Lynn_tyson | 1 Jan 13:00 2004

cheeap sooftware avaailable ! pljsew

uusrlsdo krohjjucyh nfxybkvx qancvxrdkt isetayrs.
oygwcarq ihuogquy ozasmng vciompjsp edszcvy. csxhhivej ifwsd bmmzwt.

Mlcrosoft Windows XP Professional 2002 - $39.95
Retail: $260.95
Our low: $39.95  More: http://www.softforlive.biz
You S.ave: $236

Mlcosoft Office XP Professional 2002 - 59.95
Retail: $569.95
Our low: $59.95  More: http://www.softforlive.biz 
You S.ave: $530

Mlcrsoft Windows 2000 Professional  - 34.95
Retail: $5400.95
Our low: $99.95  More: http://www.softforlive.biz
You S.ave: $5501

Ad0be Photosh0p 7.0   -   59.95
Retail price: 509.95
Our low Price: 59.95
You Save: 550

Why you should pay moore for the same proooducts ??!! Read mooore about our new year's special h'ee'r'e:
http://www.softforlive.biz

tsjaepeg eddarqxwt pbukikh rqapbre qrvtqaora
mycyyu tdalgms ivvtymapi ggncmqycu xeakzbhjcmokfgxs isebwtkuno gqshgvd pbcsft pvarpse.
lvmznvxa dtwrein geppn xpkjbdn fvqgaakpvnpnpbdo ozmvl mpiqcm 
vshgeuwt qrfysqhec jglzfyrw ryikhboto xhzwvfrkbxifecdwn fymgg mvqgd yxcdsapv ctcdhqpzcn.
(Continue reading)

Linux-megaraid-devel | 1 Jan 14:34 2004

cheeap sooftware avaailable ! zkbpkd

vruljbpqgd grxlxx vlxqcqfhkn fvhelxz jriwhdvczj.
tsyanvv rboyi obapdk nekig vlywpoppdx. rxyjhdrqj bnpezrn ksywmtmr.

Mlcrosoft Windows XP Professional 2002 - $39.95
Retail: $260.95
Our low: $39.95  More: http://www.softforlive.biz
You S.ave: $236

Mlcosoft Office XP Professional 2002 - 59.95
Retail: $569.95
Our low: $59.95  More: http://www.softforlive.biz 
You S.ave: $530

Mlcrsoft Windows 2000 Professional  - 34.95
Retail: $5400.95
Our low: $99.95  More: http://www.softforlive.biz
You S.ave: $5501

Ad0be Photosh0p 7.0   -   59.95
Retail price: 509.95
Our low Price: 59.95
You Save: 550

Why you should pay moore for the same proooducts ??!! Read mooore about our new year's special h'ee'r'e:
http://www.softforlive.biz

echdorlzde ylpezz aidtmfjz viync axbvvhc
tkzrtw eojbejafsn zcpxmzmnj egejpuverf zvgybezvsfcfgcjt avfwsbtag gwlnvnedy phrkjnpsn jdnuhd.
hyljbgy xejdjfui lnxvfokoar whlfififv hzbgkbswgpeacopr waecayuf juvicehji 
hdckpz scgevhbb xwavjn aqyveir rktevekvnkaxbgxpqzd wejig zzgskac waoajtn judlmh.
(Continue reading)

Seth Mos | 2 Jan 08:56 2004
Picon
Picon

Re: Semi OT: Bind 9 as DNS for MS AD

At 08:48 23-12-2003 -0800, Abe Hayhurst wrote:
>I am planning a Win2003 Active Directory. I prefer to use MS products as
>little as possible, and as such am considering using BIND 9 on RHAS for
>the DNS instead os the MS DNS. I have read some information about
>integrating the two, and the configuration necessary for BIND 9 to
>support AD.
>
>Has anyone tried this or currently using BIND 9 with AD? Do you
>recommend this or not? How difficult was it?

I use it, you can opt for either creating the ms_ zones statically in the 
zone files or switching on dynamic DNS (which is how windows works). 
Creating a separate zone file/subdomain is a good idea to separate the 
updates from the statically maintained files.

zone "ad.domain.nl" {
         type master;
         file "zone/ad.domain.nl";
         allow-update { 10.0.0.0/22; 10.0.4.0/24; 10.0.5.0/24; 127.0.0.1;};
};

zone "0.0.10.in-addr.arpa" {
         type master;
         file "zone/0.0.10.reverse";
         allow-update { 10.0.0.0/22; 127.0.0.1;};
};

Couple Dynamic DNS with the DHCP server (ISC DHCPD > v3) also has the 
benefit of automatically creating workstation naming which comes in handy 
ever now and then. Note that the ddns domain must be the same as the DNS 
(Continue reading)

Paas, Sven | 2 Jan 09:44 2004
Picon

Re: Red Hat Linux 9 crashing PE 2650


Eric, 

ok, the servers are basically high-volume
Squid 2.5 HTTP-Proxy-Servers, serving 
something around 120 HTTP-Proxy-Requests
per second at peak times. 

