search for: kelu

Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "kelu".

Did you mean: gelu
2011 Jan 30
4
RAID support in kernel?
Hello. I'm setting up a computer that will run 'CentOS 6 server'. The MB is an Asus with a hw raid controller (Promise PDC-20276), which I want to use in RAID-1 mode. I noted (from a MB website) that it also needs a driver - which is probably why it's called a 'fakeraid'. So, I've been trying to determine if any recent kernels support this chip. Using
2010 May 25
0
CentOS-virt Digest, Vol 33, Issue 9
...|_/ > ___|________________________________________________________ | > \___________________________________________________________\__/ > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 15:34:17 +0200 > From: Kenni Lund <kenni at kelu.dk> > Subject: [CentOS-virt] Libvirt NAT-based network 2x-4x faster than > Libvirt routed network? > To: Discussion about the virtualization on CentOS > <centos-virt at centos.org> > Message-ID: > <AANLkTilVG9SoFwr45o_GY-UD-q0htqEnFyuuizNT2JZZ at mail.gmail...
2010 May 25
1
Libvirt NAT-based network 2x-4x faster than Libvirt routed network?
Hi Is it expected behaviour that a libvirt NAT-based network is faster than a libvirt routed network? I would guess that the routed network would be the fastest one in all cases, but I'm seeing the opposite in my setup. On a 100mbit internet connection, the routed network tops at 4mbyte/sec, while the nat-based network goes all the way to 10mbyte/sec. I've spend the last 6 hours on
2011 Jan 15
0
CentOS 5.5/5.6 on Sandy Bridge
Hi list Has anyone tried to install CentOS 5.5 on a system with one of the new Sandy Bridge processors with integrated GPU? I can live with bad X11 performance - I'm happy as long as I get a X11 desktop (with VESA or whatever) with no crashes :) I'll mostly use this system as a KVM host with a VNC server, but I'll like to be able to hook a screen to it. CentOS 5.6/6.0 will undoubtly
2010 May 22
0
NAT-based network 2x-4x faster than routed network?
Hi Is it expected behaviour that a libvirt NAT-based network is faster than a libvirt routed network? I would guess that the routed network would be the fastest one in all cases, but I'm seeing the opposite in my setup. On a 100mbit internet connection, the routed network tops at 4mbyte/sec, while the nat-based network goes all the way to 10mbyte/sec. I've spend the last 6 hours on