similar to: [Bug 560] Privsep child continues to run after monitor killed.

Hi, I''ve been having some issues integrating bdrb on a cruisecontrolrb server It''s related to the way we stop the bdrb server. The thing is, right now when we stop the process we are killing the parent of the group of the process. This is ok if you''re running script/backgroundrb stop directly from the console, but if I''m running this from another process,

Hi, I have a dataset in which I would like to select rows based on matching conditions and return the maximum value of a variable else return one row if duplicate counts exist. My dataset looks like this: PGID PTID Year Visit Count 6755 53121 2009 1 0 6755 53121 2009 2 0 6755 53121 2009 3 0 6755 53122 2008 1 0 6755 53122 2008 2 0 6755 53122 2008 3 1 6755 53122 2009 1 0 6755 53122 2009 2 1 6755

Hello, I have 2 hosts HostA and HostB HostA - 10.38.9.2, kernel 2.4.16, tincd from Debian package HostB - 10.38.9.223, kernel 2.2.17-21mdk, tincd from tarball package. HostA: ------------------------------ /etc/tinc/test4/tinc.conf Name = HostA ConnectTo = HostB TapDevice = /dev/misc/net/tun PrivateKeyFile = /etc/tinc/test4/rsa_key.priv /etc/tinc/test4/hosts/HostA Subnet = 10.0.0.0/8 Port =

Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV

Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV

Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV

Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV

We observe a difference between a Windows 7 client and Windows 2003/XP client when accessing directories that should be accessible via the UNIX accounts primary group GID. Windows client refuses access. Ignoring for now why the two different client behaviours (either some subtle difference in the requests or the way the Samba reply is dealt with) the question is what should be the correct

Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV

Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV

Hi there, I am experiencing an annoying but not critical issue with (I think) tinc's internal routing. My setup is this: HostA (local. ConnectTo = HostC) HostB (geographically close. ConnectTo = HostC) HostC (far away. ConnectTo = nothing) Without tinc, pings from HostA to HostB take around 10ms, and from HostA/B to HostC around 200ms. With tinc, pings from HostA to HostB take nearly

Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV

Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV

I am taisaki About how to carry out mirroring with both server Although I would like you to teach About rsync, although it is a question, this time hostA hostB It is related with ssh connection. authorized_keys is held on both sides. In the environment which can be used satisfactory hostA /export/Data The following directories hostB /export/temp a mirror is carried out to below --

Hello again :) Thank you all for your reply's. Below are the config files of the 3 hosts. I use  tinc in router mode. I do not have a kernel mode config lines anywhere so tinc must be using the default settings here. I added the ipaddressx to subnets on hostc and this works. Traffic to that ip is now routed via hostc. But since this ipaddressx address changes often I need to resolve it

Hi, We're encountering a rather weird, sporadic hang during a large-file transfer. A bit of background on the setup: - Host A rsyncs a MySQL database from Host B. Both sides use rsync 3.1.1 on Debian Jessie. - Host B serves the files using rsync --daemon from an ext4 filesystem residing on a thin LVM snapshot. - Host A uses the following command to rsync the files to a btrfs

Problem is apparently with locking issues, disabled oplocks in the [general] section, and the problem actually got worse... Here's what happens: User-A part of group1, opens Excel file off of share, saves, exits... User-B (or even User-A for that matter) tries to re-open same file, get error stating it's locked and can only open for read-only access... Both users in the same group, and

On 11 April 2018 at 11:30, Hans de Groot <hansg at dandy.nl> wrote: > Hello again :) > > Thank you all for your reply's. Below are the config files of the 3 hosts. > I use tinc in router mode. I do not have a kernel mode config lines > anywhere so tinc must be using the default settings here. > > I added the ipaddressx to subnets on hostc and this works. Traffic

Hello Everyone, I am having a problem with setting up port forwarding from one of our local CentOS machines to an AWS EC2 instance. We are wanting to make mysql connections over an ssh tunnel. In this case, lets say that hostA is our local machine, and hostB is the Amazon EC2 instance. I have tried several different variations (that I have found from google searching), including: from hostA: ssh

Hello, I'm trying to use block migration with below procedure, but got some errors. I would highly appreciate if anyone give me a hand.. There are 2 hosts(hostA and hostB), both OS is Ubuntu 10.10(merverick). And a VM(named centos54-1mg) is running at hostA(centos54 64bit). [package version] +++-=====================-=====================-=================== ii kvm