From gillian.bennett at celentia.com Sun Oct 17 16:25:36 2004 From: gillian.bennett at celentia.com (gillian) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 09:25:36 +1000 Subject: [cAos] centos-3 x86_64 install hangs Message-ID: <1098055535.11794.596.camel@rh-possum.localdomain> Hi, Fristly thanks for this awsome distro. It constantly blows me away the stength of the opensource community. I am currently trying to install centos-3 x85_64 on an amd64 whitebox machine. I downloaded the iso's and have created some CD's over the weekend. The first cd is bootable and to all intents and purposes the install appears to proceed. It gets to the splash menu (I am currently running a manual install just to see how things go) and I hit enter to proceed with the graphical install. It says: Loading vmlinuz............. Loading initrd.img............................ Decompressing Linux...done. Booting the kernel. Then it just hangs. Has anyone else seen this happen and been able to get past this first bit? Thanks, gb From tmattox at gmail.com Sun Oct 17 17:12:03 2004 From: tmattox at gmail.com (Tim Mattox) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:12:03 -0400 Subject: [cAos] centos-3 x86_64 install hangs In-Reply-To: <1098055535.11794.596.camel@rh-possum.localdomain> References: <1098055535.11794.596.camel@rh-possum.localdomain> Message-ID: Hello gillian, You can try adding these options to the kernel commandline and it might help: noapic iommu=off The 2.4/2.6 hybrid kernel that RedHat supplies with RHEL3 has some issues with some AMD64 motherboards AFAIK, and the above options made the CentOS 3's kernel bootable for me on one of our systems. BTW - I've moved this to the CentOS mailing list, that is a more appropriate forum for this question. Please remove the caos at caosity.org CC if/when anyone replies. On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 09:25:36 +1000, gillian wrote: > Hi, > > Fristly thanks for this awsome distro. It constantly blows me away the > stength of the opensource community. > > I am currently trying to install centos-3 x85_64 on an amd64 whitebox > machine. I downloaded the iso's and have created some CD's over the > weekend. The first cd is bootable and to all intents and purposes the > install appears to proceed. It gets to the splash menu (I am currently > running a manual install just to see how things go) and I hit enter to > proceed with the graphical install. > > It says: > > Loading vmlinuz............. > Loading initrd.img............................ > > Decompressing Linux...done. > Booting the kernel. > > Then it just hangs. Has anyone else seen this happen and been able to > get past this first bit? > > Thanks, gb -- Tim Mattox - tmattox at gmail.com - http://homepage.mac.com/tmattox/ From gillian.bennett at celentia.com Mon Oct 18 19:47:15 2004 From: gillian.bennett at celentia.com (gillian) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:47:15 +1000 Subject: [cAos] centos-3 x86_64 install hangs In-Reply-To: <1098055535.11794.596.camel@rh-possum.localdomain> References: <1098055535.11794.596.camel@rh-possum.localdomain> Message-ID: <1098154035.1547.24.camel@rh-possum.localdomain> On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 09:25, gillian wrote: > Hi, > > Fristly thanks for this awsome distro. It constantly blows me away the > stength of the opensource community. > > I am currently trying to install centos-3 x85_64 on an amd64 whitebox > machine. I downloaded the iso's and have created some CD's over the > weekend. The first cd is bootable and to all intents and purposes the > install appears to proceed. It gets to the splash menu (I am currently > running a manual install just to see how things go) and I hit enter to > proceed with the graphical install. > > It says: > > Loading vmlinuz............. > Loading initrd.img............................ > > Decompressing Linux...done. > Booting the kernel. > > > Then it just hangs. Has anyone else seen this happen and been able to > get past this first bit? > > Thanks, gb > > > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos > YAHOO!! I got it working by disabling USB and APCI in the BIOS. I am now currently installing centos-3 x86_64 ;) thanks Tim for your suggestions which set me on the right path. ta, Gillian From centos at infinity77.net Wed Oct 20 18:21:53 2004 From: centos at infinity77.net (Mike) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:21:53 -0400 Subject: [cAos] Updating Packages Message-ID: <000801c4b70c$5a2f33f0$12146241@infinity777> I seem to be a little confused when it comes to updating packages. I assume centos mirrors would be used but everything refers to redhat so I'm not quite sure how to update the system. Also, the list of available updates shows the same versions for install and available. