Search Results

Search found 19 results on 1 pages for 'lustre'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • Lustre - issues with simple setup

    - by ethrbunny
    Issue: I'm trying to assess the (possible) use of Lustre for our group. To this end I've been trying to create a simple system to explore the nuances. I can't seem to get past the 'llmount.sh' test with any degree of success. What I've done: Each system (throwaway PCs with 70Gb HD, 2Gb RAM) is formatted with CentOS 6.2. I then update everything and install the Lustre kernel from downloads.whamcloud.com and add on the various (appropriate) lustre and e2fs RPM files. Systems are rebooted and tested with 'llmount.sh' (and then cleared with 'llmountcleanup.sh'). All is well to this point. First I create an MDS/MDT system via: /usr/sbin/mkfs.lustre --mgs --mdt --fsname=lustre --device-size=200000 --param sys.timeout=20 --mountfsoptions=errors=remount-ro,user_xattr,acl --param lov.stripesize=1048576 --param lov.stripecount=0 --param mdt.identity_upcall=/usr/sbin/l_getidentity --backfstype ldiskfs --reformat /tmp/lustre-mdt1 and then mkdir -p /mnt/mds1 mount -t lustre -o loop,user_xattr,acl /tmp/lustre-mdt1 /mnt/mds1 Next I take 3 systems and create a 2Gb loop mount via: /usr/sbin/mkfs.lustre --ost --fsname=lustre --device-size=200000 --param sys.timeout=20 --mgsnode=lustre_MDS0@tcp --backfstype ldiskfs --reformat /tmp/lustre-ost1 mkdir -p /mnt/ost1 mount -t lustre -o loop /tmp/lustre-ost1 /mnt/ost1 The logs on the MDT box show the OSS boxes connecting up. All appears ok. Last I create a client and attach to the MDT box: mkdir -p /mnt/lustre mount -t lustre -o user_xattr,acl,flock luster_MDS0@tcp:/lustre /mnt/lustre Again, the log on the MDT box shows the client connection. Appears to be successful. Here's where the issues (appear to) start. If I do a 'df -h' on the client it hangs after showing the system drives. If I attempt to create files (via 'dd') on the lustre mount the session hangs and the job can't be killed. Rebooting the client is the only solution. If I do a 'lctl dl' from the client it shows that only 2/3 OST boxes are found and 'UP'. [root@lfsclient0 etc]# lctl dl 0 UP mgc MGC10.127.24.42@tcp 282d249f-fcb2-b90f-8c4e-2f1415485410 5 1 UP lov lustre-clilov-ffff880037e4d400 00fc176e-3156-0490-44e1-da911be9f9df 4 2 UP lmv lustre-clilmv-ffff880037e4d400 00fc176e-3156-0490-44e1-da911be9f9df 4 3 UP mdc lustre-MDT0000-mdc-ffff880037e4d400 00fc176e-3156-0490-44e1-da911be9f9df 5 4 UP osc lustre-OST0000-osc-ffff880037e4d400 00fc176e-3156-0490-44e1-da911be9f9df 5 5 UP osc lustre-OST0003-osc-ffff880037e4d400 00fc176e-3156-0490-44e1-da911be9f9df 5 Doing a 'lfs df' from the client shows: [root@lfsclient0 etc]# lfs df UUID 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on lustre-MDT0000_UUID 149944 16900 123044 12% /mnt/lustre[MDT:0] OST0000 : inactive device OST0001 : Resource temporarily unavailable OST0002 : Resource temporarily unavailable lustre-OST0003_UUID 187464 24764 152636 14% /mnt/lustre[OST:3] filesystem summary: 187464 24764 152636 14% /mnt/lustre Given that each OSS box has a 2Gb (loop) mount I would expect to see this reflected in available size. There are no errors on the MDS/MDT box to indicate that multiple OSS/OST boxes have been lost. EDIT: each system has all other systems defined in /etc/hosts and entries in iptables to provide access. SO: I'm clearly making several mistakes. Any pointers as to where to start correcting them?

