Hi,
We have two nodes with centos 5.5 x64 and cluster+gfs offering samba and
NFS services.
Recently one node displayed the following messages in log files:
Sep 13 08:19:07 NODE1 gfs_controld[3101]: cpg_mcast_joined error 2
handle 2846d7ad MSG_PLOCK
Sep 13 08:19:07 NODE1 gfs_controld[3101]
Hi all,
I'm just curios and would like some input from the community on this
one. We're busy budgeting for a couple of new servers and I thought it
would be good to try out the Core i7 CPU's, but see the majority of
them don't offer VT-d, but just VT-x. Looking at the LGA1366 range,
only the "Inte
On 09/14/2010 03:01 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> Even so, most machines today performs multiple tasks, so 3GB limit per
> process isn't really that big an issue, unless you render graphics
> with a mono-threaded application.
You are assuming, wrongly, that apps will scale interprocess as they do
for
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> On 09/14/2010 03:01 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
>> Even so, most machines today performs multiple tasks, so 3GB limit per
>> process isn't really that big an issue, unless you render graphics
>> with a mono-threaded application.
>
> You are assu
On 09/15/2010 11:05 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> Sure, there are exceptions but my assumptions were on a general scale.
> So, if this is the case (which I don't think it was with the OP), then
> 64bit would be better. But in general, 32bit could perform as well.
>
No, I dont agree - my point really wa
> So, if VT-d really necessary?
> We mainly host XEN virtual machine for the hosting industry, i.e. we
> don't need / use graphics rendering inside VM's, or need DAS on the
> VM's, etc.
> Kind Regards
> Rudi Ahlers
> SoftDux
VT-d is not a necessity in general. It all depends on the kind of
virtu
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
> VT-d is not a necessity in general. It all depends on the kind of
> virtualization you run. If you run only paravirtualized guests on Xen,
> then there is not any need for VT-d (see [1]). If you fully virtualize for
> instance Windows gue
John R Pierce wrote on 09/14/2010 09:27 AM:
> On 09/14/10 6:24 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> rsync -HPavxz --exclude /mnt /. /mnt/.
>>
>>
>
> how does rsync handle links? not symlinks, but actual file links?
From "man rsync":
-H, --hard-linkspreserve hard links
Phil
__
Hello listmates,
I have been playing with Xen VM's and was wondering what the minimum
RAM size in which you could run CentOS 5.5 (i386). So far I managed to
install in 256 MB or 512 MB and then shrink the VM's RAM to 128 MB and
still run the installation. Would anyone know why the install in a 128
On Wednesday, September 15, 2010 09:00:35 am Boris Epstein wrote:
> Hello listmates,
>
> I have been playing with Xen VM's and was wondering what the minimum
> RAM size in which you could run CentOS 5.5 (i386). So far I managed to
> install in 256 MB or 512 MB and then shrink the VM's RAM to 128 M
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of
Bobby
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 3:11 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS in low RAM settings
On Wednesday, September 15, 2010 09:00:35 am Boris Epstein wrote
On 9/15/2010 8:00 AM, Boris Epstein wrote:
> Hello listmates,
>
> I have been playing with Xen VM's and was wondering what the minimum
> RAM size in which you could run CentOS 5.5 (i386). So far I managed to
> install in 256 MB or 512 MB and then shrink the VM's RAM to 128 MB and
> still run the in
i'm experimenting with some basic removable media mounting
exercises for an upcoming class, and i read that, while you can use
gconf-editor to change some of the mount options in cases like that,
there is no way to override the mount options of nodev, noexec and
nosuid. for example, that claim
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 03:09:39PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> i'm experimenting with some basic removable media mounting
> exercises for an upcoming class, and i read that, while you can use
> gconf-editor to change some of the mount options in cases like that,
> there is no way to override
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> i'm experimenting with some basic removable media mounting
> exercises for an upcoming class, and i read that, while you can use
> gconf-editor to change some of the mount options in cases like that,
> there is no way to override the mo
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:26:12AM -1000, Dave wrote:
> This question is different from the one in your subject header. These
> mount options are 'security features', make crackers jump through another
> hoop. They can be undone with a mount -o remount.
If one can jump through that hoop, one alrea
Hi,
> I'm just curios and would like some input from the community on this
> one. We're busy budgeting for a couple of new servers and I thought it
> would be good to try out the Core i7 CPU's, but see the majority of
> them don't offer VT-d, but just VT-x. Looking at the LGA1366 range,
> only the
On 09/15/10 2:19 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm just curios and would like some input from the community on this
> one. We're busy budgeting for a couple of new servers and I thought it
> would be good to try out the Core i7 CPU's, but see the majority of
> them don't offer VT-d, but ju
18 matches
Mail list logo