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.infiscale.org/pipermail/caos/attachments/20041020/f11e7202/attachment.html From wla at ebooksys.com Thu Oct 21 05:01:20 2004 From: wla at ebooksys.com (Willy Ang) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:01:20 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: cAos digest, Vol 1 #272 - 1 msg In-Reply-To: <20041021120000.24855.43822.Mailman@caos1.caosity.org> Message-ID: Hi, I'm currently away from the office and will be back on Oct 25, 2004. If you have any urgent requests, please contact mark at ebooksys.com Regards, Willy From ahodgson at simkin.ca Thu Oct 21 09:27:31 2004 From: ahodgson at simkin.ca (Alan Hodgson) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 09:27:31 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Updating Packages In-Reply-To: <000801c4b70c$5a2f33f0$12146241@infinity777> References: <000801c4b70c$5a2f33f0$12146241@infinity777> Message-ID: <20041021162731.GA14717@simkin.ca> On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 09:21:53PM -0400, Mike wrote: > I seem to be a little confused when it comes to updating packages. I assume > centos mirrors would be used but everything refers to redhat so I'm not quite > sure how to update the system. Also, the list of available updates shows the > same versions for install and available. Use yum for updates. A suitable yum.conf should have been installed during installation. -- Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines From gravesricharde at yahoo.com Thu Oct 21 17:15:58 2004 From: gravesricharde at yahoo.com (Rick Graves) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:15:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [cAos] announcing LagMirror In-Reply-To: <20041021120000.24855.43822.Mailman@caos1.caosity.org> Message-ID: <20041022001558.96110.qmail@web14728.mail.yahoo.com> Hey, LagMirror is a little different. The objective of LagMirror is to run YUM as a daily cron job and minimize the risk that a show-stopping glitch could get onto and bring down a mission-critical server. Packages that are quickly superseded are not put into the Lag mirror directories at all. The system takes advantage of the fact that show-stopping glitches are typically discovered and fixed quickly. Although LagMirror is not for everyone, it could work well for systems running on common hardware without any customized packages. This is work in progress, but it seems to be working. For more information, get the README here: ftp://www.advanced-app.com.hk/ One can get the Python source from the "source" directory under the above URL. Interested persons are invited to try it. Feedback is welcome. Rick From wla at ebooksys.com Fri Oct 22 05:01:24 2004 From: wla at ebooksys.com (Willy Ang) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 05:01:24 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: cAos digest, Vol 1 #273 - 3 msgs In-Reply-To: <20041022120001.4459.63103.Mailman@caos1.caosity.org> Message-ID: Hi, I'm currently away from the office and will be back on Oct 25, 2004. If you have any urgent requests, please contact mark at ebooksys.com Regards, Willy From charlieb-caos at budge.apana.org.au Fri Oct 22 06:18:44 2004 From: charlieb-caos at budge.apana.org.au (Charlie Brady) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 09:18:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [cAos] announcing LagMirror In-Reply-To: <20041022001558.96110.qmail@web14728.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Oct 2004, Rick Graves wrote: > LagMirror is a little different. > > The objective of LagMirror is to run YUM as a daily > cron job and minimize the risk that a show-stopping > glitch could get onto and bring down a > mission-critical server. > > Packages that are quickly superseded are not put into > the Lag mirror directories at all. The system takes > advantage of the fact that show-stopping glitches are > typically discovered and fixed quickly. Would it not be sufficient to add a feature to yum to consult a revocation list before accepting what it finds in a yum repository? --- Charlie From greg at runlevelzero.net Sat Oct 23 01:34:21 2004 From: greg at runlevelzero.net (Greg M. Kurtzer) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:34:21 -0700 Subject: [cAos] cAos-2 users... ext/testing Message-ID: <20041023083421.GA29287@titan.runlevelzero.net> Apparently there are already a number of caos-2 users out there even though it hasn't been formally released (even as alpha) yet. Well, because development is moving so quickly, many people were yum'ing against ext/autobuilder. This is _very_ dangerous because it is hard for us to control and coordinate package releases (ie. all packages in a dep tree must be released at the same time as opposed to just when they are built). Everyone that is updating caos-2 from current, should change to use: basearch=http://mirror.caosity.org/cAos-2/ext/testing/$basearch/ I will be updating that at least 1x per day, and can quickly fix any bugs that are encountered until we have a more static repository (which we will signify with a release of some sort). -- Greg M. Kurtzer http://runlevelzero.net/ http://caosity.org/ http://warewulf-cluster.org/ From wla at ebooksys.com Sat Oct 23 05:01:11 2004 From: wla at ebooksys.com (Willy Ang) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 05:01:11 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: cAos digest, Vol 1 #274 - 3 msgs In-Reply-To: <20041023120001.12902.14753.Mailman@caos1.caosity.org> Message-ID: Hi, I'm currently away from the office and will be back on Oct 25, 2004. If you have any urgent requests, please contact mark at ebooksys.com Regards, Willy From gravesricharde at yahoo.com Sat Oct 23 11:21:44 2004 From: gravesricharde at yahoo.com (Rick Graves) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:21:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [cAos] Re: announcing LagMirror In-Reply-To: <20041023120001.12902.14753.Mailman@caos1.caosity.org> Message-ID: <20041023182144.29519.