> This is the way I do it, may not be the best but it works. All disabled
> accounts start with '!' in the encrypted password, so if you do a
> 'radius:/etc# cat shadow |grep :!' in your path of your shadow file it
will
> show accounts that are disabled.
egrep ':![^!]' /etc/shadow
That's : fol
> I am looking for file sever. I think that debian with big ide disk is the
best
> solution. I plan to use lvm for home and pub partition.
> But I am looking for bigest ide disk available which can be used with
> linux. Do you have any experience with big disk with linux I know that
> is a hardwar
On 2000-11-23 09:20, Robert Davies wrote:
> Do you REALLY have 300G of things that need to be backed up?
> If so the solution is a DLT robot. But most people who think that they
have
>that much data to backup aren't doing things effectively.
I sure do, I wish I hadn't and
> From: "Russell Coker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Peter Billson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2000 3:03 PM
> Subject: Re: IDE DAT Drive?
>
> On 2000-11-22 11:44, Peter Billson wrote:
> >Can anyone offer any info about IDE DAT Backup tape drives for use
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:47:54 +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer writes:
> >On Friday 17 November 2000, at 9 h 25, the keyboard of Debian Ghost
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> I was wondering if there were any debian tools used for working with
Cisco
> >> routers and/or other Cisco gear.
> >
> >Ev
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 06:30:59PM +0100, Robert Waldner wrote:
> > On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:18:31 +0100, Dariush Pietrzak writes:
> > >> which are useful unless you have to manage lots of those boxes,
> >
> > >I wouldn't know.
> > >but isn't that what OpenView is for? and is unbeatable in that fi
> Raid 1 is faster than a single drive for reads, but about the same for
> writes. To get more speed, use raid 0+1, striping plus mirroring. That
> wastes a lot of disk, but is faster than level 5 for writes. Keep in
> mind, RAID 1 is only mirroring using two disks (typical).
>
> Raid 5 is slow
This is very possible and indeed desirable. As you only have a T1 (T3+
would be different), I doubt you really have a lot to worry about, indeed I
wonder if more than 2 servers is necessary, but anyway
I use a similar setup to that you propose for WWW servers, which access
backend DataBase
Check!
Are you a victim of linuxconf?
It has used different tables to the standard sendmail distribution generated
configuration.
It's left me configuring the files in multiple files in /etc/mail. Perhaps
you've done your config, in a file you're not using.
Have you tried using the IP address,
Any tools, techniques or tips, to help select the optimum web server network
to serve a client browser. http://www.solidspeed.net/solution/index.html
claim to do this, with their web caching service.
Ideally the selection would not require the site user to do anything, it
should just happen. It
I think you'll find the Promise controllers fit the bill.
You can choose a H/W RAID version if you wish.
The ATA-100 & ATA-66 are supported by Andre Hedrick's IDE patch.
I use it for the |BP6 HPT366 controller, which was less well liked.
Think www.ide.org publishes a press release about ATA-100
Yes, we've faced this problem and are planning a solution.
We've not coded anything yet, but have plans for a couple of months. Maybe
it could be an Open Source project if there's nothing pre-existing. I'd
want the daemon interfaces to be DB independant.
Basic idea is to seperate the Queries fr
> It seems like a reasonable idea to try to evaluate a backbone ISP from a
> traffic speed perspective, from a random sample of my customers (94% of
> whom have dedicated, high-speed connections) to the nearest hub of the
> ISP. I need no services from the ISP other than basic throughput, my web
>
> It seems like a reasonable idea to try to evaluate a backbone ISP from a
> traffic speed perspective, from a random sample of my customers (94% of
> whom have dedicated, high-speed connections) to the nearest hub of the
> ISP. I need no services from the ISP other than basic throughput, my web
>
Take a look at www.webperf.net, they discuss this. Perhaps the ISPs are
already rated on there and have a track record. IIRC they us ab from Apache
for benchmarking, which is derived from code, developed to test the zeus web
server.
> What is the best method for benchmarking potential ISPs for a
Take a look at www.webperf.net, they discuss this. Perhaps the ISPs are
already rated on there and have a track record. IIRC they us ab from Apache
for benchmarking, which is derived from code, developed to test the zeus web
server.
> What is the best method for benchmarking potential ISPs for
My workplace used php3 + mysql, then php3 + oracle, now looking at a
combination of php3 + local mysql + master oracle db (the local mysql db's
would act as caches for fast answers to most page queries). This is for
scalability and availability reasons.
php most commonly used with mysql, told by
My workplace used php3 + mysql, then php3 + oracle, now looking at a
combination of php3 + local mysql + master oracle db (the local mysql db's
would act as caches for fast answers to most page queries). This is for
scalability and availability reasons.
php most commonly used with mysql, told b
> Thanks for all the reponses. From most of the replies, can I gather that
> I'll have to observe my how much is being swapped to determine whether I
> should immediately "up" the RAM back to 128MB? (and pester the tight-wad
> suits who'll approve the requesition)
Why wait?
Run the command vmstat
> Thanks for all the reponses. From most of the replies, can I gather that
> I'll have to observe my how much is being swapped to determine whether I
> should immediately "up" the RAM back to 128MB? (and pester the tight-wad
> suits who'll approve the requesition)
Why wait?
Run the command vmsta
> he's probably better off using squid on the linux box as an http
> accelerator. much easier to configure, just set it up to accelerate for
> virtual domains and that's it.
>
> squid is also a lot faster and avoids the delays inherent in sending a
> redirect (browser queries apache, apache sends r
> he's probably better off using squid on the linux box as an http
> accelerator. much easier to configure, just set it up to accelerate for
> virtual domains and that's it.
>
> squid is also a lot faster and avoids the delays inherent in sending a
> redirect (browser queries apache, apache sends
22 matches
Mail list logo
