On 5/22/11, yonatan pingle wrote:
> the only way to go with SSD is RAID due to these reasons.
> it's unlikely that two disks will die at the same time, so it's
> possible to use and enjoy them ,
> but don't forget to have a fresh backup and a raid array. ( that
> should be done also with an ordina
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 05/20/2011 01:26 PM, Keith Roberts wrote:
> > I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to use a new SSD
> > for moving all the disk i/o to, that Linux likes to do so
> > often.
>
Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited num
On 05/22/2011 08:05 PM, Steven Crothers wrote:
> I think you're missing the point, if you read between the lines, the
> complaint I see is that CentOS (Community Enterprise Operating System)
> is not community based whatsoever. Displaying the self-righteous
> attitude you are doesn't earn you cooki
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe
wrote:
> Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
> cycles.
> Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes across the drive
> but
> even so they don't last very long in heavy write usage.
>
Doesn't SATA and S
On 05/22/2011 09:22 AM, Mailing List wrote:
>
>Thanks,
>
> I'm trying to keep CentOS 5.5 from upgrading to 5.6 because of my
> issue with the time sync. I thought I had it figured out till today. I
> have tried google for help but with no luck. Can someone point me to a
> page or link t
On 05/22/2011 08:05 PM, Steven Crothers wrote:
> I think you're missing the point, if you read between the lines, the
> complaint I see is that CentOS (Community Enterprise Operating System)
> is not community based whatsoever. Displaying the self-righteous
> attitude you are doesn't earn you cooki
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> Doesn't SATA and SAS drives also wear out?
Not in such a clear way related to usage. You could have a SATA disk that you
write to 24 hours a day and it could last for years. With an SSD, you'd be
certain to kill your disk in months if you treated it lik
yonatan pingle wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Keith Roberts
> anyways - if it's for home usage Don't think twice get an SSD .
Why?
I've read most of the articles in this thread,
and I haven't seen anything that persuades me
SSD would be a good investment in my case,
either in servers
On 5/23/11 4:44 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
> The "community" does many, many things for CentOS.
And some of those things could probably be better too, but...
> We never said, anywhere, that the community would build the packages,
> nor did we say we would teach people how to make the distribution
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Community effort or not, it did once seem like you had goals
> for timeliness as well. Are you happy with the current
> situation? If more community participation is off the
> table, what else could help?
Johnny points out that we get crickets at he
On Sun, 22 May 2011, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> To: CentOS mailing list
> From: Gordon Messmer
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp & /var/ partition
>
> On 05/20/2011 01:26 PM, Keith Roberts wrote:
>> I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to use a new SSD
>> for moving all the disk
R P Herrold wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> Community effort or not, it did once seem like you had goals
>> for timeliness as well. Are you happy with the current
>> situation? If more community participation is off the
>> table, what else could help?
> Tell you what, Le
Keith,
On Friday, May 20, 2011 you wrote:
> I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to use a new SSD
> for moving all the disk i/o to, that Linux likes to do so
> often. Plus putting SWAP onto a decent SSD should speed
> things up somewhat.
As far as I understand, SSD are fast at reading and
2011/5/23 Johnny Hughes :
> I have said this a million times ... but you are flat out wrong.
>
> The "community" does many, many things for CentOS.
>
> It is the community that makes the CentOS Fora one of the best place to
> get information.
>
> The community does all the articles on the CentOS Wi
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> This seems to me to be an unnecessarily agressive response
> to what appeared to me a rational question from Les Mikesell.
> But I don't think the fact that a service is free
> entitles its proponents to be rude to those using it.
You must be new to t
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Michael Schumacher wrote:
> To: CentOS mailing list
> From: Michael Schumacher
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp & /var/ partition
>
> Keith,
>
> On Friday, May 20, 2011 you wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to use a new SSD
>> for moving a
Here, we are waiting for CentOS 6 for the discard (trim) option from the new
kernel...
Also, RedHat has some advices:
http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Guide/newmds-ssdtuning.html
JD
___
CentOS mail
On 05/23/2011 03:01 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> Here, we are asking for someone to get involved with the project. As
> usual, the trolls who say CentOS is closed do not volunteer to help
> actually do things. Nothing from them but the sound of crickets when we
> actually ask for help.
I did. How
2011/5/23 R P Herrold
> On Mon, 23 May 2011, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
> > This seems to me to be an unnecessarily agressive response
> > to what appeared to me a rational question from Les Mikesell.
>
> > But I don't think the fact that a service is free
> > entitles its proponents to be rude to t
On 05/23/2011 09:08 AM, cornel panceac wrote:
> regarding the fact we are not contributing as much as we want to the
> project, i'm afraid is basicaly a documentation problem. i'd personally
> like to do something to help, but i don't have the required education to
> do that.
Fedora provides excel
R P Herrold wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2011, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
>
>> This seems to me to be an unnecessarily agressive response
>> to what appeared to me a rational question from Les Mikesell.
>>
>
>
>> But I don't think the fact that a service is free
>> entitles its proponents to be
On 05/23/2011 01:22 AM, Emmanuel Noobadmin wrote:
> If I'm not mistakened, one issue with using SSD was limited write
> cycles of the cells? So two SSD used for repeated rewrite operations
> would likely die around the same time, wouldn't they?