    Read the article

  • thought about shared storage (NFS, Lustre) [closed]

    - by user134880
    Possible Duplicate: Can you help me with my capacity planning? Now I habe small cluster with total of 8 nodes. 6 of them are computing nodes (apache and vmware) and 2 nodes are for storage. 2 storage nodes are identical. Each storage server is linux box with 8 x 1Tb WD RE4 in soft raid 10. 1st box is master and 2nd is slave. Data is mirrored with DRDB. We export NFSv4 shares to Apache (for document root) and iSCSI to Vmware. Now all is working pretty good and stable. But it will be soon time to upgrade our system. I have been thinking of Lustre. Does some one has any real experience with Lustre or NFS medium clusters? Will it be good idea just to upgrade server and change hdd's to 3Tb ? With NFS we will always have only 2 servers to maintain (one primary and one slave). Thanks. QUESTIONS: 1) Does some one used Lustre? In production? I have seen a lot of info about how it is hard to setup Lustre because you need to compile own kernel and patches. It's answers from newbies. Is there some one who has used Lustre for some period of time? 2) About disk upgrades - it's only description of strategy. I'm not asking if it is enough 3Tb or not. I just ask if it is right just to replace hdds instead of adding new server (like with Lustre) Thanks again.

    Read the article

  • Lustre - is this bad form?

    - by ethrbunny
    Im going to be consolidating several 'server rooms' into a single installation soon. Part of this effort will be finding a home for 5Tb (and growing) of files / logs. To this end Im looking at Lustre and appreciating its ability to scale. The big vendors want to sell me a $20K SAN to manage this but Im wondering about buying several iSCSI units (like this http://www.asacomputers.com/3U-iSCSI-Solution.html) and using VMs for the OSS machines. This would let me fail-over to cover problems and not require a dedicated system for each OSS. Given articles like this (http://h30565.www3.hp.com/t5/Feature-Articles/RAID-Is-Dead-Long-Live-RAID/ba-p/1422) that talk about how RAID is not keeping up with drive density Im leaning towards more disks with lower capacity each. Again - some akin to the iSCSI array above. Tell me why this is a terrible idea. Do I really need to invest in a PE710 for each OSS/OST?

    Read the article

  • Which is the fastest way to move 1Petabyte from one storage to a new one?

    - by marc.riera
    First of all, thanks for reading, and sorry for asking something related to my job. I understand that this is something that I should solve by myself but as you will see its something a bit difficult. A small description: Now Storage = 1PB using DDN S2A9900 storage for the OSTs, 4 OSS , 10 GigE network. (lustre 1.6) 100 compute nodes with 2x Infiniband 1 infiniband switch with 36 ports After Storage = Previous storage + another 1PB using DDN S2A 990 or LSI E5400 (still to decide) (lustre 2.0) 8 OSS , 10GigE network 100 compute nodes with 2x Infiniband Previous experience: transfered 120 TB in less than 3 days using following command: tar -C /old --record-size 2048 -b 2048 -cf - dir | tar -C /new --record-size 2048 -b 2048 -xvf - 2>&1 | tee /tmp/dir.log So , big problem here, using big mathematical equations I conclude that we are going to need 1 month to transfer the data from one side to the new one. During this time the researchers will need to step back, and I'm personally not happy with this. I'm telling you that we have infiniband connections because I think that may be there is a chance to use it to transfer the data using 18 compute nodes (18 * 2 IB = 36 ports) to transfer the data from one storage to the other. I'm trying to figure out if the IB switch will handle all the traffic but in case it just burn up will go faster than using 10GigE. Also, having lustre 1.6 and 2.0 agents on same server works quite well, with this there is no need to go by 1.8 to upgrade the metadata servers with two steps. Any ideas? Many thanks Note 1: Zoredache, we can divide it in two blocks (A)600Tb and (B)400Tb. The idea is to move (A) to new storage which is lustre2.0 formated, then format where (A) was with lustre2.0 and move (B) to this lustre2.0 block and extend with the space where (B) was. This way we will end with (A) and (B) on separate filesystems, with 1PB each.

