Re: [CentOS] Expanding RAID 10 array, WAS: 40TB File System Recommendations

On 04/14/11 5:43 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: > On Friday, April 15, 2011 02:46 AM, John R Pierce wrote: >> On 04/14/11 7:44 AM, Christopher Chan wrote: >>> Now, if OpenIndiana resists using illumos... >> openindiana is under the Illumos project umbrella. They aren't going to >> use anything else.

Re: [CentOS] [OT] ups advice

2011/4/14 John R Pierce : > On 04/14/11 9:06 AM, admin lewis wrote: >> Hi >> I have a Dell PowerEdge T310 *tower* server.. I have to buy an ups by >> apc... anyone could help me giving an hint ? >> a simple "smart ups 1000" could be enough ? >> >> > > apc smartups or eaton powerware woudl be my cho

Re: [CentOS] cents 5.6 ..... futur

Michel Donais wrote: > To pass from Centos 5.5 to 5.6 it was easy as an upgrade. > > Will it be the same from 5.6 to 6.0 or a full install will be better. > > --- There is so big difference between them (base packages, package and system design, dependencies) that full install will be necessar

Re: [CentOS] Expanding RAID 10 array, WAS: 40TB File System Recommendations

John R Pierce wrote: > On 04/14/11 5:43 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: >> On Friday, April 15, 2011 02:46 AM, John R Pierce wrote: >>> On 04/14/11 7:44 AM, Christopher Chan wrote: Now, if OpenIndiana resists using illumos... >>> openindiana is under the Illumos project umbrella. They aren't goin

Re: [CentOS] speed-tuning samba?

On 2011-04-14 20:16, Les Mikesell wrote: > One thing in particular that I'd like to make faster is access to a set > of libraries (boost, etc.) that are in a directory mapped by several > windows boxes (mostly VM's on different machines)used as build servers. > I usually run samba with defaults, a

Re: [CentOS] Expanding RAID 10 array, WAS: 40TB File System Recommendations

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: > John R Pierce wrote: > > On 04/14/11 5:43 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: > >> On Friday, April 15, 2011 02:46 AM, John R Pierce wrote: > >>> On 04/14/11 7:44 AM, Christopher Chan wrote: > Now, if OpenIndiana resists using illumos...

Re: [CentOS] CentOS on SSDs...

Thanks to all for the info. Guess I will either keep CentOS 5 and have to compile my own kernel for the discard option; or wait for CentOS 6... Thx, JD ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Expanding RAID 10 array, WAS: 40TB File System Recommendations

On Friday, April 15, 2011 03:59 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > On 04/14/11 5:43 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: >> On Friday, April 15, 2011 02:46 AM, John R Pierce wrote: >>> On 04/14/11 7:44 AM, Christopher Chan wrote: Now, if OpenIndiana resists using illumos... >>> openindiana is under the Illumos

Re: [CentOS] Expanding RAID 10 array, WAS: 40TB File System Recommendations

On Apr 15, 2011, at 4:48 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote: > John R Pierce wrote: > > On 04/14/11 5:43 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: > >> On Friday, April 15, 2011 02:46 AM, John R Pierce wrote: > >>> On 04/14/11 7:44 AM, Christopher Chan w

Re: [CentOS] CentOs 5.6 and Time Sync

On 04/14/2011 06:23 AM, Mailing List wrote: > On 4/14/2011 6:47 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> >> Is it really true that the time is working perfectly with one of the >> other kernels (the older ones)? >> >> >> > >Johnny, > > Yes, As long as I run the older 5.5 kernel my time is perfect. A

[CentOS] php53 and MSSQL

[Reposted now I've joined the list, so I hopefully don't get moderated out] Hi, I've upgraded lots of machines to 5.6 (thanks!) and there was one particular machine that I'd also like to upgrade to PHP 5.3. Unfortunately it seems I can't. On the machine I have php-mssql installed, and it appears

Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations

On 04/14/2011 09:00 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: > > Wanna try that again with 64MB of cache only and tell us whether there > is a difference in performance? > > There is a reason why 3ware 85xx cards were complete rubbish when used > for raid5 and which led to the 95xx/96xx series. > _ I don't hap

Re: [CentOS] php53 and eacclerator

> I uploaded the spec here: > http://ubliga.de/php-eaccelerator.spec > > It's adjusted for RHEL/Centos 5.6 so that it works with stock php53 > packages - no need to pull in packages from other repos. > Thanks! ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos

[CentOS] php53 and mcrypt

More PHP fun! I can see in the spec files that php-mcrypt support was removed by Redhat. I tried to find out why but I don't have sufficient access to redhat bugzilla. I am wondering if it is actually necessary as I have also run across a post or two that indicates applications that rely on

Re: [CentOS] [OT] ups advice

Some of the newer HP servers are very picky about power from UPS's, from what I have read. I have used several Best Ferrups UPSs over the years, other than one that toasted it's transformer, have never had any trouble out of them (just replace the battery every 3 to 4 years). They are pick

Re: [CentOS] php53 and MSSQL

On 15/04/11 12:23, John Beranek wrote: > [Reposted now I've joined the list, so I hopefully don't get moderated out] > > Hi, > > I've upgraded lots of machines to 5.6 (thanks!) and there was one > particular machine that I'd also like to upgrade to PHP 5.3. > Unfortunately it seems I can't. > >

Re: [CentOS] php53 and mcrypt

Am 15.04.2011 13:32, schrieb Geoff Galitz: > More PHP fun! > I can see in the spec files that php-mcrypt support was removed by > Redhat. I tried to find out why but I don't have sufficient access to > redhat bugzilla. I am wondering if it is actually necessary as I have > also run across a post or

Re: [CentOS] php53 and mcrypt

Rainer Traut wrote on 04/15/2011 07:55 AM: ... > Yeah, I had the same problem with missing php_mcrypt. ;) > I did a full rebuild of php53 with patched spec so that it produces > php53_mcrypt but that is not very elegant. > The more elegant way to do it is to make an rpm for only the missing > modul

Re: [CentOS] php53 and MSSQL

John Beranek wrote on 04/15/2011 07:45 AM: > On 15/04/11 12:23, John Beranek wrote: >> [Reposted now I've joined the list, so I hopefully don't get moderated out] >> >> Hi, >> >> I've upgraded lots of machines to 5.6 (thanks!) and there was one >> particular machine that I'd also like to upgrade to

Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations

On Thursday, April 14, 2011 05:26:41 PM Ross Walker wrote: > 2011/4/14 Peter Kjellström : ... > > While I do concede the obvious point regarding rebuild time (raid6 takes > > from long to very long to rebuild) I'd like to point out: > > > > * If you do the math for a 12 drive raid10 vs raid6 then

Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations

On Friday, April 15, 2011 07:24 PM, Benjamin Franz wrote: > On 04/14/2011 09:00 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: >> >> Wanna try that again with 64MB of cache only and tell us whether there >> is a difference in performance? >> >> There is a reason why 3ware 85xx cards were complete rubbish when used >>

Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Christopher Chan < christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk> wrote: > On Friday, April 15, 2011 07:24 PM, Benjamin Franz wrote: > > On 04/14/2011 09:00 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: > >> > >> Wanna try that again with 64MB of cache only and tell us whether there > >> is a di

Re: [CentOS] php53 and MSSQL

On 15/04/11 13:49, Phil Schaffner wrote: > John Beranek wrote on 04/15/2011 07:45 AM: >> On 15/04/11 12:23, John Beranek wrote: >>> [Reposted now I've joined the list, so I hopefully don't get moderated out] >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've upgraded lots of machines to 5.6 (thanks!) and there was one >>> p

Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations

On 04/15/2011 06:05 AM, Christopher Chan wrote: > > Woohoo, next we will be seeing md raid6 also giving comparable results > if that is the case. I am not the only person on this list that thinks > cache is king for raid5/6 on hardware raid boards and the using hardware > raid + bbu cache for bette

[CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

Hello, Earlier this week I installed a test server with CentOS 5.6 with Virtualization enabled during the installer. Today I installed another server using the same method (they are identical servers). I just did a yum update and I found something curious. Both servers have a different kernel.

