Discuss October 2007

discuss@lists.centos.org

268 participants
322 discussions

re: Intel G33 Compatibility for Centos Server
by Michael Rock 09 Oct '07

09 Oct '07

John R Pierce >> that sounds more like a desktop system, not really >> what I'd consider >> server grade. no ECC support, no redundant power >> supplies, etc etc. Going this route has served me just as well for the last 3 years and at a cost I can afford. This is actually a major step up from what I am running and should see better mysql performance. (pretty high CPU utilization currently) Although these old servers were cutting edge when I originally installed Centos the installs were pretty smooth. But since have had a few bad experiences with some other Asus Nvidia chipsets on install. So I am looking for some proven success with the G33 chipset so I do not end up with a board which going to be a pain on install. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/

1 0

Where Can I find Perl-DBD-Sybase RPMs?
by Ow Mun Heng 09 Oct '07

09 Oct '07

It's not in CentosPlus or CentosBase or Rpmforge. Does anyone know? (Looking for it for Centos 4.4) Thanks

3 4

Xen crash
by Nicolas Sahlqvist 08 Oct '07

08 Oct '07

Hi, I'm new to this list and joined since I am volunteering as a tech admin for a non profit organization called CouchSurfing (.com) where we tried to move the web servers to Xen zones and this has proven quite unstable since the our defined zones tends to crash on a daily basis with the latest CentOS 5 Xen updates. The physical boxes have 2 quad core 1.6GHz Xeon CPU's and 4 GB RAM, there is currently only 1 domain on each box, configured with 2.2GB RAM. Domain 0: [root@nd10254 ~]# rpm -qa | grep xen xen-libs-3.0.3-25.0.4.el5 kernel-xen-2.6.18-8.1.8.el5 kernel-xen-2.6.18-8.1.14.el5 xen-3.0.3-25.0.4.el5 Web1: [root@web1 ~]# rpm -qa | grep xen kernel-xen-2.6.18-8.1.8.el5 kernel-xen-2.6.18-8.1.14.el5 The Domain0 zone is indeed rock stable, while the Web1 etc. are crashing daily with the 2.6.18-8.1.14 Xen kernel and the stack trace we see after a few hours is as follows: BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#5! Call Trace: <IRQ> [<ffffffff802a76ad>] softlockup_tick+0xdb/0xed [<ffffffff8026ba66>] timer_interrupt+0x396/0x3f2 [<ffffffff80210a87>] handle_IRQ_event+0x2d/0x60 [<ffffffff802a79ec>] __do_IRQ+0xa4/0x105 [<ffffffff802699b3>] do_IRQ+0xe7/0xf5 [<ffffffff8038dde8>] evtchn_do_upcall+0x86/0xe0 [<ffffffff8025cc1a>] do_hypervisor_callback+0x1e/0x2c <EOI> [<ffffffff802063aa>] hypercall_page+0x3aa/0x1000 [<ffffffff802063aa>] hypercall_page+0x3aa/0x1000 [<ffffffff8026afe2>] raw_safe_halt+0x84/0xa8 [<ffffffff802684f8>] xen_idle+0x38/0x4a [<ffffffff80247bcd>] cpu_idle+0x97/0xba BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#7! Etc., etc etc, It does not crash the Xen zones directly, but clogs up the Xen web1 console etc. We did not see this when running the 2.6.18-8.1.8 Xen kernel, instead the Xen zones crashed less frequent with a out of memory problem as follows: Call Trace: [<ffffffff802aeefc>] out_of_memory+0x4e/0x1d3 [<ffffffff8020efe8>] __alloc_pages+0x229/0x2b2 [<ffffffff8023fd5b>] __lock_page+0x5e/0x64 [<ffffffff80232637>] read_swap_cache_async+0x42/0xd1 [<ffffffff802b32a2>] swapin_readahead+0x4e/0x77 [<ffffffff8020929d>] __handle_mm_fault+0xae3/0xf46 [<ffffffff80260709>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x9/0x14 [<ffffffff80262fe8>] do_page_fault+0xe48/0x11dc [<ffffffff80207138>] kmem_cache_free+0x77/0xca [<ffffffff8025cb6f>] error_exit+0x0/0x6e We think the whole problem is how the kernel fails to handle resource cloging (to many interrupts, heavy CPU and memory usage in the defined zones etc.) from stubmbling on some fuzzy posts on the net, example: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.xen.user/26617 Is this problem known to you or new, any ideas on howto resolve it? Regards, Nicolas Sahlqvist CouchSurfing,.com

1 0

Need advice on 3rd party repository
by Jesse Cantara 08 Oct '07

08 Oct '07

Hello, I am looking for some advice on a way to update some packages to newer releases than are available in the standard CentOS repositories. Specifically, I am trying to update apache and PHP to conform to "Scanalert"'s "Hacker Safe" website security scan, and the required versions do not exist in the CentOS repositories. I'm using CentOS 5. I wish to stay within the realm of yum, in order to avoid RPM-dependency-heck which I have experienced before, trying to source random third party RPMs that never work out properly. I also wish to keep the system in a better state of maintenance by sticking to yum. It's just more organized (and easier) and will help keep things up to date in the future as well. Is there any other option than to go with a 3rd party repository to hopefully find later versions of apache and PHP? Does anybody have a recommended repository source? Thank you for any help and advice you can give, -Jesse Cantara

4 4

CentOS 5 release for IBM z/Series?
by Nils.Reimann＠izb.de 08 Oct '07

08 Oct '07

hi folks, i got a short question about centos 5. are there any plans to release it for System Z? i'm asking cause we are waiting for some mayor upgrades like php5. thx! greetings nils

2 1

dbus can't send to audit system
by Kenneth Porter 08 Oct '07

08 Oct '07

I'm seeing this in /var/log/messages: Oct 7 20:46:25 centos dbus: Can't send to audit system: USER_AVC avc: received setenforce notice (enforcing=0) : exe="?" (sauid=81, hostname=?, addr=?, terminal=?) Some googling suggested this was due to a policy issue a year ago, but I'm seeing it with selinux-policy-targeted-2.4.6-30.el5. I've got a game server program (Enemy Territory Quake Wars 1.1) that fails to resolve a DNS entry unless I setenforce 0, and I'd like to find the audit entry that tells me why. Is this messages entry an indication that that auditing is broken?

1 1

3Ware 9550SX and latency/system responsiveness
by Simon Banton 08 Oct '07

08 Oct '07

Dear list, I thought I'd just share my experiences with this 3Ware card, and see if anyone might have any suggestions. System: Supermicro H8DA8 with 2 x Opteron 250 2.4GHz and 4GB RAM installed. 9550SX-8LP hosting 4x Seagate ST3250820SV 250GB in a RAID 1 plus 2 hot spare config. The array is properly initialized, write cache is on, as is queueing (and supported by the drives). StoreSave set to Protection. OS is CentOS 4.5 i386, minimal install, default partitioning as suggested by the installer (ext3, small /boot on /dev/sda1, remainder as / on LVM VolGroup with 2GB swap). Firmware from 3Ware codeset 9.4.1.2 in use, firmware/driver details: //serv1> /c0 show all /c0 Driver Version = 2.26.05.007 /c0 Model = 9550SX-8LP /c0 Memory Installed = 112MB /c0 Firmware Version = FE9X 3.08.02.005 /c0 Bios Version = BE9X 3.08.00.002 /c0 Monitor Version = BL9X 3.01.00.006 I initially noticed something odd while installing 4.4, that writing the inode tables took a longer time than I expected (I thought the installer had frozen) and the system overall felt sluggish when doing its first yum update, certainly more sluggish than I'd expect with a comparatively powerful machine and hardware RAID 1. I tried a few simple benchmarks (bonnie++, iozone, dd) and noticed up to 8 pdflush commands hanging about in uninterruptible sleep when writing to disk, along with kjournald and kswapd from time to time. Loadave during writing climbed considerably (up to >12) with 'ls' taking up to 30 seconds to give any output. I've tried CentOS 4.4, 4.5, RHEL AS 4 update 5 (just in case) and openSUSE 10.2 and they all show the same symptoms. Googling around makes me think that this may be related to queue depth, nr_requests and possibly VM params (the latter from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=121434#c275) These are the default settings: /sys/block/sda/device/queue_depth = 254 /sys/block/sda/queue/nr_requests = 8192 /proc/sys/vm/dirty_expire_centisecs = 3000 /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio = 30 3Ware mentions elevator=deadline, blockdev --setra 16384 along with nr_requests=512 in their performance tuning doc - these alone seem to make no difference to the latency problem. Setting dirty_expire_centisecs = 1000 and dirty_ratio = 5 does indeed reduce the number of processes in 'b' state as reported by vmstat 1 during an iozone benchmark (./iozone -s 20480m -r 64 -i 0 -i 1 -t 1 -b filename.xls as per 3Ware's own tuning doc) but the problem is obviously still there, just mitigated somewhat. The comparison graphs are in a PDF here: http://community.novacaster.com/attach.pl/7411/482/iozone_vm_tweaks_xls.pdf Incidentally, the vmstat 1 output was directed to an NFS-mounted disk to avoid writing it to the arry during the actual testing. I've tried eliminating LVM from the equation, going to ext2 rather than ext3 and booting single-processor all to no useful effect. I've also tried benchmarking with different blocksizes from 512B to 1M in powers of 2 and the problem remains - many processes in uninterruptible sleep blocking other IO. I'm about to start downloading CentOS 5 to give it a go, and after that I might have to resort to seeing if WinXP has the same issue. My only real question is "where do I go from here?" I don't have enough specific tuning knowledge to know what else to look at. Thanks for any pointers. Simon

7 56

GFS-kernel module - Version Magic Error
by Manish Kathuria 07 Oct '07

07 Oct '07

Are the RPMs for the latest GFS kernel module GFS-kernel-2.6.9-72.2.0.8 to be used with the version 2.6.9-55.0.9.EL available ? I tried to compile the Source RPMs available from the Red Hat site but the modules can't be loaded because of invalid module format arising from version magic issues. The syslog shows: node0 kernel: gfs: version magic '2.6.9-55.0.9.ELsmp SMP 686 REGPARM 4KSTACKS gcc-3.2' should be '2.6.9-55.0.9.ELsmp SMP 686 REGPARM 4KSTACKS gcc-3.4' node0 modprobe: FATAL: Error inserting gfs (/lib/modules/2.6.9-55.0.9.ELsmp/kernel/fs/gfs/gfs.ko): Invalid module format The error message is actually surprising since the Source RPM has been compiled on a system having gcc-3.4. To complicate matters the modinfo indicates vermagic: 2.6.9-55.0.9.ELsmp SMP 686 REGPARM 4KSTACKS gcc-3.2 When are the CentOS builds expected for this module ? Thanks, Manish

2 1

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 32, Issue 5
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 07 Oct '07

07 Oct '07

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CESA-2007:0933 Moderate CentOS 4 i386 elinks - security update (Johnny Hughes) 2. CESA-2007:0933 Moderate CentOS 4 x86_64 elinks - security update (Johnny Hughes) 3. CESA-2007:0933 Moderate CentOS 5 x86_64 elinks - security update (Johnny Hughes) 4. CESA-2007:0933 Moderate CentOS 5 i386 elinks - security update (Johnny Hughes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 07:47:23 -0500 From: Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2007:0933 Moderate CentOS 4 i386 elinks - security update To: CentOS-Announce <centos-announce(a)centos.org> Message-ID: <470783DB.3040107(a)centos.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2007:0933 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2007-0933.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: i386: elinks-0.9.2-3.3.5.2.i386.rpm src: elinks-0.9.2-3.3.5.2.src.rpm

1 0

Gnome panels
by fred smith 06 Oct '07

06 Oct '07

Hi! Just installed Centos 5 (I've been running 4.x which was an upgrade from previous versions, for a long time), but this one was a fresh install. Now Gnome gives me the two panel configuration (one at top, one at bottom) but I prefer the single, larger panel at the bottom. Anyone know how to tweak Gnome to revert to the single-panel form? Thanx! -- ---- Fred Smith -- fredex(a)fcshome.stoneham.ma.us ----------------------------- The Lord detests the way of the wicked but he loves those who pursue righteousness. ----------------------------- Proverbs 15:9 (niv) -----------------------------

3 6

← Newer
1
...
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
...
33
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss October 2007