Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

34753 discussions

Re: [CentOS] Some RAID-6 observations ... RHEL-6 vs CentOS-5.5
by Gerhard Schneider 11 Feb '11

11 Feb '11

Sorry, I don't use CentOS 6 now so I cannot check, but: Could it be that RHEL6 changed the default superblock mdadm is creating? CentOS 5 is creating a 0.9 superblock. Some "other OS" are creating 1.2 per default. But you can change that on the command line. If that's the case it's not a bug but a feature.. GS -- Gerhard Schneider Institute of Lightweight Design and e-Mail: gs(a)ilsb.tuwien.ac.at Structural Biomechanics (E317) Tel.: +43 664 60 588 3171 Vienna University of Technology / Austria Fax: +43 1 58801 31799 A-1040 Wien, Gusshausstrasse 27-29 http://www.ilsb.tuwien.ac.at/~gs/

1 0

Will Rogers: Kai Schaetzl may be ignorant about kill files (was: how will CentOS handle the perftools 1.7 vs. 1.6 issue?)
by Larry Vaden 11 Feb '11

11 Feb '11

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Kai Schaetzl <maillists(a)conactive.com> wrote: > > This wasn't the first instance. This guy has recently started a habit of > copying mails (that are not his own it seems) that trip him off right to > this list. That is bad practice. I do not want to get more of this. > > Kai Kai, as you may not already know, Will Rogers said "Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects." e.g., I expressed my ignorance about just how far the binary compatibility with RedHat extended within the CentOS community and have learned from the questions posed. I think it fair to say the objective of binary compatibility has greater weight with CentOS folks than completeness and correctness, but that's JMHO and like Dennis Miller, I could be wrong about that. As Will's fellow OKie, if you don't already know about kill files, I'll help Will do posthumously what he might have done if he were alive today reading this CentOS list, namely refer you to <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_file>. I am somewhat saddened that Browning's "“Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?” doesn't seem enough to cause sufficient interest in an auxiliary repo consisting exclusively of current release intrinsic functions like BIND, DHCP, et al. Perhaps the most encouraging remark came from Karanbir, namely: On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists(a)karan.org> wrote: > > [1]: I say that with a pinch of salt though - EL6 is a tad overdue. A > lot of new projects and services need a codebase newer than whats on > offer in C5. kind regards/ldv

3 2

how will CentOS handle the perftools 1.7 vs. 1.6 issue?
by Larry Vaden 11 Feb '11

11 Feb '11

In order to avoid a cross post, the following background quote is from SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS(a)fnal.gov: <quote> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Ewan Mac Mahon <ewan(a)macmahon.me.uk> wrote: > > I'm a little bit hazy on the details, but there are some slides from the > meeting here[1]: > http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=8&sessionId=1&resId=1&mat… On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Chris Jones <christopher.rob.jones(a)cern.ch> wrote: > > I would say a bug in tcmalloc, not SL or RHEL. See for instance > > <http://code.google.com/p/google-perftools/issues/detail?id=305> > > The fix is to move to google perftools 1.7 </quote> Because of a problem with not running the current BIND release a couple of weeks ago, I would like to ask: a) is RedHat likely to choose to backport the fix to 1.6 or will it adopt 1.7 or leave as is until 5.7 or later as it has done with BIND? b) will Centos and/or SL follow RH exactly or will their approaches differ? IOW, how far does the "binary compatiblity" policy extend? kind regards/ldv

7 13

Hyper-V template configuration
by Dvorkin, Asya 11 Feb '11

11 Feb '11

Hi everyone, I've installed CentOS 5 on Hyper-V and finally got everything working. I would like to setup a template, but google is failing me. Everything I read does not seem very promising when it comes to templates support with MS Hyper-V. I was wondering if maybe someone here has successfully configured CentOS templates? I realize that VmWare is a lot better, but it's not a matter of choice at this point. Thank you! Asya

2 1

Centos 5.5 + firefox 3.6 and 64bit javaplugin (1.6u23)
by Eero Volotinen 11 Feb '11

11 Feb '11

Hi List, Any success running 64bit javaplugin on centos 5.5 & firefox 3.6? For me it always complains about wrong elfclass64 ? thanks for any help.. -- Eero