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> Charlie, > Would it not be sufficient to add a feature to yum > to consult a revocation > list before accepting what it finds in a yum > repository? Yes, that would be sufficient. I also had the same idea, and I twice put the suggestion to the yum mailing list. The second time I pressed the point, and finally I was told "No! Write your own program." So I did. My second question and the answer that I got are in the YUM mailing list archive for September. My suggestion is in Vol 14, Issue 6, msg. no. 6. Re: pkgpolicy (Rick Graves), Mon, 6 Sep 2004 19:44:02. Some discussion followed. I was told "No" and that I should write my on program on September 8th, in Yum Digest, Vol 14, Issue 8, msg. no. 3. Re: Re: mirror maintenance (Michael Stenner) and msg. no. 4. Re: Re: mirror maintenance (seth vidal). Rick --- caos-request at caosity.org wrote: > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 09:18:44 -0400 (EDT) > From: Charlie Brady > > To: caos at caosity.org > Subject: Re: [cAos] announcing LagMirror > Reply-To: caos at caosity.org > > > On Thu, 21 Oct 2004, Rick Graves wrote: > > > LagMirror is a little different. > > > > The objective of LagMirror is to run YUM as a > daily > > cron job and minimize the risk that a > show-stopping > > glitch could get onto and bring down a > > mission-critical server. > > > > Packages that are quickly superseded are not put > into > > the Lag mirror directories at all. The system > takes > > advantage of the fact that show-stopping glitches > are > > typically discovered and fixed quickly. > > Would it not be sufficient to add a feature to yum > to consult a revocation > list before accepting what it finds in a yum > repository? > > --- > Charlie > > From gravesricharde at yahoo.com Sat Oct 23 11:27:52 2004 From: gravesricharde at yahoo.com (Rick Graves) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:27:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [cAos] Re: YUM mailing list archive In-Reply-To: <20041023120001.12902.14753.Mailman@caos1.caosity.org> Message-ID: <20041023182752.93074.qmail@web14712.mail.yahoo.com> Charlie, I forgot to include the link; the YUM mailing list archive is here: https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/yum/ Rick From wla at ebooksys.com Sun Oct 24 05:01:18 2004 From: wla at ebooksys.com (Willy Ang) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 05:01:18 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: cAos digest, Vol 1 #275 - 3 msgs In-Reply-To: <20041024120001.25170.31972.Mailman@caos1.caosity.org> Message-ID: Hi, I'm currently away from the office and will be back on Oct 25, 2004. If you have any urgent requests, please contact mark at ebooksys.com Regards, Willy From malcolm at baxteris.com Mon Oct 25 14:08:54 2004 From: malcolm at baxteris.com (malcolm at baxteris.com) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:08:54 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [cAos] 2.6 kernel Message-ID: <41990.127.0.0.1.1098738534.squirrel@127.0.0.1> Is there a way to use yum to upgrade to the current 2.6* kernel? From greg at runlevelzero.net Mon Oct 25 14:44:48 2004 From: greg at runlevelzero.net (Greg M. Kurtzer) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:44:48 -0700 Subject: [cAos] 2.6 kernel In-Reply-To: <41990.127.0.0.1.1098738534.squirrel@127.0.0.1> References: <41990.127.0.0.1.1098738534.squirrel@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <20041025214448.GB24296@titan.runlevelzero.net> Are you thinking of making caos1 use the 2.6 kernel? If so, I would recommend migrating your box to caos2 when it is released. There are more things to update then just the kernel to get a fully functional 2.6 implementation. We have one or two more changes to the core that we have to bring in, and then some more testing,... once that has been done, we should be able to make an alpha release. In the mean time, if you wish to test, you can grab the latest cinch at: http://mirror.caosity.org/cAos-2/install/cinch*.iso And install caos2. On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 04:08:54PM -0500, malcolm at baxteris.com wrote: > Is there a way to use yum to upgrade to the current 2.6* kernel? > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos -- Greg M. Kurtzer http://runlevelzero.net/ http://caosity.org/ http://warewulf-cluster.org/ From malcolm at baxteris.com Mon Oct 25 14:49:28 2004 From: malcolm at baxteris.com (malcolm at baxteris.com) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:49:28 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [cAos] RE: 2.6 Kernel Message-ID: <42125.127.0.0.1.1098740968.squirrel@127.0.0.1> I should have been more specific. I have Centos 3.3 and am using the latest kernel update by using yum upgrade kernel Is there a way, and is stable to upgrade to the 2.6* kernel From greg at runlevelzero.net Mon Oct 25 14:52:56 2004 From: greg at runlevelzero.net (Greg M. Kurtzer) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:52:56 -0700 Subject: [cAos] RE: 2.6 Kernel In-Reply-To: <42125.127.0.0.1.1098740968.squirrel@127.0.0.1> References: <42125.127.0.0.1.1098740968.squirrel@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <20041025215256.GC24296@titan.runlevelzero.net> ahh. I have a centos system running with the caos2 kernel, and supporting userland utils. I was going to make a yum repo of them soon, and at that time, I will publicize it. Give me a couple of days to have the i386 packages built (presently I have only done it with x86_64). Greg On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 04:49:28PM -0500, malcolm at baxteris.com wrote: > I should have been more specific. > > I have Centos 3.3 and am using the latest kernel update by using > yum upgrade kernel > > Is there a way, and is stable to upgrade to the 2.6* kernel > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos -- Greg M. Kurtzer http://runlevelzero.net/ http://caosity.org/ http://warewulf-cluster.org/ From jrw at nplus1.net Mon Oct 25 16:10:49 2004 From: jrw at nplus1.net (Jacob Robert Wilkins) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:10:49 -0400 Subject: [cAos] RE: 2.6 Kernel In-Reply-To: <20041025215256.GC24296@titan.runlevelzero.net> References: <42125.127.0.0.1.1098740968.squirrel@127.0.0.1> <20041025215256.GC24296@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: <20041025231049.GB21788@nplus1.net> On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 02:52:56PM -0700, Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: > ahh. I have a centos system running with the caos2 kernel, and supporting > userland utils. > > I was going to make a yum repo of them soon, and at that time, I will > publicize it. Give me a couple of days to have the i386 packages built > (presently I have only done it with x86_64). It would make me very happy to have such a thing. jrw From akbar501 at dslextreme.com Mon Oct 25 23:54:53 2004 From: akbar501 at dslextreme.com (Akbar S. Ahmed) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:54:53 -0700 Subject: [cAos] RE: 2.6 Kernel In-Reply-To: <42125.127.0.0.1.1098740968.squirrel@127.0.0.1> References: <42125.127.0.0.1.1098740968.squirrel@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <417DF4BD.50500@dslextreme.com> malcolm at baxteris.com wrote: > I have Centos 3.3 and am using the latest kernel update by using > yum upgrade kernel > > Is there a way, and is stable to upgrade to the 2.6* kernel Do you know which features of the 2.6 kernel you want to use? The reason I ask is that numerous 2.6 kernel features are backported to the 2.4.x kernel in CentOS. Red Hat had backported many 2.6 features to RHEL 3, which CentOS 3.x is of course related to. So, the 2.6 features you are looking to benefit from may already be in the 2.4 kernel that is already used by CentOS 3.3. - Akbar From greg at runlevelzero.net Tue Oct 26 10:32:32 2004 From: greg at runlevelzero.net (Greg M. Kurtzer) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:32:32 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill Message-ID: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> It turns out that the release of Centos-3.3 was so popular, that it threw us way over the threshold of our ISP's, and now we are stuck with a _very_ large bill (as in an estimated 6TB of transfers). While in one hand I am ecstatic that we are so successful, but on the other hand, that is coming out of the developers pockets. The developers should be the last ones footing these bills (and this one was very large). You can help. Please consider a donation for each of the systems that you are using. A reasonable donation we think starts at $12US per system per year. That money is only spent on infrastructure and development. $12 is much cheaper then a magazine subscription, and if everyone contributes their share, we will be able to grow our infrastructure to better handle our growing user base, and continue to provide software to the community. Please visit http://www.caosity.org/contributing/ to do your part. -- Greg M. Kurtzer http://runlevelzero.net/ http://caosity.org/ http://warewulf-cluster.org/ From greg at runlevelzero.net Tue Oct 26 11:04:50 2004 From: greg at runlevelzero.net (Greg M. Kurtzer) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 11:04:50 