[CentOS] Monitor Dummy Device
Hello List, i want to use a Dual-Screen Solution without connected a second Monitor. Its a solution available, that a physical monitor/Device is simulated? I want to use it on KDE. Thank you. Joey ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Monitor Dummy Device
On 01/17/2016 10:42 AM, Joey wrote: > Dual-Screen Solution without connected a second Monitor What is a dual screen solution without a second monitor? Are you talking about virtual desktops? -- -- Steve ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Monitor Dummy Device
Am 2016-01-17 17:47, schrieb SternData: On 01/17/2016 10:42 AM, Joey wrote: Dual-Screen Solution without connected a second Monitor What is a dual screen solution without a second monitor? Are you talking about virtual desktops? Yes. if this virtual Desktop is useable like a normal Desktop (for example change position in kde systemsettings) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] HDD badblocks
Hi list, I've a notebook with C7 (1511). This notebook has 2 disk (640 GB) and I've configured them with MD at level 1. Some days ago I've noticed some critical slowdown while opening applications. First of all I've disabled acpi on disks. I've checked disk for badblocks 4 consecutive times for disk sda and sdb and I've noticed a strange behaviour. On sdb there are not problem but with sda: 1) First run badblocks reports 28 badblocks on disk 2) Second run badblocks reports 32 badblocks 3) Third reports 102 badblocks 4) Last run reports 92 badblocks. Running smartctl after the last badblocks check I've noticed that Current_Pending_Sector was 32 (not 92 as badblocks found). To force sector reallocation I've filled the disk up to 100%, runned again badblocks and 0 badblocks found. Running again smartctl, Current_Pending_Sector 0 but Reallocated_Event Count = 0. Why each consecutive run of badblocks reports different results? Why smartctl does not update Reallocated_Event_Count? Badblocks found on sda increase/decrease without a clean reason. This behaviuor can be related with raid (if a disk had badblocks this badblock can be replicated on second disk?)? What other test I can perform to verify disks problems? Thanks in advance. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] HDD badblocks
Have you ran a "long" smart test on the drive? Smartctl -t long device I'm not sure what's going on with your drive. But if it were mine, I'd want to replace it. If there are issues, that long smart check ought to turn up something, and in my experience, that's enough for a manufacturer to do a warranty replacement. On Jan 17, 2016 11:00, "Alessandro Baggi" wrote: > Hi list, > I've a notebook with C7 (1511). This notebook has 2 disk (640 GB) and I've > configured them with MD at level 1. Some days ago I've noticed some > critical slowdown while opening applications. > > First of all I've disabled acpi on disks. > > > I've checked disk for badblocks 4 consecutive times for disk sda and sdb > and I've noticed a strange behaviour. > > On sdb there are not problem but with sda: > > 1) First run badblocks reports 28 badblocks on disk > 2) Second run badblocks reports 32 badblocks > 3) Third reports 102 badblocks > 4) Last run reports 92 badblocks. > > > Running smartctl after the last badblocks check I've noticed that > Current_Pending_Sector was 32 (not 92 as badblocks found). > > To force sector reallocation I've filled the disk up to 100%, runned again > badblocks and 0 badblocks found. > Running again smartctl, Current_Pending_Sector 0 but Reallocated_Event > Count = 0. > > Why each consecutive run of badblocks reports different results? > Why smartctl does not update Reallocated_Event_Count? > Badblocks found on sda increase/decrease without a clean reason. This > behaviuor can be related with raid (if a disk had badblocks this badblock > can be replicated on second disk?)? > > What other test I can perform to verify disks problems? > > Thanks in advance. > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Monitor Dummy Device
On 01/17/2016 10:58 AM, Joey wrote: > Am 2016-01-17 17:47, schrieb SternData: >> On 01/17/2016 10:42 AM, Joey wrote: >>> Dual-Screen Solution without connected a second Monitor >> >> What is a dual screen solution without a second monitor? Are you >> talking about virtual desktops? > > Yes. if this virtual Desktop is useable like a normal Desktop (for > example change position in kde systemsettings) I don't use KDE, but I see lots of info googling on "enable KDE Virtual Desktop" -- -- Steve ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Monitor Dummy Device
Am 2016-01-17 18:09, schrieb SternData: On 01/17/2016 10:58 AM, Joey wrote: Am 2016-01-17 17:47, schrieb SternData: On 01/17/2016 10:42 AM, Joey wrote: Dual-Screen Solution without connected a second Monitor What is a dual screen solution without a second monitor? Are you talking about virtual desktops? Yes. if this virtual Desktop is useable like a normal Desktop (for example change position in kde systemsettings) I don't use KDE, but I see lots of info googling on "enable KDE Virtual Desktop" But this means other things. i think i need a virtual device for dual screen using. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CPU Freq Scaling
