On 3/3/22 14:44, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 3/3/22 04:24, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
On 3/3/22 00:03, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 3/2/22 20:29, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
~]# ip route
default via 192.168.122.1 dev enp1s0 proto dhcp metric 100
192.168.122.0/24 dev virbr0 proto kernel scope link
On 3/3/22 04:24, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
On 3/3/22 00:03, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 3/2/22 20:29, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
~]# ip route
default via 192.168.122.1 dev enp1s0 proto dhcp metric 100
192.168.122.0/24 dev virbr0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.122.1
linkdown
192.168.1
On 3/3/22 00:03, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 3/2/22 20:29, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
~]# ip route
default via 192.168.122.1 dev enp1s0 proto dhcp metric 100
192.168.122.0/24 dev virbr0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.122.1
linkdown
192.168.122.0/24 dev enp1s0 proto kernel scope link src
19
On Wed, 2022-03-02 at 21:03 -0800, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 3/2/22 20:29, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
> > ~]# ip route
> > default via 192.168.122.1 dev enp1s0 proto dhcp metric 100
> > 192.168.122.0/24 dev virbr0 proto kernel scope link src
> > 192.168.122.1
> > linkdown
> > 192.168.122.0/24 d
On 3/2/22 20:29, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
~]# ip route
default via 192.168.122.1 dev enp1s0 proto dhcp metric 100
192.168.122.0/24 dev virbr0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.122.1
linkdown
192.168.122.0/24 dev enp1s0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.122.91
metric 100
Assuming th
On 3/2/22 07:10, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Wed, 2022-03-02 at 01:17 -0500, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
Installed from iso with virt-manager. The install used virtio. Not
using
samba or nfs but added firewall commands anyway.
I can ping devices on the local network but can't get to the
i
On Wed, 2022-03-02 at 01:17 -0500, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
> Installed from iso with virt-manager. The install used virtio. Not
> using
> samba or nfs but added firewall commands anyway.
>
> I can ping devices on the local network but can't get to the
> internet.
> 50 to 60% drops on th
On 3/1/22 06:31, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2022-02-28 at 18:26 -0500, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
On 2/28/22 08:56, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 00:21:30 -0500
Robert McBroom via users wrote:
With 4 processors and 2G response is atrocious.
Make sure you are using prope
On Mon, 2022-02-28 at 18:26 -0500, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
> On 2/28/22 08:56, Tom Horsley wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 00:21:30 -0500
> > Robert McBroom via users wrote:
> >
> > > With 4 processors and 2G response is atrocious.
> > Make sure you are using proper virtual disk and network
> Exploring the use of VM's. Fairly plain install of CentOS8. Understood that
> Fedora server installed the VM structure. Where would one see alternate
> drivers? Networking seems to be all set up but doesn't see the router or the
> outside internet.
With the given hardware info, a VM with 2gb
On 2/28/22 08:56, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 00:21:30 -0500
Robert McBroom via users wrote:
With 4 processors and 2G response is atrocious.
Make sure you are using proper virtual disk and network drivers.
If you installed it with some sort of emulated IDE disk, it will
definitely h
On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 00:21:30 -0500
Robert McBroom via users wrote:
> With 4 processors and 2G response is atrocious.
Make sure you are using proper virtual disk and network drivers.
If you installed it with some sort of emulated IDE disk, it will
definitely have the effect of making performance h
On Mon, 2022-02-28 at 00:21 -0500, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
> Xeon 8 core machine with 16G. Fedora 35 server installed. Have
> CentOS8
> installed in qemu/kvm virtual machine. What would be the appropriate
> configuration of processor access and memory to get reasonable
> response
> from
On 2/27/22 21:21, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
Xeon 8 core machine with 16G. Fedora 35 server installed. Have CentOS8
installed in qemu/kvm virtual machine. What would be the appropriate
configuration of processor access and memory to get reasonable response
from the vm? With 4 processors an
Xeon 8 core machine with 16G. Fedora 35 server installed. Have CentOS8
installed in qemu/kvm virtual machine. What would be the appropriate
configuration of processor access and memory to get reasonable response
from the vm? With 4 processors and 2G response is atrocious.
_
15 matches
Mail list logo