5 5

Some RAID-6 observations ... RHEL-6 vs CentOS-5.5
by Chuck Munro 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Hello all, In the process of building a new VM box to replace several individual CentOS servers, I've had the "interesting" experience of running both CentOS-5.5 and RHEL-6 (eval copy) as I build out the hardware based on a Supermicro motherboard. A couple of observations regarding RAID-6: - RAID-6 arrays created on RHEL-6 don't seem backward compatible with CentOS-5.5. This may or may not be expected behaviour, but it makes me wonder if forward compatibility might be a problem for those of us migrating large RAID-6 arrays from CentOS-5 to -6 systems. The main observations are that the md superblock is declared bad, and I get those boot-time messages claiming the available blocks are less than the configured size. As a result, the RAID arrays are not made available on CentOS-5.5. - A total of 8 RAID-6 arrays in RHEL-6 are built with 2TB data disks plus a hot spare. However, every time I boot the system some, but not all, of the hot spare partitions are randomly missing. Using mdadm to manually add the spare partition back into an array always works. There are 4 array partitions per disk, and the largest single array is just over 2 TBytes of useable space. There are two groups of 5+1 drives spread across two SAS/SATA controller cards, and this random behaviour can occur on either one. Rebooting gets me a different set of missing hot spare partitions. The only error messages I get are the mdmonitor "missing spares event" emails ... nothing in dmesg. The host OS has its own RAID-1 (+ hot spare) arrays on a separate set of disks and controller, and those arrays always come up correctly. I've checked and double ckecked the mdadm.conf file to make sure the ARRAY, DEVICE and 'devices=....' statements are correct. Using mdadm to shut down an array and then reassemble it always seems to work properly, but something random is happening at boot-time assembly. It's only the hot spare partitions that don't appear, never the data partitions. Weird. I'm hoping CentOS-6 doesn't present me with the same problem. Because I'm not a registered RHEL user, I don't have the ability to submit a bug report at RedHat. Chuck

2 1

dhcp fail over
by aurfalien＠gmail.com 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Hi all, Few questions. Does DHCP failover work with statically assigned nodes? Seems like the failover statements only work in shared networks with non bootp clients? I'm assuming Centos 6 will have DHCP v4.2? Currently 5.5 ships with v3.0.5b. And will DHCP v4.X have easier failover implementation? Thanks in advance, - aurf

3 2

High Availability and Storage Cluster
by Denis Zaharov 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Dear mailing list members, There was a branch about clusters, but I have a certain task. There are two servers with CentOS 5.5 installed. The servers are working with Zabbix (monitoring system for traffic, using a MySQL), wiki and RT (all are using Apache). If one server will have became not available then necessary start these services on another server with replication of data. Can I use the Red Hat Cluster Suite for it at CentOS? Also I heard about Heartbeat and DRBD. Maybe it is what I need? -- Kind regards, Denis Zaharov

5 4

PAE kernel source code
by sri 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Hi I want to use 2.6.18-194.el5-PAE kernel source code. Unable to find it over web. Appreciate any pointers for that. Thanks, Sri -- --

4 3

ipsec with ipv4 and ipv6 not working
by Steve Clark 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Hello, How do I find out what is happening to my packets thru my ipsec tunnel. They just seem to disappear on the remote side. I have successfully got the pings thru when everything has an ipv6 address, but am not successful when trying to connect two ipv4 lans across an ipv6 ipsec tunnel. All fw chains both 4 and 6 are set to ACCEPT. NAT is turned off. eth0 eth1 eth1 eth0 10.1.254.254/17 2001:xxxx:1628::254 <----ipv6 internet -----> 2001:xxxx:e334::254 10.0.254.254/17 12:00:02.296972 IP6 2001:xxxx:1628::254 > 2001:xxxx:e334::254: ESP(spi=0x07454bc3,seq=0x28b), length 132 12:00:03.308751 IP6 2001:xxxx:1628::254 > 2001:xxxx:e334::254: ESP(spi=0x07454bc3,seq=0x28c), length 132 12:00:04.296857 IP6 2001:xxxx:1628::254 > 2001:xxxx:e334::254: ESP(spi=0x07454bc3,seq=0x28d), length 132 12:00:05.293748 IP6 2001:xxxx:1628::254 > 2001:xxxx:e334::254: ESP(spi=0x07454bc3,seq=0x28e), length 132 12:00:06.296623 IP6 2001:xxxx:1628::254 > 2001:xxxx:e334::254: ESP(spi=0x07454bc3,seq=0x28f), length 132 I have posted to the ipsec-devel list and haven't gotten any responses. Also I have spent 2 days googling with no results about the above setup. Is it even possible to tunnel ipv4 packet thru an ipv6 ipsec tunnel? Thanks, Steve -- "They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Ben Franklin) "The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." (Thomas Jefferson)

3 4

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss