there, done that.
I allways make partition few GB smaller than the physical size.
It's not always possible to get the same type of the replacement disk.

My 2c, Bob

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

Re: [CentOS] USB 3.0 Driver

[Matt]

Tried it and CentOS 6 did not seem to find it.  Anyone know of a USB
3.0 card that does work with Centos 6.x?


On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Matt  wrote:
> http://www.inateck.com/inateck-kt4005-4-port-usb-3-0-pci-express-card-no-additional-power-connection-needed/
>
> Will these work under Centos 6.x?  Can I just boot my home system with
> a CentOS 6.x live CD to test?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Dan Hyatt]

I was under the understanding that you CAN put in larger drives, BUT 
they format identically to the smaller drive. There are some exceptions 
I do not remember what.


D.
On 9/5/2014 4:26 PM, Bob Marcan wrote:

On Fri, 5 Sep 2014 10:18:13 -0400
Scott Robbins  wrote:


On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:01:05AM -0600, Warren Young wrote:

On 9/5/2014 07:18, Richard Zimmerman wrote:

Until I read this thread, I've never heard of building RAIDs on bare
metal drives. I'm assuming no partition table, just a disk label?

When the disk dies, the replacement disk must be exactly the same size.
Been there, done that.
I allways make partition few GB smaller than the physical size.
It's not always possible to get the same type of the replacement disk.

My 2c, Bob

___
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] Bare drive RAID question, was RE: *very* ugly mdadm issue [Solved, badly]

[Keith Keller]

On 2014-09-05, Bob Marcan  wrote:
>
> When the disk dies, the replacement disk must be exactly the same size.
> Been there, done that.
> I allways make partition few GB smaller than the physical size.
> It's not always possible to get the same type of the replacement disk.

I thought that newer versions of md could accomodate small size
differences (just as hardware RAID controllers can).  I know I have an
md array with at least two different drive models (though IIRC all from
the same manufacturer).

--keith

-- 
kkel...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us


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