search for: 220s

These taken tonight (9/22/2004) at the Expo and Reception Enjoy. http://photos.tropiano.org/gallery/astricon-2004 Lenny

My apology for cross posting We have a DELL6850 with 8Gbytes of memory, four 3.2Ghz CPU's , perc 4 raid controller, with fourteen 300Gbyte 10Krpm disk on a powervault 220s, And a powervault 124T LTO-3 tape systems on a separate 160Mbyte/sec adaptec SCSI card. The disks are configured as two 2Tbyte raid 0 partitions using the perc 4 hardware. The problem is - reading from the disk, and writing to the tape is pathetically slow. The specs say I should get around 80Mb...

...dd disk devices Second try: then I did changed disk param to- disk = [''access=w,vdev=xvda1,backend=storage,target=/root/domsi.img''] And I got this console log - [ 5.588091] XENBUS: Waiting for devices to initialise: 25s...20s...15s...10s...5s...0s...235s...230s...225s...220s...215s...210s...205s...200s...195s...190s...185s...180s...175s...170s...165s...160s...155s...150s...145s...140s...135s...130s...125s...120s...115s...110s...105s...100s...95s...90s...85s...80s...75s...70s...65s...60s...55s...50s...45s...40s...35s...30s...25s...20s...15s...10s...5s...0s... [ 270.588...

...dd disk devices Second try: then I did changed disk param to- disk = [''access=w,vdev=xvda1,backend=storage,target=/root/domsi.img''] And I got this console log - [ 5.588091] XENBUS: Waiting for devices to initialise: 25s...20s...15s...10s...5s...0s...235s...230s...225s...220s...215s...210s...205s...200s...195s...190s...185s...180s...175s...170s...165s...160s...155s...150s...145s...140s...135s...130s...125s...120s...115s...110s...105s...100s...95s...90s...85s...80s...75s...70s...65s...60s...55s...50s...45s...40s...35s...30s...25s...20s...15s...10s...5s...0s... [ 270.588...

I am trying to use: ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 ocfs-2.4.21-EL-smp-1.0.11-1 ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 with RedHat AS 3.0, 2-node cluster with shared SCSI. 2 dell 1650s, dual CPUs, PERC 3/DC cards chained to a PowerVault 220S. I am using lvm, and here is my layout: [root@cluster1 archive]# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda2 32G 5.1G 25G 17% / /dev/sda1 99M 15M 79M 16% /boot none 1.8G 0 1.8G 0% /dev/shm /dev/Volume...

...But the startup process hung with messages: xen-vbd: registered block device major 202 xvda:<6>netfront: Initialising virtual ethernet driver. XENBUS: Waiting for devices to initialise: 295s...290s...285s...280s...275s...270s...265s...260s...255s...250s...245s...240s...235s...230s...225s...220s...215s...210s...205s...200s...195s...190s...185s...180s...175s...170s...165s...160s...155s...150s...145s...140s...135s...130s...125s...120s...<6>Uniform Multi-Platform E-IDE driver SCSI subsystem initialized st: Version 20080504, fixed bufsize 32768, s/g segs 256 BIOS EDD facility v0.16 2004-...

...ed Hat Linux 7.3 and using ext3. This server sees hefty read & write activity and I've been getting a lot of complaints that writing to the disks is taking a long time. The hardware is ample (Dell PE 2650 with 2x2.4GHz Xeons, 6GB RAM, PERC3-DC RAID controller & attached PowerVault 220S) and network connectivity doesn't seem to be the problem, so I'm looking to change some of the mount settings for ext3 to get more performance. Based on what I've read via Google and discussed on the valhalla list, I am planning to change two of the mount options: data=(journal or...

...ted. [ 0.976641] TCP cubic registered [ 0.976647] NET: Registered protocol family 17 [ 0.976739] registered taskstats version 1 [ 6.077230] XENBUS: Waiting for devices to initialise: 295s...290s...285s...280s...275s...270s...265s...260s...255s...250s...245s...240s...235s...230s...225s...220s...215s...210s...205s...200s...195s...190s...185s...180s...175s...170s...165s...160s...155s...150s...145s...140s...135s...130s...125s...120s...115s...110s...105s...100s...95s...90s...85s...80s...75s...70s...65s...60s...55s...50s...45s...40s...35s...30s...25s...20s...15s...10s...5s...0s... [ 301.076...

...le Loading uhci-hcd.ko module USB Universal Host Controller Interface driver v3.0 Loading jbd.ko module Loading ext3.ko module Loading xenblk.ko module XENBUS: Waiting for devices to initialise: 295s...290s...285s...280s...275s...270s...265s...260s...255s...250s...245s...240s...235s...230s...225s...220s...215s...210s...205s...200s...195s...190s...185s...180s...175s...170s...165s...160s...155s...150s...145s...140s...135s...130s...125s...120s...115s...110s...105s...100s...95s...90s...85s...80s...75s...70s...65s...60s...55s...50s...45s...40s...35s...30s...25s...20s...15s...10s...5s...0s... XENBUS: Ti...

The src won't compile with gcc 2.96 or 3.23: /lib/modules/2.4.21-4.ELsmp/build/include/linux/bitops.h:47: warning: no previous prototype for `gen eric_fls' /lib/modules/2.4.21-4.ELsmp/build/include/linux/bitops.h:76: warning: no previous prototype for `get _bitmask_order' Linux/ocfsmain.c:113: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type Linux/ocfsmain.c:1492: conflicting

I have a pair of snom 360s at a customer and they were giving me Low Memory errors. The distributor suggested updating the firmware. I did that, to the one just below 4.0 (which wasn't released yet). One of the phones is still giving the Low Memory error every 3-4 days. The other one had a broken display that was just RMA'd, so it' hasn't been up long enough to know if the

...4.x. Currently we are running 2.4.16 on our producton system and we have a rather complicated hardware/software RAID configuration on the box. Now for the details of my system. See http://w3.one.net/~djflux/graphics/raiddiag.png for a graphic of our RAID configuration. We have 2 Dell PowerVault 220S filled with 15K 18GB SCSI drives. Each drive in PowerVault 1 is hardware mirrored to the corresponding drive in PowerVault 2. I then use Linux software RAID0 to create a stripe across these 12 drives (/dev/md0). This setup is kind of convoluted due to hardware restraints (a Dell PERC3QC RAID ca...

...bles: (C) 2000-2006 Netfilter Core Team [ 0.260070] sit: IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling driver [ 0.260194] NET: Registered protocol family 17 [ 0.260213] Bridge firewalling registered [ 5.360075] XENBUS: Waiting for devices to initialise: 25s...20s...15s...10s...5s...0s...235s...230s...225s...220s...215s...210s... 205s...200s...195s...190s...185s...180s...175s...170s...165s...160s...155s... 150s...145s...140s...135s...130s...125s...120s...115s...110s...105s...100s... 95s...90s...85s...80s...75s...70s...65s...60s...55s...50s...45s...40s... 35s...30s...25s...20s...15s...10s...5s...0s... [ 270...

Hey folks, I guess this is an odd question to be asking here, but I could do with some feedback from anybody who''s actually using ZFS in anger. I''m about to go live with ZFS in our company on a new fileserver, but I have some real concerns about whether I can really trust ZFS to keep my data alive if things go wrong. This is a big step for us, we''re a 100% windows