    Read the article

  • How exactly are Distributed File Systems used in cloud environment?

    - by vaab
    How exactly are Distributed File Systems used in cloud environment ? More precisely: Are live VMs images (or their filesystem) usually located in the DFS ? Are VMs usually used to run the backbone (actual code) of DFS structure ? Precise example citing DFS (ceph, Gluster, GFS, GPFS, Lustre) or cloud environment (Openstack , CloudStack, ...) would be appreciated, even if I'm more interessted by ceph on OpenStack for now.

    Read the article

  • Multi-petabyte scale out storage solution [closed]

    - by Alex Yuriev
    Let's say that I have a need to have a single-name space scale to multi-petabyte object store with a file system-like wrapper. What is currently out there that supports the following: Single name space that can take 1B files. Support for multiple entry points using NFS At least node level replication ( preferably node and file level replication ) Online software upgrades No "magic sauce" on the storage layer The following has been evaluated: Gluster & Lustre - just ick - fundamental lack of understanding of why online upgrades are mandatory. OneFS - we have it. It is smelling more and more like it hides a dead body under the hood. Other than MapR and zfs am I missing anything? P.S. Oh yes, I keep forgetting that the forums are for people to discuss if 2TB drive actually stores 2TB info. May bad. Seriously though - how the heck can "meets the following requirements" can be considered a "debate"? P.P.S. I did not throw an idiotic insult - i pointed out that this is actually an interesting question compared to a conversation about storage capacity of a 2TB hard drive. It is not a question of what works better - it is a question that asks did I miss any of the products that currently exist which fit the criteria where criteria is clearly outline. I got one answer below which included something that I have not looked at in a long time which looks quite a bit grown up compared to the time I briefly look at it before.

    Read the article

  • Shared storage for web cluster

    - by user52475
    Hi all! Have a big question about shared/clustered/distributed file system for storage. It will shared storage for shared web hosting (web files + maildir) and OpenVZ containers storage . Have any one working example of such system? The options are: Lustre GFS1/GFS2 - GFS2 - as I understand is EXPERIMENTAL... NFS This 3 systems which I consider for shared storage. Now I have storage with HW RAID 10 - 1TB. NFS - As I know there will be problem with locking? GFS/Lustre - problems when there will be a lot of small files , what is typical for hosting environment and problems with maildir.

    Read the article

  • Linux : le kernel 2.6.34 est stable, il introduit deux nouveaux systèmes de fichiers pour remplacer

    Mise à jour du 18/05/10 Le kernel 2.6.34 disponible en version stable Il introduit deux nouveaux systèmes de fichiers pour remplacer le ext4 et gérer la mémoire Flash Le kernel 2.6.34 est à présent disponible en version stable. Trois mois après la précédente version majeure du noyau (cf ci-avant), ce nouveau kernel propose deux nouveaux systèmes de gestion de fichiers. Le premier est issu du projet Ceph et sépare les données des méta-données. Ce système de fichier distribué peut faire penser à Lustre d'Oracle (utilisé par exemple dans les supercalculateurs). Même si Ceph, toujours assez expérimental, n'est pas aussi per...

    Read the article

  • Scalable distributed file system for blobs like images and other documents

    - by Pinnacle
    Cassandra & HBase both do not efficiently support storage of blobs like images. Storing directly on HDFS stresses the Namenode because of huge number of files. Facebook uses Haystack for images and attachments storage, but this is not open source. So is Lustre a good choice for distributed blob storage? I have read that Amazon S3 is used by many, but this would cost money and personally, I would not like to rely on third party system. What are other suggestions?