Hi list, I'm using C7 and noticed that cpu freq is enabled with governor conservative. I've used cpupower utils for governor change, but at the next boot it restart with conservative governor. I've tried also to start cpupower service and setting OPT in /etc/sysconfig/cpupower but it does not works. Can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks in advance ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] HDD badblocks
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Matt Garman wrote: > I'm not sure what's going on with your drive. But if it were mine, I'd want > to replace it. If there are issues, that long smart check ought to turn up > something, and in my experience, that's enough for a manufacturer to do a > warranty replacement. I agree with Matt. Go ahead and run a few of the S.M.A.R.T. tests. I can almost guarantee based off of your description of your problem that they will fail. badblocks(8) is a very antiquated tool. Almost every hard drive has a few bad sectors from the factory. Very old hard drives used to have a list of the bad sectors printed on the front of the label. When you first created a filesystem you had to enter all of the bad sectors from the label so that the filesystem wouldn't store data there. Years later, more bad sectors would form and you could enter them into the filesystem by discovering them using a tool like badblocks(8). Today, drives do all of this work automatically. The manufacturer of a hard drive will scan the entire surface and write the bad sectors into a section of the hard drive's electronics known as the P-list. The controller on the drive will automatically remap these sectors to a small area of unused sectors set aside for this very purpose. Later if more bad sectors form, hard drives when they see a bad sector will enter it into a list known as the G-list and then remap this sector to other sectors in the unused area of the drive I mentioned earlier. Basically under normal conditions, the end user should NEVER see bad sectors from their perspective. If badblocks(8) is reporting bad sectors, it is very likely that enough bad sectors have formed to the point where the unused reserved sectors is depleted of replacement sectors. While in theory you could run badblocks(8) and pass it to the filesystem, I can ensure you that the growth of bad sectors at this point has reached a point in which it will continue. I'd stop using that hard drive, pull any important data, and then proceed to run S.M.A.R.T. tests so if the drive is under warranty you can have it replaced. Brandon Vincent ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] HDD badblocks
Il 17/01/2016 18:46, Brandon Vincent ha scritto: On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Matt Garman wrote: I'm not sure what's going on with your drive. But if it were mine, I'd want to replace it. If there are issues, that long smart check ought to turn up something, and in my experience, that's enough for a manufacturer to do a warranty replacement. I agree with Matt. Go ahead and run a few of the S.M.A.R.T. tests. I can almost guarantee based off of your description of your problem that they will fail. badblocks(8) is a very antiquated tool. Almost every hard drive has a few bad sectors from the factory. Very old hard drives used to have a list of the bad sectors printed on the front of the label. When you first created a filesystem you had to enter all of the bad sectors from the label so that the filesystem wouldn't store data there. Years later, more bad sectors would form and you could enter them into the filesystem by discovering them using a tool like badblocks(8). Today, drives do all of this work automatically. The manufacturer of a hard drive will scan the entire surface and write the bad sectors into a section of the hard drive's electronics known as the P-list. The controller on the drive will automatically remap these sectors to a small area of unused sectors set aside for this very purpose. Later if more bad sectors form, hard drives when they see a bad sector will enter it into a list known as the G-list and then remap this sector to other sectors in the unused area of the drive I mentioned earlier. Basically under normal conditions, the end user should NEVER see bad sectors from their perspective. If badblocks(8) is reporting bad sectors, it is very likely that enough bad sectors have formed to the point where the unused reserved sectors is depleted of replacement sectors. While in theory you could run badblocks(8) and pass it to the filesystem, I can ensure you that the growth of bad sectors at this point has reached a point in which it will continue. I'd stop using that hard drive, pull any important data, and then proceed to run S.M.A.R.T. tests so if the drive is under warranty you can have it replaced. Brandon Vincent ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos I'm running long smart test. I'll report data when finished ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CPU Freq Scaling
Am 17.01.2016 um 18:36 schrieb Alessandro Baggi: Hi list, I'm using C7 and noticed that cpu freq is enabled with governor conservative. I've used cpupower utils for governor change, but at the next boot it restart with conservative governor. I've tried also to start cpupower service and setting OPT in /etc/sysconfig/cpupower but it does not works. Can someone point me in the right direction? https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/Performance_Tuning_Guide/sect-Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux-Performance_Tuning_Guide-Tool_Reference-tuned_adm.html Thanks in advance Alexander ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