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <20041026174455.7BE88B30012@mail.caosity.org> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041026174455.7BE88B30012@mail.caosity.org> Message-ID: <20041026180450.GD1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 10:43:48AM -0700, Jeff Coleman wrote: > Greg, > > 1 - I will be glad to make a donation to your project. I would be happier > using Paypal than entering my CC info on every site that has a donations > policy. Any chance of you creating a PayPal account? Kintera (our donation management partner) used to take paypal donations, but don't seem to be doing that anymore. I am checking with them now. > 2 - As founder of www.contribs.org (SME Server) I ran into the bandwidth > issue bigtime each time there was a release or upgrade. The solution we > finally came to worked well for everyone. > > We simply got a mirror at Ibiblio and a few others and then we rsync the > appropriate directories over to the mirrors. All downloads happen at the > mirror sites and the bandwidth that you have is reserved for the website. So our mirror list sorta accomplishes the same thing. These were hits though from mirrors, and from people hitting or syncing to mirror.caosity.org which is a rrdns pool of mirror servers that we maintain. > Thanks to you and all the other folks who make it possible for us to lurk > the lists and utilize your work product. :) -- Greg M. Kurtzer http://runlevelzero.net/ http://caosity.org/ http://warewulf-cluster.org/ From greg at runlevelzero.net Tue Oct 26 18:34:56 2004 From: greg at runlevelzero.net (Greg M. Kurtzer) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:34:56 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <20041026180450.GD1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041026174455.7BE88B30012@mail.caosity.org> <20041026180450.GD1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: <20041027013456.GB3909@titan.runlevelzero.net> On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 11:04:50AM -0700, Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: > On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 10:43:48AM -0700, Jeff Coleman wrote: > > Greg, > > > > 1 - I will be glad to make a donation to your project. I would be happier > > using Paypal than entering my CC info on every site that has a donations > > policy. Any chance of you creating a PayPal account? > > Kintera (our donation management partner) used to take paypal donations, but > don't seem to be doing that anymore. I am checking with them now. This has been fixed. The Kintera page now support using Paypal again. Please follow the normal contribute links, and on the Paypal page, there is a link (middle of page) with the payment options for Paypal payments. Let me know how it works out. Thanks! -- Greg M. Kurtzer http://runlevelzero.net/ http://caosity.org/ http://warewulf-cluster.org/ From malcolm at baxteris.com Tue Oct 26 20:38:57 2004 From: malcolm at baxteris.com (Malcolm Baxter) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:38:57 -0500 Subject: [cAos] RE: 2.6 Kernel In-Reply-To: <417DF4BD.50500@dslextreme.com> Message-ID: I do not have any specific features in mind. I would just like some of the possibilities that I have heard about. I will just look forward to when it comes. Malcolm Baxter Baxter Information Services (901)270-3971 mobile (662)342-1160 home office Malcolm at Baxteris.com http://baxteris.com -----Original Message----- From: caos-admin at caosity.org [mailto:caos-admin at caosity.org] On Behalf Of Akbar S. Ahmed Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 1:55 AM To: caos at caosity.org Subject: Re: [cAos] RE: 2.6 Kernel malcolm at baxteris.com wrote: > I have Centos 3.3 and am using the latest kernel update by using > yum upgrade kernel > > Is there a way, and is stable to upgrade to the 2.6* kernel Do you know which features of the 2.6 kernel you want to use? The reason I ask is that numerous 2.6 kernel features are backported to the 2.4.x kernel in CentOS. Red Hat had backported many 2.6 features to RHEL 3, which CentOS 3.x is of course related to. So, the 2.6 features you are looking to benefit from may already be in the 2.4 kernel that is already used by CentOS 3.3. - Akbar _______________________________________________ cAos mailing list cAos at caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos From malcolm at baxteris.com Tue Oct 26 20:50:12 2004 From: malcolm at baxteris.com (Malcolm Baxter) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:50:12 -0500 Subject: [cAos] RE: 2.6 Kernel In-Reply-To: <20041025215256.GC24296@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: Cool, Well I am excited to try it out and I also saw the donation mail and I will defiantly make my contribution. I am using this Distro as a web server with Cpanel so it earns its keep. Malcolm Baxter Baxter Information Services (901)270-3971 mobile (662)342-1160 home office Malcolm at Baxteris.com http://baxteris.com -----Original Message----- From: caos-admin at caosity.org [mailto:caos-admin at caosity.org] On Behalf Of Greg M. Kurtzer Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 