    Read the article

  • High I/O wait after login

    - by Jackson Tan
    I've noticed that the ubuntuone-syncdaemon hogs up the hard disk every time I log in to Ubuntu (10.04). This takes up to two or three minutes, which makes Ubuntu insufferably slow. Opening Firefox is okay, but the browser is constantly greyed out and lags horribly. Given that I often shut down my laptop when I don't use it (about 3 to 4 times a day), this makes Ubuntu lose much of its lustre because of its long boot time. Is this a normal behaviour of Ubuntu One? Is it intended? Note that I've actually posted this in the forums here, but I received only few replies.

    Read the article

  • Distributed, Parallel, Fault-tolerant File System

    - by Eddified
    There are so many choices that it's hard to know where to start. My requirements are these: Runs on Linux Most of the files will be between 5-9 MB in size. There will also be a significant number of small-ish jpgs (100px x 100px). All of the files need to be available over http. Redundancy -- ideally it would provide the space efficiency similar to RAID 5 of 75% (in RAID 5 this would be calculated thus: with 4 identical disks, 25% of the space is used for parity = 75% efficent) Must support several petabytes of data scalable runs on commodity hardware In addition, I look for these qualities, though they are not "requirements": Stable, mature file system Lots of momentum and support etc I would like some input as to which file system works best for the given requirements. Some people at my organization are leaning towards MogileFS, but I'm not convinced of the stability and momentum of that project. GlusterFS and Lustre, based on my limited research, appear to be better supported... Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • The Oracle Enterprise Linux Software and Hardware Ecosystem

    - by sergio.leunissen
    It's been nearly four years since we launched the Unbreakable Linux support program and with it the free Oracle Enterprise Linux software. Since then, we've built up an extensive ecosystem of hardware and software partners. Oracle works directly with these vendors to ensure joint customers can run Oracle Enterprise Linux. As Oracle Enterprise Linux is fully--both source and binary--compatible with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), there is minimal work involved for software and hardware vendors to test their products with it. We develop our software on Oracle Enterprise Linux and perform full certification testing on Oracle Enterprise Linux as well. Due to the compatibility between Oracle Enterprise Linux and RHEL, Oracle also certifies its software for use on RHEL, without any additional testing. Oracle Enterprise Linux tracks RHEL by publishing freely downloadable installation media on edelivery.oracle.com/linux and updates, bug fixes and security errata on Unbreakable Linux Network (ULN). At the same time, Oracle's Linux kernel team is shaping the future of enterprise Linux distributions by developing technologies and features that matter to customers who deploy Linux in the data center, including file systems, memory management, high performance computing, data integrity and virtualization. All this work is contributed to the Linux and Xen communities. The list below is a sample of the partners who have certified their products with Oracle Enterprise Linux. If you're interested in certifying your software or hardware with Oracle Enterprise Linux, please contact us via [email protected] Chip Manufacturers Intel, Intel Enabled Server Acceleration Alliance AMD Server vendors Cisco Unified Computing System Dawning Dell Egenera Fujitsu HP Huawei IBM NEC Sun/Oracle Storage Systems, Volume Management and File Systems 3Par Compellent EMC VPLEX FalconStor Fusion-io Hitachi Data Systems HP Storage Array Systems Lustre Network Appliance OCFS2 PillarData Symantec Veritas Storage Foundation Networking: Switches, Host Bus Adapters (HBAs), Converged Network Adapters (CNAs), InfiniBand Brocade Emulex Mellanox QLogic Voltaire SOA and Middleware ActiveState ActivePerl, ActivePython Tibco Zend Backup, Recovery & Replication Arkeia Network Backup Suite BakBone NetVault CommVault Simpana 8 EMC Networker, Replication Manager FalconStor Continuous Data Protector HP Data Protector NetApp Snapmanager Quest LiteSpeed Engine Steeleye Data Replication, Disaster Recovery Symantec NetBackup, Veritas Volume Replicator, Symantec Backup Exec Zmanda Amanda Enterprise Data Center Automation BMC CA Unicenter HP Server Automation (formerly Opsware), System Management Homepage Oracle Enterprise Manager Ops Center Quest Vizioncore vFoglight Pro TeamQuest Manager Clustering & High Availability FUJITSU x10sure NEC Express Cluster X Steeleye Lifekeeper Symantec Cluster Server Univa UniCluster Virtualization Platforms and Cloud Providers Amazon EC2 Citrix XenServer Rackspace Cloud VirtualBox VMWare ESX Security Management ArcSight: Enterprise Security Manager, Logger CA Access Control Centrify Suite Ecora Auditor FoxT Manager Likewise: Unix Account Management Lumension Endpoint Management and Security Suite QualysGuard Suite Quest Privilege Manager McAfee Application Control, Change ControlIntegrity Monitor, Integrity Control, PCI Pro Solidcore S3 Symantec Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) Tripwire Trusted Computer Solutions

