similar to: Cloning Centos server with RSync - what to exclude?

With our without puppet. We are looking at setting up DR nodes with some draft ideas. We use puppet against a git repository (with ppg) instead of against a puppet server. Nodes are actually VMs. Configuration ideas: - a filesystem-level flag that indicates that the node is running as standby spare, to use as conditional in bash/python scripts as well as in puppet - some services

I manage a set of CentOS operations workstations which are all clones of each other (3 "live" and 1 "spare" kept powered down); each has a single drive with four partitions (/boot, /, /home, swap). I've already set up cron'd rsync jobs to copy the operations accounts between the workstations on a daily basis, so that when one fails, it is a simple, quick process to swap

Il 30/01/19 16:33, mark ha scritto: > Alessandro Baggi wrote: >> Il 30/01/19 14:02, mark ha scritto: >>> On 01/30/19 03:45, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>> Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: >>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>>> Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >>>>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote:

Alessandro Baggi wrote: > Il 30/01/19 16:33, mark ha scritto: > >> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >> >>> Il 30/01/19 14:02, mark ha scritto: >>> >>>> On 01/30/19 03:45, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>> >>>>> Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: >>>>> >>>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote:

Hello folks, I am experiencing a weird problem at bootup with large RAID-6 arrays. After Googling around (a lot) I find that others are having the same issues with CentOS/RHEL/Ubuntu/whatever. In my case it's Scientific Linux-6 which should behave the same way as CentOS-6. I had the same problem with the RHEL-6 evaluation version. I'm posting this question to the SL mailing list

Alessandro Baggi wrote: > Il 30/01/19 14:02, mark ha scritto: >> On 01/30/19 03:45, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>> Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: >>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>> Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >>>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>>>> Il 29/01/19 15:03, mark ha scritto:

As mentioned last night, we''ve been reviewing a proposal for hot spare support in ZFS. Below you can find a current draft of the proposed interfaces. This has not yet been submitted for ARC review, but comments are welcome. Note that this does not include any enhanced FMA diagnosis to determine when a device is "faulted". This will come in a follow-on project, of which some

Hello, I am trying to mess with a prio type qdisc, and must be missing something. Here''s my sample code: tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: prio tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1:0 prio 1 protocol ip u32 \ match ip dst 208.0.0.0/8 flowid 1:1 tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1:0 prio 3 protocol ip u32 \ match ip dst 0.0.0.0/0 flowid 1:3 I would assume that any traffic going to

Hello, I'm trying to set up a samba server for a friend who has a mac. He's running OSX, version 10.2. He's got some really big video editing files that are well in excess of 2gb. We're trying to back these up to the samba server, but it quits right around 2gb. That seems to be a magical number. This is with version 2.2.3 of Samba, and Linux-Mandrake 8.2, ext3 file system. I

> On 01/30/19 03:45, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >> Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: >>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>> Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>>> Il 29/01/19 15:03, mark ha scritto: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've no idea what happened, but the box I was working

I''ve got a zpool that has 4 raidz2 vdevs each with 4 disks (750GB), plus 4 spares. At one point 2 disks failed (in different vdevs). The message in /var/adm/messages for the disks were ''device busy too long''. Then SMF printed this message: Nov 23 04:23:51 x.x.com EVENT-TIME: Fri Nov 23 04:23:51 EST 2007 Nov 23 04:23:51 x.x.com PLATFORM: Sun Fire X4200 M2, CSN:

Il 30/01/19 14:02, mark ha scritto: > On 01/30/19 03:45, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >> Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: >>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>> Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>>> Il 29/01/19 15:03, mark ha scritto: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've no idea what

We have a situation where all of the spares in a set of pools have gone into a faulted state and now, apparently, we can''t remove them or otherwise de-fault them. I''m confidant that the underlying disks are fine, but ZFS seems quite unwilling to do anything with the spares situation. (The specific faulted state is ''FAULTED corrupted data'' in ''zpool

> Il 30/01/19 16:49, Simon Matter ha scritto: >>> On 01/30/19 03:45, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>> Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: >>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>>> Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >>>>>>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>>>>>> Il 29/01/19 15:03, mark ha scritto:

Il 29/01/19 20:42, mark ha scritto: > Alessandro Baggi wrote: >> Il 29/01/19 18:47, mark ha scritto: >>> Alessandro Baggi wrote: >>>> Il 29/01/19 15:03, mark ha scritto: >>>> >>>>> I've no idea what happened, but the box I was working on last week >>>>> has a *second* bad drive. Actually, I'm starting to wonder about

I''m looking for input on building an HA configuration for ZFS. I''ve read the FAQ and understand that the standard approach is to have a standby system with access to a shared pool that is imported during a failover. The problem is that we use ZFS for a specialized purpose that results in 10''s of thousands of filesystems (mostly snapshots and clones). All versions of

While testing a zpool with a different storage adapter using my "blkdev" device, I did a test which made a disk unavailable -- all attempts to read from it report EIO. I expected my configuration (which is a 3 disk test, with 2 disks in a RAIDZ and a hot spare) to work where the hot spare would automatically be activated. But I''m finding that ZFS does not behave this way

Hello Centos People, I have a CentOS 5.3 box that had a total of 5 ethernet cards in it. It functions to share an internet connection with 4 different subnets. All works fine, except I'm noticing that my MRTG traffic graphs are wrong. Further digging with snmpwalk reveal that the order of the ethernet interfaces changes every time the machine is rebooted to a different order. For

I have a x4540 with a single pool made from a bunch of raidz1''s with 2 spares (solaris 10 u7). Been running great for over a year, but I''ve had my first event. A day ago the system activated one of the spares c4t7d0, but given the status below, I''m not sure what to do next. # zpool status pool: pool1 state: ONLINE scrub: resilver completed after 2h25m

Hi all I have installed a new server with 77 2TB drives in 11 7-drive RAIDz2 VDEVs, all on WD Black drives. Now, it seems two of these drives were bad, one of them had a bunch of errors, the other was very slow. After zfs offlining these and then zfs replacing them with online spares, resilver ended and I thought it''d be ok. Appearently not. Albeit the resilver succeeds, the pool status