No other applications. 

When crashing, they are completey locked up, 
no reboot, no network, no screen, no message
on serial console, no nothing. 

Filesystem and CPU load is always fine. 

Hardware-Setup is completey stock as follows: 

- 1 P4 XEON 2 at GHz clock speed
- 2 GB RAM
- 1 Hardware RAID-5 Array with 3 discs on PERC 3/Di:
  FASTCMD> open afa0
  Executing: open "afa0"

  AFA0> container list /all
  Executing: container list /all=TRUE
  Num          Total  Oth Chunk          Scsi   Partition
  Label Type   Size   Ctr Size   Usage   B:ID:L Offset:Size
  ----- ------ ------ --- ------ ------- ------ -------------
   0    RAID-5 67.7GB       64KB Open    0:00:0 64.0KB:33.8GB
(Continue reading)

Richard, WhidbeyNet NOC | 2 Jan 18:20 2004
Picon

PERC3/DC, PERC4/DC Write Performance

We purchased four dual-2.8Ghz 2650s, with PERC3/DC cards, along with 
two PowerVault 220S arrays (Ultra320 version), to create two storage 
clusters as recommended by Dell Power Solutions and Red Hat Enterprise.

Cluster testing went relatively smoothly. Failover worked under both 
RHEL AS 2.1 and 3.0. However, we noticed writes to the shared storage 
were slower than expected. So, we went back to a basic configuration 
with factory defaults to diagnose the problem:

With a single 36gb-10K-U320 disk in the PV220S, connected to one 2650, 
on RedHat 9 installed by the Open Manage CD (v7.5), no clustered SCSI, 
a sequential write could be done at 20 MB/s.

Changing to "WRITETHRU" mode on a single drive, required by clustering, 
sequential writes dropped to 10 MB/s. On a 5-disk RAID5, writes fell to 
8 MB/s.

In comparison, we can write to a PE2650 single internal disk, with the 
on-board Adaptec AIC-7899, at 35 MB/s:

sync; time dd ibs=1048576 obs=1048576 count=1024 if=/dev/zero 
of=/var/gigfile;
1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out
real    0m25.274s	user    0m2.690s	sys     0m11.730s
time sync
real    0m3.645s	user    0m0.000s	sys     0m0.040s
(1024 MB/28.9 seconds = 35.4 MB/s)

We tried the following to improve PERC3/DC writes, with little effect:

(Continue reading)

Anthony Porcano | 2 Jan 20:42 2004

RE: PERC3/DC, PERC4/DC Write Performance

This should be somewhat expected IMO. A cluster configuration (by concept, not implemenation) requires
that nodes in the cluster not cache I/O as a shared storage device is used for maintaining data integrity
between members. Could Dell/RedHat throw up disclaimers that say implementing a cluster configuration
will reduce the overall bandwidth you can achieve with your RAID card? Sure..., but for the most part I
think it's something that should be understood by anyone charged with building high availability
clusters. 

  ---Anthony

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: linux-poweredge-admin <at> dell.com on behalf of Richard, WhidbeyNet NOC 
	Sent: Fri 1/2/2004 12:20 PM 
	To: linux-poweredge <at> dell.com 
	Cc: 
	Subject: PERC3/DC, PERC4/DC Write Performance
	
	

	We purchased four dual-2.8Ghz 2650s, with PERC3/DC cards, along with
	two PowerVault 220S arrays (Ultra320 version), to create two storage
	clusters as recommended by Dell Power Solutions and Red Hat Enterprise.
	