    Read the article

  • Geographically distributed file system with preferred locality

    - by dpb
    Hi All -- I'm building a application that needs to distribute a standard file server across a few sites over a WAN. Basically, each site needs to write a lot of misc files of varying size (some in the 100s MB range, but most small), and the application is written such that collisions aren't a problem. I'd like to have a system set up that meets the following qualifications: Each site can store files in a shared "namespace". That is, all the files would show up in the same filesystem. Each site would not send data over the WAN unless necessary. I.e., there would be local storage on each side of the WAN that would be "merged" into the same logical filesystem. Linux & Free ($$$) is a must. Basically, something like a central NFS share would meet most of the requirements, however it would not allow the locally written data to stay local. All data from remote sides of the WAN would be copied locally all the time. I have looked into Lustre, and have run some successful tests with it, however, it appears to distribute files fairly uniformly across the distributed storage. I have dug through the documentation and have not found anything that automatically will "prefer" local storage over remote storage. Even something that went with the lowest latency storage would be fine. It would work most of the time, which would meet this application's requirements. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Distributed storage and computing

    - by Tim van Elteren
    Dear Serverfault community, After researching a number of distributed file systems for deployment in a production environment with the main purpose of performing both batch and real-time distributed computing I've identified the following list as potential candidates, mainly on maturity, license and support: Ceph Lustre GlusterFS HDFS FhGFS MooseFS XtreemFS The key properties that our system should exhibit: an open source, liberally licensed, yet production ready, e.g. a mature, reliable, community and commercially supported solution; ability to run on commodity hardware, preferably be designed for it; provide high availability of the data with the most focus on reads; high scalability, so operation over multiple data centres, possibly on a global scale; removal of single points of failure with the use of replication and distribution of (meta-)data, e.g. provide fault-tolerance. The sensitivity points that were identified, and resulted in the following questions, are: transparency to the processing layer / application with respect to data locality, e.g. know where data is physically located on a server level, mainly for resource allocation and fast processing, high performance, how can this be accomplished? Do you from experience know what solutions provide this transparency and to what extent? posix compliance, or conformance, is mentioned on the wiki pages of most of the above listed solutions. The question here mainly is, how relevant is support for the posix standard? Hadoop for example isn't posix compliant by design, what are the pro's and con's? what about the difference between synchronous and asynchronous opeartion of a distributed file system. Though a synchronous distributed file system has the preference because of reliability it also imposes certain limitations with respect to scalability. What would be, from your expertise, the way to go on this? I'm looking forward to your replies. Thanks in advance! :) With kind regards, Tim van Elteren

    Read the article

  • What are the typical methods used to scale up/out email storage servers?