An SLC drive with wear leveling should last far longe
On 05/23/2011 02:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe wrote:
> Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
> cycles. Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes
> across the drive but even so they don't last very long in heavy write
> usage.
Yes, there's a limit number of wr
On 05/23/2011 09:39 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 02:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe wrote:
>> Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
>> cycles. Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes
>> across the drive but even so they don't last very long in hea
Jerry Franz wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 09:39 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>> On 05/23/2011 02:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe wrote:
>>> Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
>>> cycles. Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes
>>> across the drive but even so they do
On 05/23/2011 07:23 AM, Michael Schumacher wrote:
>
> As far as I understand, SSD are fast at reading and slow at writing.
A good SSD will be substantially faster at writes than a disk drive, as
well. Because there's no head seeking around a platter, latency is
vastly better, which provides a m
>
> How about a fundamental change? A completely open development process
> like at Fedora?
Fedora is not suitable to what CentOS is, for several reasons.
1: Fedora is a bleeding-edge engineering development project, CentOS is
a reverse-engineering effort.
2: Fedora is for avid hobbyists, CentOS
2011/5/23 Gordon Messmer
> On 05/23/2011 09:08 AM, cornel panceac wrote:
> > regarding the fact we are not contributing as much as we want to the
> > project, i'm afraid is basicaly a documentation problem. i'd personally
> > like to do something to help, but i don't have the required education t
Gordon Messmer wrote on 05/23/2011 11:41 AM:
> What was it about Patrice's work
> that you found unsatisfactory?
I don't think anyone found Patrice's work unsatisfactory. He just
stated that he did not have much time to work on the CentOS-6 LiveCD/DVD
and asked for someone else to take the lead
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Jerry Franz wrote:
*snip*
> However, SSD drive reliability itself has been very poor in the field.
> The failure rate is obscene.
>
> See Jeff Atwood's 'The Hot/Crazy Solid State Drive Scale':
> http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2011/05/the-hot-crazy-solid-state-drive-scale.html
On 05/23/2011 10:06 AM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
> I don't think anyone found Patrice's work unsatisfactory. He just
> stated that he did not have much time to work on the CentOS-6 LiveCD/DVD
> and asked for someone else to take the lead.
If it's satisfactory, the live cd would be considered done.
On 05/22/2011 02:57 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
> On Sun, 22 May 2011, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>
>> Who said anything about 5.6 breaking the environment? Everyone in the
>> very long thread gave the excuse that it was done concurrent with other
>> releases.
>
> customary trolling by Gordon Messmer -- pas
Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 05/22/2011 02:57 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
> Having slept on that, I don't think my previous reply was direct to
your
> accusation.
> My entire participation in the last long thread was directed at users
> who have unrealistic expectations of the CentOS release team. O
on 5/23/2011 11:02 AM Ljubomir Ljubojevic spake the following:
>
> Then everybody cough on that and started endless flame-war.
>
I survived the rapture to come back to this? LMAO
http://www.ebiblefellowship.com/outreach/tracts/may21/
___
CentOS mai
On May 23, 2011, at 7:50 AM, R P Herrold wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2011, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
>> This seems to me to be an unnecessarily agressive response
>> to what appeared to me a rational question from Les Mikesell.
>
>> But I don't think the fact that a service is free
>> entitles its pr
Scott Silva wrote:
> on 5/23/2011 11:02 AM Ljubomir Ljubojevic spake the following:
>
>>
>> Then everybody cough on that and started endless flame-war.
>>
> I survived the rapture to come back to this? LMAO
> http://www.ebiblefellowship.com/outreach/tracts/may21/
What, more flamewars?
The Raptu
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:29 AM, yonatan pingle
wrote:
> Hi Keith
> not sure about OCZ reliability for production , but i can confirm
> Intel x-25 drives work great with centos ( about 11 month's now ).
> I use two drives as /var in md mirror , using it for SQL and logs -
> it's an amazing boost
On 05/23/2011 11:01 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> Now, the question is, is is there any way to tell EXT3/4 to use a
> separate drive as a cache drive for the same purpose? OR, how about
> telling CentOS to use a separate drive for caching purposes in the
> same way?
You can use an external journal on a
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 11:01 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
>> Now, the question is, is is there any way to tell EXT3/4 to use a
>> separate drive as a cache drive for the same purpose? OR, how about
>> telling CentOS to use a separate drive for caching purpose
On 05/23/2011 11:02 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> I was first to suggest that C6.1 **might** be released in **about** a
> month from C6.0. Why? Because I suspect that since RHEL 6.1 srpms are
> already published, devs could use free time, while waiting for QA team
> to find bugs, to dry-run 6.1
On 5/23/2011 1:31 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
>>> Then everybody cough on that and started endless flame-war.
>>>
>> I survived the rapture to come back to this? LMAO
>> http://www.ebiblefellowship.com/outreach/tracts/may21/
>
> What, more flamewars?