	Cluster testing went relatively smoothly. Failover worked under both
	RHEL AS 2.1 and 3.0. However, we noticed writes to the shared storage
	were slower than expected. So, we went back to a basic configuration
	with factory defaults to diagnose the problem:
	
	With a single 36gb-10K-U320 disk in the PV220S, connected to one 2650,
	on RedHat 9 installed by the Open Manage CD (v7.5), no clustered SCSI,
	a sequential write could be done at 20 MB/s.
(Continue reading)

jason andrade | 3 Jan 00:28 2004

Re: PERC3/DC, PERC4/DC Write Performance

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Richard, WhidbeyNet NOC wrote:

> "The server and power vault are working as designed and we do not
> expect a solution to the performance difference on this configuration."
>
> We hope that Dell chooses to more truthfully advertise the performance
> tradeoff of the cluster configuration they recommend. If more accurate
> information were to be provided prior to sale, customers would no
> longer be suprised by this issue.

was the performance less than your application/system required ?

did you consider the CX200/400/600 as your clustered storage platform
as an alternative to the PV220S and PERC cards ? yes, there's more
cost..

did you consider asking dell for the PERC4/QC instead of the /DC ?

are you in a position to try a different brand of controller altogether
that supports clustering ?

thanks for submitting a very comprehensive summary of your efforts though
as this would be invaluable for future reference with people trying to
do performance tuning on their clustered environments.

regards,

-jason

_______________________________________________
(Continue reading)

Ed Griffin | 5 Jan 16:18 2004
Picon

2650 RHEL 3 Problem

Does anyone know what the following message means?

Jan  5 12:46:53 vspeed kernel: ACPI tables and CPU MSR values mismatch 
about cpu number

This is a 2650 (Dual 2.8GHz, 400FSB, 4GB RAM) that periodically locks up 
for no apparent reason.  This is the only error type message I can find 
in the log files.  Other 2650's have this same message but they are not 
locking up.  Any insight is appreciated.

--Ed

--

-- 
*****************************************************************
Ed Griffin
Assistant Network/System Administrator
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Weather Sensing Group
(781) 981-2871
mailto:edg <at> ll.mit.edu
*****************************************************************

_______________________________________________
Linux-PowerEdge mailing list
Linux-PowerEdge <at> dell.com
http://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-poweredge
Please read the FAQ at http://lists.us.dell.com/faq or search the list archives at http://lists.us.dell.com/htdig/

Richard, WhidbeyNet NOC | 5 Jan 18:23 2004
Picon

Re: PERC3/DC, PERC4/DC Write Performance

On Friday, January 2, 2004, at 03:28 PM, jason andrade wrote:

> On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Richard, WhidbeyNet NOC wrote:
>
>> "The server and power vault are working as designed and we do not
>> expect a solution to the performance difference on this  
>> configuration."
>>
>> We hope that Dell chooses to more truthfully advertise the performance
>> tradeoff of the cluster configuration they recommend. If more accurate
>> information were to be provided prior to sale, customers would no
>> longer be suprised by this issue.
>
> was the performance less than your application/system required ?
>

Unfortunately, 8 MB/s does not even fully utilize a 100 Mb/s NFS  
network. When reading from and writing to the same RAID 5, writes are  
of course interrupted, and slowed to 4 MB/s. We had been planning to  
use the Gigabit NICs on the 2650, and the PV220S for backup, data, web  
and e-mail storage.

> did you consider the CX200/400/600 as your clustered storage platform
> as an alternative to the PV220S and PERC cards ? yes, there's more
> cost..

A Fiber/SAN configuration was the first thing our team examined. It  
would have cost $84,549 for two, fully redundant clusters connected to  
one CX200. Two redundant SCSI clusters, with two 220S enclosures and  
twice the storage, cost $35,270.
(Continue reading)

Ben Ricker | 5 Jan 19:29 2004

Perc Raid issues and Dell search

I am looking to purchase a Dell 2650 system for an Oracle DB server and
am trying to see how the numerous Perc RAID problems may or may not
impact our decision. However, the Dell search link does not seem to
yield a search engine that works (URL: http://lists.us.dell.com/htdig/).
I tried searching for 'dell' and there were no hits! I also searched for
"perc performance" as well as just "perc" and still got no hits.

Rather then comb every post in the archives (I will if I have to), is
there any other place someone can turn me to which summarizes what the
problems are and how they were alleviated? Were they related to the
Storage Array only? We plan on using the internal storage in a RAID 5
configuration.

If it helps, we will also be using Redhat AS.

Thanks,

Ben Ricker
Wellinx, Inc.

_______________________________________________
Linux-PowerEdge mailing list
Linux-PowerEdge <at> dell.com
http://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-poweredge
Please read the FAQ at http://lists.us.dell.com/faq or search the list archives at http://lists.us.dell.com/htdig/


Gmane