    - by nareshov
    Hi, What I've tried: I have two email storage architectures. Old and new. Old: courier-imapds on several (18+) 1TB-storage servers. If one of them show signs of running out of disk space, we migrate a few email accounts to another server. the servers don't have replicas. no backups either. New: dovecot2 on a single huge server with 16TB (SATA) storage and a few SSDs we store fresh mails on the SSDs and run a doveadm purge to move mails older than a day to the SATA disks there is an identical server which has a max-15min-old rsync backup from the primary server higher-ups/management wanted to pack in as much storage as possible per server in order to minimise the cost of SSDs per server the rsync'ing is done because GlusterFS wasn't replicating well under that high small/random-IO. scaling out was expected to be done with provisioning another pair of such huge servers on facing disk-crunch issues like in the old architecture, manual moving of email accounts would be done. Concerns/doubts: I'm not convinced with the synchronously-replicated filesystem idea works well for heavy random/small-IO. GlusterFS isn't working for us yet, I'm not sure if there's another filesystem out there for this use case. The idea was to keep identical pairs and use DNS round-robin for email delivery and IMAP/POP3 access. And if one the servers went down for whatever reasons (planned/unplanned), we'd move the IP to the other server in the pair. In filesystems like Lustre, I get the advantage of a single namespace whereby I do not have to worry about manually migrating accounts around and updating MAILHOME paths and other metadata/data. Questions: What are the typical methods used to scale up/out with the traditional software (courier-imapd / dovecot)? Do traditional software that store on a locally mounted filesystem pose a roadblock to scale out with minimal "problems"? Does one have to re-write (parts of) these to work with an object-storage of some sort - such as OpenStack object storage?

    Read the article

  • Silabs cp2102 driver problem

    - by Zxy
    I downloaded appropriate driver from its own site, unzipped it and then tried to install it. But: root@ghostrider:/home/zero/Downloads# tar xvf cp210x-3.1.0.tar.gz cp210x-3.1.0/ cp210x-3.1.0/COPYING cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/ cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x-3.1.0.spec cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/.rpmmacros cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/configure cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/cp210x.c cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/cp210x.h cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/cp210xuniversal.c cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/cp210xuniversal.h cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/installmod cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/Makefile24 cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/Makefile26 cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/rpmmacros24 cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/rpmmacros26 cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/Rules.make cp210x-3.1.0/INSTALL cp210x-3.1.0/makerpm cp210x-3.1.0/PACKAGE-LIST cp210x-3.1.0/README cp210x-3.1.0/RELEASE-NOTES cp210x-3.1.0/REPORTING-BUGS cp210x-3.1.0/rpm/ cp210x-3.1.0/rpm/brp-java-repack-jars cp210x-3.1.0/rpm/brp-python-bytecompile cp210x-3.1.0/rpm/check-rpaths cp210x-3.1.0/rpm/check-rpaths-worker root@ghostrider:/home/zero/Downloads# cd cp210x-3.1.0 root@ghostrider:/home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0# ls COPYING cp210x-3.1.0.spec makerpm README REPORTING-BUGS cp210x INSTALL PACKAGE-LIST RELEASE-NOTES rpm root@ghostrider:/home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0# run ./makerpm No command 'run' found, did you mean: Command 'zrun' from package 'moreutils' (universe) Command 'runq' from package 'exim4-daemon-heavy' (main) Command 'runq' from package 'exim4-daemon-light' (main) Command 'runq' from package 'sendmail-bin' (universe) Command 'grun' from package 'grun' (universe) Command 'qrun' from package 'torque-client' (universe) Command 'qrun' from package 'torque-client-x11' (universe) Command 'lrun' from package 'lustre-utils' (universe) Command 'rn' from package 'trn' (multiverse) Command 'rn' from package 'trn4' (multiverse) Command 'rup' from package 'rstat-client' (universe) Command 'srun' from package 'slurm-llnl' (universe) run: command not found root@ghostrider:/home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0# sudo ./makerpm + uname -r + kernel_release=3.2.0-25-generic-pae + pwd + current_dir=/home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0 + export current_dir + uname -r + KVER=3.2.0-25-generic-pae + echo 3.2.0-25-generic-pae + awk -F . -- { print $1 } + KVER1=3 + echo 3.2.0-25-generic-pae + awk -F . -- { print $2 } + KVER2=2 + sed -e s/3\.2\.//g + echo 3.2.0-25-generic-pae + KVER3=0-25-generic-pae + [ -f /root/.rpmmacros ] + echo 2 2 + [ 2 == 4 ] ./makerpm: 25: [: 2: unexpected operator + echo 0-25-generic-pae 0-25-generic-pae + [ 0-25-generic-pae -gt 15 ] ./makerpm: 29: [: Illegal number: 0-25-generic-pae + cp /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/rpmmacros24 /root/.rpmmacros + d=/var/tmp/silabs + [ ! -d /var/tmp/silabs ] + mkdir /var/tmp/silabs + cd /var/tmp/silabs + r=/var/tmp/silabs/rpmbuild + o=cp210x-3.1.0 + s=/var/tmp/silabs/rpmbuild/SOURCES + spec=cp210x-3.1.0.spec + rm -rf /var/tmp/silabs/rpmbuild + mkdir rpmbuild + mkdir rpmbuild/SOURCES + mkdir rpmbuild/SRPMS + mkdir rpmbuild/SPECS + mkdir rpmbuild/BUILD + mkdir rpmbuild/RPMS + cd /var/tmp/silabs/rpmbuild/SOURCES + rm -rf cp210x-3.1.0 + mkdir cp210x-3.1.0 + cp -r /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/Makefile24 /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/Makefile26 /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x- 3.1.0/cp210x/Rules.make /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/configure /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/cp210x.c /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x- 3.1.0/cp210x/cp210x.h /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/cp210xuniversal.c /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/cp210xuniversal.h /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x- 3.1.0/cp210x/installmod /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/rpmmacros24 /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/rpmmacros26 cp210x-3.1.0 + echo 2 2 + [ 2 == 4 ] ./makerpm: 64: [: 2: unexpected operator + echo 0-25-generic-pae 0-25-generic-pae + [ 0-25-generic-pae -gt 15 ] ./makerpm: 68: [: Illegal number: 0-25-generic-pae + cp /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/.rpmmacros24 cp210x-3.1.0/.rpmmacros cp: cannot stat `/home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x/.rpmmacros24': No such file or directory + MyCopy=0 + rm -f cp210x-3.1.0.tar + rm -f cp210x-3.1.0.tar.gz + tar -cf cp210x-3.1.0.tar cp210x-3.1.0 + gzip cp210x-3.1.0.tar + cp /home/zero/Downloads/cp210x-3.1.0/cp210x-3.1.0.spec /var/tmp/silabs/rpmbuild/SPECS + rpmbuild -ba /var/tmp/silabs/rpmbuild/SPECS/cp210x-3.1.0.spec ./makerpm: 121: ./makerpm: rpmbuild: not found + [ -f /root/.rpmmacros.cp210x ] How may I solve my problem? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Sharing storage between servers

    - by El Yobo
    I have a PHP based web application which is currently only using one webserver but will shortly be scaling up to another. In most regards this is pretty straightforward, but the application also stores a lot of files on the filesystem. It seems that there are many approaches to sharing the files between the two servers, from the very simple to the reasonably complex. These are the options that I'm aware of Simple network storage NFS SMB/CIFS Clustered filesystems Lustre GFS/GFS2 GlusterFS Hadoop DFS MogileFS What I want is for a file uploaded via one webserver be immediately available if accessed through the other. The data is extremely important and absolutely cannot be lost, so whatever is implemented needs to a) never lose data and b) have very high availability (as good as, or better, than a local filesystem). It seems like the clustered filesystems will also provide faster data access than local storage (for large files) but that isn't of vita importance at the moment. What would you recommend? Do you have any suggestions to add or anything specifically to look out for with the above options? Any suggestions on how to manage backup of data on the clustered filesystems?