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

It's possible that your #2 server has not rebooted or had problems with the latest kernel or just has the default set to something other than "0" in grub.conf. What's the output of: egrep 'default|title' /etc/grub.conf yum list kernel | grep kernel ./Cal On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 16:18 +0200, Hans

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Hans Vos wrote: > Hello, > > Earlier this week I installed a test server with CentOS 5.6 with > Virtualization enabled during the installer. Today I installed another > server using the same method (they are identical servers). I just did a > yum update and I foun

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

Hello Cal, Thank you for your reply. > It's possible that your #2 server has not rebooted or had problems with > the latest kernel or just has the default set to something other than > "0" in grub.conf. I did a reboot and checked the grub.conf. Should have mentioned that. > What's the output of

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

Hello, > The 9.1 kernel update was released last night. The mirrors must still > be catching up. I was update to update one box to 9.1 and my other > boxes still don't see the 9.1 update. Ah, that might also explain why on server 1 there were 51 updates and on server 2 only 33. Could not figure

Re: [CentOS] [OT] ups advice

On 04/15/11 4:38 AM, Howard Fleming wrote: > I have used several Best Ferrups UPSs over the years, other than one > that toasted it's transformer, have never had any trouble out of them > (just replace the battery every 3 to 4 years). > > They are picky about their input power, do not run not c

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 16:37 +0200, Hans Vos wrote: > Hello Cal, > > Thank you for your reply. > > > It's possible that your #2 server has not rebooted or had problems with > > the latest kernel or just has the default set to something other than > > "0" in grub.conf. > > I did a reboot and check

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

Hello, > Ryan is right. The mirrors need to sync up. That's most likely the > cause. Still, it's curious why you have two kernels listed in grub.conf > and only one listed from yum. You should also see the 2.6.18-238.el5xen > kernel listed. Well, I copied the /var/cache/yum/timedhosts.txt file fr

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Hans Vos wrote: > Well, I copied the /var/cache/yum/timedhosts.txt file from server 1 to > server 2. Then run yum update and all kinds of errors came flying at me. > So I just SCP'ed the whole /var/cache/yum directory of server 1 to > server 2. Ran yum update and

Re: [CentOS] [OT] ups advice

On 4/15/2011 10:48, John R Pierce wrote: > On 04/15/11 4:38 AM, Howard Fleming wrote: >> I have used several Best Ferrups UPSs over the years, other than one >> that toasted it's transformer, have never had any trouble out of them >> (just replace the battery every 3 to 4 years). >> >> They a

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 17:00 +0200, Hans Vos wrote: > Hello, > > > Ryan is right. The mirrors need to sync up. That's most likely the > > cause. Still, it's curious why you have two kernels listed in grub.conf > > and only one listed from yum. You should also see the 2.6.18-238.el5xen > > kernel li

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 11:07 -0400, Ryan Wagoner wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Hans Vos wrote: > > Well, I copied the /var/cache/yum/timedhosts.txt file from server 1 to > > server 2. Then run yum update and all kinds of errors came flying at me. > > So I just SCP'ed the whole /var/cac

Re: [CentOS] Two cleanly installed CentOS 5.6 servers but with different Xen kernel versions

> Not sure the outcome of copying the yum directory. I would have just > run yum clean all then yum update. Ah, thanks, I will put that in my personal Wiki for future reference. Noob here and it is a test environment at home :). Thanks for your help. -- Kind regards, Hans Vos _

Re: [CentOS] CentOs 5.6 and Time Sync

On 04/15/2011 04:08 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 04/14/2011 06:23 AM, Mailing List wrote: >> On 4/14/2011 6:47 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> Is it really true that the time is working perfectly with one of the >>> other kernels (the older ones)? >>> >>> >>> >>Johnny, >> >> Yes, As long as

Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations

On Apr 15, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Christopher Chan > wrote: > On Friday, April 15, 2011 07:24 PM, Benjamin Franz wrote: > > On 04/14/2011 09:00 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: > >> > >> Wanna try that again with 64MB of cache only and tell us w

Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Ross Walker wrote: > On Apr 15, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Christopher Chan > < > christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk> wrote: > >> On Friday, April 15, 2011 07:24 PM, Benjamin Franz wrote: >> > On 04/14/2011 09:00

Re: [CentOS] 5.6 - SRPM's

On 04/13/2011 07:54 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote: > > They are definitely in there, just slow. > > - KB Hi guys, Still without SRPM's in 5.6/os/SRPMS/ -- Filipe Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/

[CentOS] cross-platform email client

I'm a Thunderbird user almost since day one, but now I'm looking for something else. For whatever reason, it doesn't work well for me - every once in a while it becomes non-responsive (UI completely frozen for several seconds, CPU usage goes to 100%) and I just can't afford to waste time waitin

Re: [CentOS] cross-platform email client

On 04/15/11 12:07 PM, Florin Andrei wrote: > I'm a Thunderbird user almost since day one, but now I'm looking for > something else. For whatever reason, it doesn't work well for me - every > once in a while it becomes non-responsive (UI completely frozen for > several seconds, CPU usage goes to 100

Re: [CentOS] cross-platform email client

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Florin Andrei wrote: > I'm a Thunderbird user almost since day one, but now I'm looking for > something else. For whatever reason, it doesn't work well for me - every > once in a while it becomes non-responsive (UI completely frozen for > several seconds, CPU usage

Re: [CentOS] cross-platform email client

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 02:30:10PM -0500, Jeff wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Florin Andrei wrote: > > I'm a Thunderbird user almost since day one, but now I'm looking for > > something else. For whatever reason, it doesn't work well for me - every > > once in a while it becomes non-re

Re: [CentOS] cross-platform email client

On 04/15/2011 12:28 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > > I think T-bird gets locked up when its SENDING mail if the server takes > too long to reply at the early stages of the protocol. that or DNS > lookups take too long. At least in my case - no and no. It freezes randomly but pretty often, no relatio

Re: [CentOS] cross-platform email client

On 04/15/2011 12:30 PM, Jeff wrote: > > By default Thunderbird creates a local cache for IMAP accounts -- for > large accounts, this can be problematic. Have you tried disabling the > local synchronization? > > Account Settings -> Synch& Storage -> Uncheck "Keep messages for this > account on th

Re: [CentOS] cross-platform email client

On 04/15/11 12:45 PM, Florin Andrei wrote: > On 04/15/2011 12:28 PM, John R Pierce wrote: >> I think T-bird gets locked up when its SENDING mail if the server takes >> too long to reply at the early stages of the protocol. that or DNS >> lookups take too long. > At least in my case - no and no. >

Re: [CentOS] cross-platform email client

On 4/15/2011 3:46 PM, Florin Andrei wrote: > On 04/15/2011 12:30 PM, Jeff wrote: >> By default Thunderbird creates a local cache for IMAP accounts -- for >> large accounts, this can be problematic. Have you tried disabling the >> local synchronization? >> >> Account Settings -> Synch& Storage -

Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations

On Apr 15, 2011, at 12:32 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Ross Walker wrote: > On Apr 15, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Christopher Chan >> wrote: >> On Friday, April 15, 2011 07:24 PM, Benjamin Franz wrote:

Re: [CentOS] CentOs 5.6 and Time Sync

On 4/15/2011 7:08 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: I do not see anything from Dell that is a model C151. I also do not see anything in the RH bugzilla that is problematic for older AMD processors and the clock, unless running KVM type virtual machines. Is this a VM or regular install? If this a real

