logs archiveIRC Archive / Freenode / #centos / 2006 / August / 12 / 1
TSWoodV
Hello, everyone! When can we expect to see Centos 4.4? There's a nasty bug in 4.3 where RAID1 and LVM2 don't get along without data corruption that Red Hat just fixed two days ago on RHEL. So, when can expect to see it?
It's hard to install a machine with RAID1 and LVM2 without rolling my own CDs, which I am loathe to do. I did that once. What a PITA.
dan__t
(Action) stabs Inter-Tel. Again.
donavan
TSWoodV: bug tracker entry?
(Action) hugs inter-tel
dan__t
(Action) stabs donavan.
turnpike420
TSWoodV: watch the announce list or the website
donavan
(Action) wishes to read about this nasty bug
doug8429
Can anyone explain the Centos support for a Xeon 5000? It claims to be a 32/64bit processor. Does the kernel inherently support 64 bit mode? Is there anything I need to do to enable this?
donavan
have you installed centos?
doug8429
Just finished.
         

donavan
what did you download to install?
LuvRedheads
what 4.4 was just released hours ago and we don't have it rebuilt yet ?
doug8429
The 4.3server CD.
i386
donavan
then you installed a 386 (32 bit) release
devhen
doug8429: install the x86_64 architecture version to use the 64-bit capabilities of the xeon
donavan
if that processor has em64t and you want a 64bit os, you need the x86_64 release
doug8429
I thought x86_64 was AMD specific.
donavan
it was until amd licensed it
to intel
devhen
for use with the xeon, specifically :)
donavan
huh?
you can buy other intel crap with em64t
devhen
well, that was the first intel chip to use x86_64, no?
anyway, its the most common
doug8429
OK, great! Thanks a lot. I search the Centos forums for a while and couldn't find this info. Maybe it's just commonly known? Should it be a FAQ?
devhen
i'm willing to bet the centos d/l page mentions that the x86_64 arch is for AMD 64 and Xeon em64t
think i remember reading it
donavan
devhen: i doubt its most common
devhen
i could be wrong. i just remember seeing multiple distros claiming the x86_64 version was for AMD 64 and Xeon em64t
doug8429
I think it does, I just didn't know if a Xeon 5000 is a em64t processor.
devhen
never seen them mention another intel processor
donavan
you'll find this: "x86_64 (AMD64 and Intel EM64T)"
devhen
im sure your right. thanks for the info.
doug8429
Yes, I saw that. But I didn't see the word "Xeon", so I wasn't sure.
         

devhen
so, doug8429, i'd recommend the x86_64 arch to sqeeze every bit of performance out of your em64t xeon
donavan
dayum intel marketing hype foils another user
doug8429
OK, thanks a lot everyone.
devhen
np. thanks donavan, for straightening me out :)
donavan
he might actually only have a 32bit CPU
I was searching
devhen
dont know much about the '5000'...
not em64t?
finnzi
Xeon 5000 is a emt67
donavan
not sure, still looking :D
finnzi
64 even ;)
for Intel Xeon information, http://www.intel.com/design/Xeon/documentation.htm ....if in doubt ;)
perry753
Xeon 5000?
Dempsey?
donavan
thats what I'm thinking perry753
devhen
surely you agree xeon is intel's most popular em64t server chip. its in about 99% of dell servers, and even the xserve now! :)
perry753
5100 = woodcrest
donavan
they seem to be 64bit
LuvRedheads
they are
donavan
you can never be too sure with intel -- between marketing lies, marketing lies to cover design flaws, the vastly superier marketing lie called itanic, not to mention itanic2
perry753
Xeon's have been 64bit for a while
Stormx2
Hey folks, I think there is a variable somewhere which sets the maximum open files on centos. Where is it stored?
donavan
sounds like a google question Stormx2
Stormx2
>.< Alright
Does anyone know what this variable would be called, to aid me with my quest?
devhen
wow im actually d/l rhel4.4 at 75kB/sec now! sweeeet
donavan
Stormx2: at the kernel level or the user level?
perry753
devhen: holy sh*t RHEL 4.4?
devhen
yep, just released. sloow downloads though
TSWoodV
donavan: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=164696 for the RAID1 and LVM2 entry.
perry753
WTF
I JUST DOWNLOADED 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4
@.@
dan__t
sucker.
donavan
(Action) hugs inter-tel
dan__t
:(
donavan
TSWoodV: where is the information this was fixed?
Stormx2
donavan: I'm not sure. Im getting an IRC server running, and it said
The OS enforces a limit on max open files
Hard Limit: 100 MAXCONNECTIONS: 1024
Fix MAXCONNECTIONS
Ack, sorry for the paste
(Action) slaps mIRC
TSWoodV
donavan: Look at the bottom of this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=152162
donavan: Seems a relatively small patch that took a lot of digging to find.
donavan
TSWoodV: I fail to understand your issue now.... that kernel is ungodly old
TSWoodV
donavan: Sorry. This one instead: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2006-0575.html
donavan
a little birdy told me 2.6.9-42 is going to be the 4.4 kernel
TSWoodV
donavan: It took a fair amount of link following to get here...
donavan
help me understand this: "There's a nasty bug in 4.3 where RAID1 and LVM2 don't get along without data corruption that Red Hat just fixed two days ago on RHEL."
TSWoodV
donavan: Some how I'm not coming up with the same link path that I used to find this earlier. Sorry for all the bad starts/stops. I dug this info out of bugzilla that led me to believe that this kernel fixes the RAID1/LVM issue.
donavan: At any rate, neither the original CentOS 4.3 kernel nor the currently-available kernel work properly with this setup.
donavan: I've tried turning off hyperthreading, thinking this was some obscure race condition on MP boxes. That didn't help either.
donavan
TSWoodV: what is the output of " uname -a " on the box in question?
TSWoodV
donavan: SMART on both drives shows no problems.
donavan: I'll have to try to get it back up enough to tell. A simple rebooting after installation has corrupted at least /var and maybe / as well. Everything except /boot on this box is under LVM.
donavan: I'll have to go down the hall and try to resurrect the box. BRB.
donavan
TSWoodV: I doubt anything that redhat fixed 2 days ago is going to be in 4.4 as 4.4 has likely been in final QA from some number of days
if you have corruption after install, I hardly believe the issue can be related to the bugzilla's I've looked at -- particularly if you are installing from 4.3 media
TSWoodV
donavan: 2.6.9-34.EL is causing problems. Same thing with the 4.2 media.
donavan: Just rebooted the box and it dropped out for fsck again.
donavan: Previous efforts to run "yum update" have also met with corruption.
donavan
I'll stand by my last comment
every box I have with 2 or more drives is doing LVM over raid1 (raid5 or raid6)
not that it matters I also boot off raid1
TSWoodV
donavan: It's a relatively simple setup: Two 250GB HDs. Two RAID1 md's: /dev/md0 (512 MB) for /boot, non-LVM and /dev/md1 as a LVM. All other filesystems, including swap, are created within that LVM.
LuvRedheads
I have 3 boxes that are raid1+lvm
TSWoodV
donavan: Nothing too fancy, and nothing that should throw it a loop.
donavan: I agree with you that this shouldn't still be an issue. It was caught last year. But I've seen a fair share of regressions with RHL/RHEL over the years.
donavan: And I'm open to suggestions. I've reinstalled this box 5 times now.
donavan
what hardware?
TSWoodV
Dell PowerEdge 650. Single 3.06GHz Xeon. 1GB RAM. Two 250GB IDE HDs. One dual gigabit NIC and a single 10/100 3Com NIC.
Nothing fancy.
Evolution
TSWoodV: wait a week or so. 4.4 will be out relatively soon, and the -42 kernel contains LOADS of fixes.
TSWoodV
Evolution: I hope this is one of them. However, considering this was noted and supposedly fixed last year, I'm a bit doubtful.
I think I'm going to throw Ubuntu 6.06-1 on there. Its alternative build is supposed to support LVM and RAID. Just want to see if the kernel they're using avoids the problem.
Evolution
I have a huge lack of respect for dell hardware, but you may also wish to check out linux.dell.com for drivers, similar issues etc.
(Action) heads back out for another contract meeting.
TSWoodV
Evolution: So do I, but that's what this client likes. So that's what I
Evolution: am stuck with.
donavan
2 words: client, door
TSWoodV
donavan: 2 words: 5 year mega 6 figure deal.
donavan: Ok, so that's more than 2 words. It's also more than $2... ;-)
donavan
2 more words: your problem
TSWoodV
donavan: LOL!
donavan: At any rate, I don't think it's the hardware. I've got 10 others just like it w/o LVM and they're going strong.
donavan
be very bizzare
TSWoodV
donavan: They're not HPs or IBMs, but they do seem to run what we need. Oh, how I long for an all-IBM shop again...
donavan
The P7 extended the pipeline even further to over 20 stages (or 30 during cache misses), stressing clock speed over execution speed (for marketing reasons) - this led to some questionable design decisions.
TSWoodV
Questionable indeed. Cache misses or branch prediction misses are costly. That's why the Netburst architecture was done away with when Conroe hit the streets. Frankly, the Pentium-M kicked a large part of it to the curb.
donavan: Are you the whiteboxlinux dude?
dtm
no that's some librarian, isn't it? :)
donavan
TSWoodV: I have some history with wbel, my might you ask?
I am not THE wbel dude
s/my/why
TSWoodV
donavan: I remember the name from when I first ran WBEL, years ago.
WBEL weaned me from RHEL.
z00dax
i wonder how that story unravelled
donavan
yes, I was the arse who tried to create a community around wbel -- mostly unwelcomed by THE wbel dude
TSWoodV
That, and RH ditching RHL...
donavan: Sorry to see that didn't work out - glad to see that CentOS swept you up...
donavan
I sold my whiteboxlinux possesions for $.0001/hour invested
TSWoodV
donavan: About $.02/year, eh?
Dysk
I think that's $.20/yeah
assuming 2000 hours/year
donavan
Dysk: those are work (paid) hours
TSWoodV
Gotta run. Just got Ubuntu alternative down. Gonna see if its kernel is any better.
Thanks for the help.
donavan
(Action) still thinks its hardware related
Evolution
(Action) points out that if it's a 6 figure deal. then TSWoodV's client can surely afford a PNAELV system with proper support
k31th
morning guys
Evolution
(Action) goes to ANOTHER last minute meeting about contracting before heading home
k31th
Evolution: no PFY to send ?
z00dax
Evolution: do you mean to imply that the pony does not provide propper suport
tessier_
Hello all!
« prev 1 2 3 4 next »