i just registered for a centos wiki account, and was wondering if
this gives me edit capability. i'm prepping for the first of a number
of RHEL/centos basic admin courses and currently working my way thru
the wiki, collecting neat tricks and ideas and, occasionally, i'll
stumble over typoes --
On 25/09/10 11:36, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
>i just registered for a centos wiki account, and was wondering if
> this gives me edit capability. i'm prepping for the first of a number
> of RHEL/centos basic admin courses and currently working my way thru
> the wiki, collecting neat tricks and
On Sat, 25 Sep 2010, Ned Slider wrote:
> No, an account does not automatically give you edit rights, and you
> need to take this to the centos-docs list where a wiki editor will
> be happy to make the edits for you.
thanks muchly.
rday
--
On 09/24/2010 07:50 PM, Digimer wrote:
> Raid 10 requires 4 drives. First you would make two RAID 0 arrays, then
> create a third array that is RAID 1 using the two RAID 0 arrays for it's
> devices.
>
> With only two drives, your option is RAID 1 (mirroring - proper
> redundancy) or RAID 0 (stripin
On 09/25/2010 01:06 PM, Benjamin Franz wrote:
> If you have a single drive failure with RAID 0+1 you've lost *all* of
> your redundancy - one more failure and you are dead. If you create two
>
Things get a bit 'grey' with the mdraid10 and extentions, look at :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-sta
Jacob Bresciani wrote:
> RAID10 requires at least 4 drives does it not?
>
> Since it's a strip set of mirrored disks, the smallest configuration I
> can see is 4 disks, 2 mirrored pairs stripped.
He might be referring to what he can get from the mdraid10 (i know, Neil
Brown could have chosen a
I notice that the certificate /etc/pki/tls/certs/ca-bundle.crt
on my CentOS-5.5 system expired on 7 Jan 2010,
although the openssl-0.9.8e-12.el5_4.6 package was updated in March.
What is the point of this certificate?
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +35
On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:11 AM, Christopher Chan
wrote:
> Jacob Bresciani wrote:
>> RAID10 requires at least 4 drives does it not?
>>
>> Since it's a strip set of mirrored disks, the smallest configuration I
>> can see is 4 disks, 2 mirrored pairs stripped.
>
> He might be referring to what he c
On 9/24/10 11:12 PM, cpol...@surewest.net wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 10:28:41PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 22:24, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
>>> http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/
>>>
>>> That is a good source to read up about bind configuration.
>>>
>>> As a sidenote pl
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
> On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:11 AM, Christopher Chan
> wrote:
>> Jacob Bresciani wrote:
>>> RAID10 requires at least 4 drives does it not?
>>>
>>> Since it's a strip set of mirrored disks, the smallest configuration I
>>> can see is 4 disks, 2 mirr
On Sep 25, 2010, at 1:52 PM, Tom H wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
>> On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:11 AM, Christopher Chan
>> wrote:
>>> Jacob Bresciani wrote:
RAID10 requires at least 4 drives does it not?
Since it's a strip set of mirrored disks, the sm
> And don't do it that way.
>
> If you have a single drive failure with RAID 0+1 you've lost *all* of
> your redundancy - one more failure and you are dead. If you create two
> RAID1 sets and then strip them into a RAID0 you get pretty much the same
> performance and space efficiency characteristi
Thanks for all of the inputs...I finally came across a good article
summarizing what I needed, looks like I am going to try to the f2 option and
then do some testing vs the default n2 option. I am building the array as
we speak but it looks like building the f2 option will take 24hrs vs 2hrs
for t
> Mdraid10 actually allows for a 3 drive raid10 set. It isn't raid10 per say
> but a raid level based on distributing copies of chunks around the spindles
> for redundancy.
Isn't this what they call RAID 1e (RAID 1 Enhanced), which needs a
minimum of 3 drives?
This seems to me a much better n
Miguel Medalha wrote:
>> Mdraid10 actually allows for a 3 drive raid10 set. It isn't raid10 per say
>> but a raid level based on distributing copies of chunks around the spindles
>> for redundancy.
>>
>
> Isn't this what they call RAID 1e (RAID 1 Enhanced), which needs a
> minimum of 3 driv
On Sep 25, 2010, at 4:15 PM, Miguel Medalha wrote:
>
>> Mdraid10 actually allows for a 3 drive raid10 set. It isn't raid10 per say
>> but a raid level based on distributing copies of chunks around the spindles
>> for redundancy.
>
> Isn't this what they call RAID 1e (RAID 1 Enhanced), which n
I am atempting to work with some rpms in the c5-testing repo.
When I add:
[c5-testing]
name=CentOS-5 Testing
baseurl=http://dev.centos.org/centos/5/testing/x86_64/
gpgcheck=1
gpgkey=http://dev.centos.org/centos/RPM-GPG-KEY-CentOS-testing
to centos-5-x86_64.cfg, saving as centos-5-x86_64-testdev.
Solved,
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jason Pyeron
> Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2010 17:22
> To: 'CentOS mailing list'
> Subject: [CentOS] Mock on 5.5 x86_64 failing with Could not
> find useradd inchroot, mayb
> The raid1e type probably didn't exist when Neil Brown came up with the
> algorithm.
You are probably right.
> He should have patented it though...
Maybe...
> Maybe he started out with the idea to create a raid10, but didn't want the
> complexity of managing sub-arrays so decided just to re
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Ross Walker wrote:
> On Sep 25, 2010, at 1:52 PM, Tom H wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
>>> On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:11 AM, Christopher Chan
>>> wrote:
Jacob Bresciani wrote:
> RAID10 requires at least 4 drives does it not?
I just picked up a new HP OfficeJet J3680 all-in-one (because, as
previously posted, my 4315 broke), and I was able to install the
printer using the latest hplip's hp-setup command, BUT:
My sane:
libsane-hpaio.x86_64 1.6.7-4.1.el5.4 installed
sane-backends.x86_64
21 matches
Mail list logo