Re: [CentOS] CentOs 5.6 and Time Sync

On 4/15/2011 4:58 PM, Mailing List wrote: Johnny, Sorry about the wrong system id number here is what it is. Dell Inspiron C521 Bios Version 1.1.11 (08/07/2007) It is not a VM, it is a regular install. I have not made any changes to the kernel options. It has been fine with a sto

[CentOS] unrar rpm package

Hi there -- I am running a server with the 5.6 64-bit distribution, and I am looking for an unrar rpm package. I have several repositories set up on the server which are the following: base updates extras centosplus contrib c5-testing All are enabled. When I do a yum search for unrar, nothing c

Re: [CentOS] unrar rpm package

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:38:49 -0400 Kaplan, Andrew H. wrote: > All are enabled. When I do a yum search for unrar, nothing comes up. Is there > another repository > that I should add to the list, or is there a particular website that I can go > to get the package? rpmfusion has it. -- MELVILLE T

Re: [CentOS] unrar rpm package

On 04/15/11 2:38 PM, Kaplan, Andrew H. wrote: > > Hi there -- > > I am running a server with the 5.6 64-bit distribution, and I am > looking for an unrar rpm package. > I have several repositories set up on the server which are the following: > > base > updates > extras > centosplus > contrib > c5

Re: [CentOS] unrar rpm package

On 4/15/2011 5:50 PM, Frank Cox wrote: On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:38:49 -0400 Kaplan, Andrew H. wrote: All are enabled. When I do a yum search for unrar, nothing comes up. Is there another repository that I should add to the list, or is there a particular website that I can go to get the package?

Re: [CentOS] unrar rpm package

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 02:54:23PM -0700, John R Pierce wrote: > On 04/15/11 2:38 PM, Kaplan, Andrew H. wrote: > > > > Hi there -- > > > > I am running a server with the 5.6 64-bit distribution, and I am > > looking for an unrar rpm package. > > I have several repositories set up on the server whi

Re: [CentOS] 40TB File System Recommendations

> > As matter of interest, does anyone know how to use an SSD drive for cach > purposes on Linux software RAID drives? ZFS has this feature and it > makes a helluva difference to a storage server's performance. You cannot. You can however use one for the external journal of ext3/4 in full journ

Re: [CentOS] cross-platform email client

Florin Andrei wrote: > I'm a Thunderbird user almost since day one, but now I'm looking for > something else. Check out Mulberry. It hasn't been updated in a while, but don't let that scare you off. It's a very solid mail reader for Linux, Mac, and Windows. It does

Re: [CentOS] cents 5.6 ..... futur

>> Will it be the same from 5.6 to 6.0 or a full install will be better. > > Full installs are always recommended between major versions. Thank's all for the advise; but is there any easy way to install a newer version while keeping all configuration changes that have been made on a previous on

Re: [CentOS] cents 5.6 ..... futur

On 04/15/11 7:40 PM, Michel Donais wrote: >>> Will it be the same from 5.6 to 6.0 or a full install will be better. >> Full installs are always recommended between major versions. > > Thank's all for the advise; but is there any easy way to install a newer > version while keeping all configuration

Re: [CentOS] cents 5.6 ..... futur

> have all your configuration under a change management system, with an at > least semi-automated installation procedure, such as kickstart. I nerver think kikstart was I need. I will check what it is and how it work. Thank's for the info. --- Michel Donais ___

[CentOS] Gnome Notification Applet

I tried out Scientific Linux 6 Live to see (basically) what I can expect with CentOS 6 and was pleased to find that everything looks pretty familiar and is easily customizable to make it look and feel like 5.6 -- except for one thing that I also noticed in Ubuntu's newest beta (my Dad uses Linux Mi

Re: [CentOS] cents 5.6 ..... futur

John R Pierce wrote: > have all your configuration under a change management system, with an at > least semi-automated installation procedure, such as kickstart. Or have the self discipline to keep a text file (or other record) of *all* changes you make to a system as root or other role accoun