    Read the article

  • Cross-platform distributed fault-tolerant (disconnected operation/local cache) filesystem

    - by Adrian Frühwirth
    We are facing a design "challenge" where we are required to set up a storage solution with the following properties: What we need HA a scalable storage backend offline/disconnected operation on the client to account for network outages cross-platform access client-side access from certainly Windows (probably XP upwards), possibly Linux backend integrates with AD/LDAP (permission management (user/group management, ...)) should work reasonably well over slow WAN-links Another problem is that we don't really know all possible use cases here, if people need to be able to have concurrent access to shared files or if they will only be accessing their own files, so a possible solution needs to account for concurrent access and how conflict management would look in this case from a user's point of view. This two years old blog posts sums up the impression that I have been getting during the last couple of days of research, that there are lots of current übercool projects implementing (non-Windows) clustered petabyte-capable blob-storage solutions but that there is none that supports disconnected operation nicely and natively, but I am hoping that we have missed an obvious solution. What we have tried OpenAFS We figured that we want a distributed network filesystem with a local cache and tested OpenAFS (which, as the only currently "stable" DFS supporting disconnected operation, seemed the way to go) for a week but there are several problems with it: it's a real pain to set up there are no official RHEL/CentOS packages the package of the current stable version 1.6.5.1 from elrepo randomly kernel panics on fresh installs, this is an absolute no-go Windows support (including the required Kerberos packages) is mystical. The current client for the 1.6 branch does not run on Windows 8, the current client for the 1.7 does but it just randomly crashes. After that experience we didn't even bother testing on XP and Windows 7. Suffice to say, we couldn't get it working and the whole setup has been so unstable and complicated to setup that it's just not an option for production. Samba + Unison Since OpenAFS was a complete disaster and no other DFS seems to support disconnected operation we went for a simpler idea that would sync files against a Samba server using Unison. This has the following advantages: Samba integrates with ADs; it's a pain but can be done. Samba solves the problem of remotely accessing the storage from Windows but introduces another SPOF and does not address the actual storage problem. We could probably stick any clustered FS underneath Samba, but that means we need a HA Samba setup on top of that to maintain HA which probably adds a lot of additional complexity. I vaguely remember trying to implement redundancy with Samba before and I could not silently failover between servers. Even when online, you are working with local files which will result in more conflicts than would be necessary if a local cache were only touched when disconnected It's not automatic. We cannot expect users to manually sync their files using the (functional, but not-so-pretty) GTK GUI on a regular basis. I attempted to semi-automate the process using the Windows task scheduler, but you cannot really do it in a satisfactory way. On top of that, the way Unison works makes syncing against Samba a costly operation, so I am afraid that it just doesn't scale very well or even at all. Samba + "Offline Files" After that we became a little desparate and gave Windows "offline files" a chance. We figured that having something that is inbuilt into the OS would reduce administrative efforts, helps blaming someone else when it's not working properly and should just work since people have been using this for years. Right? Wrong. We really wanted it to work, but it just doesn't. 30 minutes of copying files around and unplugging network cables/disabling network interfaces left us with (silent! there is only a tiny notification in Windows explorer in the statusbar, which doesn't even open Sync Center if you click on it!) undeletable files on the server (!) and conflicts that should not even be conflicts. In the end, we had one successful sync of a tiny text file, everything else just exploded horribly. Beyond that, there are other problems: Microsoft admits that "offline files" in Windows XP cannot cope with "large files" and therefore does not cache/sync them at all which would mean those files become unavailable if the connection drop In Windows 7 the feature is only available in the Professional/Ultimate/Enterprise editions. Summary Unless there is another fault-tolerant DFS that supports Windows natively I assume that stacking a HA Samba cluster on top of something like GlusterFS/Lustre/whatnot is the only option, but I hope that I am wrong here. How do other companies allow fault-tolerant network access to redundant storage in a heterogeneous environment with Windows?

    Read the article

1