>
> The Rapture just *wasn't* what it was cra
On 05/23/11 9:54 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 07:23 AM, Michael Schumacher wrote:
>> As far as I understand, SSD are fast at reading and slow at writing.
> A good SSD will be substantially faster at writes than a disk drive, as
> well. Because there's no head seeking around a platter,
On 05/23/2011 01:44 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
>
> But, for paranoia's sake, I would RAID1 the SSD with a second SSD.
>
Quote from
http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Guide/newmds-ssdtuning.html
:
Red Hat also warns that software RAID levels
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 02:29:22PM -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
> On 05/23/2011 01:44 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
> >
> > But, for paranoia's sake, I would RAID1 the SSD with a second SSD.
> >
>
> Quote from
> http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Gui
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 5/23/2011 1:31 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
Then everybody cough on that and started endless flame-war.
>>> I survived the rapture to come back to this? LMAO
>>> http://www.ebiblefellowship.com/outreach/tracts/may21/
>>
>> What, more flamewars?
>>
>> The Raptur
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
*snip*
> ZFS can use a SATA, SAS or SSD drive as cache drive to speed up common
> reads & writes. I have seen some small improvements even when using a
> cheaper grade SATA & SAS drive (as part of an experiment). The speed
> improvement is quite a bit more ev
On Mon, 23 May 2011, John R Pierce wrote:
> To: centos@centos.org
> From: John R Pierce
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp & /var/ partition
>
> On 05/23/11 9:54 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>> On 05/23/2011 07:23 AM, Michael Schumacher wrote:
>>> As far as I understand, SSD are fast
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
> To: centos@centos.org
> From: Ray Van Dolson
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] SSD for Centos SWAP /tmp & /var/ partition
>
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 02:29:22PM -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
>> On 05/23/2011 01:44 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
>>>
>>> But, for paranoia
On 05/23/11 12:45 PM, Keith Roberts wrote:
> Would a defrag program work on a SSD?
for some values of 'work'.as its completely unaware of the internal
block remapping of the SSD, all it would really do would be to churn the
data around.
I've read the only way to reset the block remapping on
Gordon Messmer wrote:
> I've never seen the developer suggest that releases are longer because
> they don't remember how the last one was finished.
Where on earth did you dig this out? I said they **could** be faster
since it is all fresh in their memory. I was explaining what conclusion
made m
On 05/23/2011 12:27 PM, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
>
>> Quote from
>> http://docs.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Guide/newmds-ssdtuning.html
>> :
>>
>> Red Hat also warns that software RAID levels 1, 4, 5, and 6 are not
>> recommended for use on SS
On May 23, 2011, at 4:48 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe
> wrote:
>> Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
>> cycles.
>> Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even the writes across the drive
>> but
>> even so they don't
> Do note that the server-grade SSDs are far more reliable than
> the consumer-grade crap.
>
> mark
>
mark,
what specific units are considered server grade ssd's ?
have you bought and used them with CentOS? other opsys ?
where are you sourcing and what are you paying?
- rh
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Kevin K wrote:
>
> On May 23, 2011, at 4:48 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
>
>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Kevin Thorpe
>> wrote:
>>> Just be aware that SSDs wear out. They have a limited number of write
>>> cycles.
>>> Nowadays they all do 'wear levelling' to even
>> A SSD drive can be a SATA drive. SATA is the connection/protocol between
>> the drive and the computer.
>
> Not quite. SATA is a type of drive, same as IDE / ATA, SCSI, SATA :)
I disagree. :)
IDE/ATA, SATA, SAS, SCSI are all just interfaces. The underlying
media, whether spinning rust or MLC
Hi All,
Please feel free to correct any misconceptions in my premises as I get to my
question. I have about 6 ftp services running on a CentOS system that is going
down for service, and I want to move the ftp services to a VM on another
network. These are all running on Proftpd, with fairly compli
On 5/23/2011 7:03 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> yonatan pingle wrote:
>
>> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Keith Roberts
>
>> anyways - if it's for home usage Don't think twice get an SSD .
>
> Why?
> I've read most of the articles in this thread,
> and I haven't seen anything that persuades me
> S
On 5/20/2011 4:00 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 5/20/11 1:16 PM, Joseph L. Casale wrote:
>>> Git and Gitweb?
>>
>> Thought of that, is there anything that can monitor for changes so I can
>> avoid a commit command for every script, as they all dump to an already
>> well organized tree, I was hoping
I would like to confirm Matt's claim. I too experienced larger
latencies with Centos 5.x compared to 4.x. My application is very
network sensitive and its easy to prove using lat_tcp.
Russ,
I am curious about identifying the problem. What tools do you
recommend to find where the latency is coming
On Tuesday 24 May 2011 05:24:07 listmail wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Please feel free to correct any misconceptions in my premises as I get to
> my question. I have about 6 ftp services running on a CentOS system that
> is going down for service, and I want to move the ftp services to a VM on
> another n
On 05/23/2011 12:24 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> yes,butt SSD has to erase and write a LARGE block all at once, so
> they don't do so well with the sorts of 8k random writes that write
> intensive applications like relational databases commonly perform.
Many SSD are faster at writing even to a
61 matches
Mail list logo