4:53 PM To: caos at caosity.org Subject: Re: [cAos] RE: 2.6 Kernel ahh. I have a centos system running with the caos2 kernel, and supporting userland utils. I was going to make a yum repo of them soon, and at that time, I will publicize it. Give me a couple of days to have the i386 packages built (presently I have only done it with x86_64). Greg On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 04:49:28PM -0500, malcolm at baxteris.com wrote: > I should have been more specific. > > I have Centos 3.3 and am using the latest kernel update by using > yum upgrade kernel > > Is there a way, and is stable to upgrade to the 2.6* kernel > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos -- Greg M. Kurtzer http://runlevelzero.net/ http://caosity.org/ http://warewulf-cluster.org/ _______________________________________________ cAos mailing list cAos at caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos From Tom.DeBlende at dhl.com Tue Oct 26 23:51:45 2004 From: Tom.DeBlende at dhl.com (Tom DE BLENDE (GCC)) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:51:45 +0200 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <20041026180450.GD1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041026174455.7BE88B30012@mail.caosity.org> <20041026180450.GD1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: <417F4581.90907@dhl.com> Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: >So our mirror list sorta accomplishes the same thing. These were hits though >from mirrors, and from people hitting or syncing to mirror.caosity.org which >is a rrdns pool of mirror servers that we maintain. > Payment done. Thank you very much for all the hard work. I hope you can sort out the traffic problem. Maybe setup in a way that users can only download from mirrors, and only the mirrors can rsync from the main CentOS server? Or do you have to pay for traffic generated to mirrors as well? Tom From greg at runlevelzero.net Wed Oct 27 07:10:20 2004 From: greg at runlevelzero.net (Greg M. Kurtzer) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:10:20 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: <20041027141020.GA8611@titan.runlevelzero.net> I have received many emails regarding our mirror setup, and people asking more specifics about the amount of data transferred and the costs... Configuration: We rent 3 systems at a colo, all of which come with 1TB of pre-payed for bandwidth. Each of these systems are part of a round robin DNS pool for mirror.caosity.org, and payed for by different members of our devel team. This is where all of our public Tier1 mirrors are supposed to sync from (http://caosity.org/download/mirrors/). Now we already know that _many_ more mirrors then what is listed on our mirror page are sync'ing from it, and individual computers are running yum against it. We thought that the 3TB provided by these mirrors would be sufficient to handle our traffic load. We were right 2-3 months ago. :/ Now,... I said an "estimated 6TB", and here is where I got the estimation. One system's owner is being charged for an _extra_ 1TB of data transfer. I have not heard from the the owners of the other 2 systems yet,... This is why it was an _estimation_ of 6TB. rrDNS is known for not implementing an even rotation (due to caching), so I wouldn't be surprised if the other systems have _slightly_ different numbers. Here is the directory layout of mirror.caosity.org: 5.5G cAos-1 14G cAos-2 6.3G centos-2 31G centos-3 18G centos-3/3.1 14G centos-3/3.3 note: some repos include hard links As cAos-2 is also new (but not released yet), it too would have been a contributor to the transfer load. Usually I don't like to divulge finances as publicly as this, but considering the interest I have gotten I will let on to some numbers... The first bill was in generous excess of $500US. I would imagine that the other two bills will also be near that, putting the grand total somewhere around $1500US. Typically we spend $80US per system (which is reasonable), and this charge is ontop of that. The Foundation also has a rather substantial "I owe you" list to several of the developers which we are hoping will be paid back when/if we receive enough donations. How to fix: We have always been throwing the idea around of blocking access to our primary mirrors and only letting through the Teir1 mirrors. We have not done that (yet) because of the potential of breaking the update stream to many systems (most yum.confs currently point to mirror). Another solution is to get more systems to put into our mirror rrDNS pool. Or we can find someone willing to host a very large temporary mirror for new releases and point people there. We will be discussing these issues and more in IRC #caos for anyone that wish to provide thoughts or input. I hope that clears up some confusion. :) Thank you for all of the interest and ideas that this has sparked. I am sorry if I don't respond directly to each of them, but I think I answered all of the questions that were asked of me in this email. Let me know if I missed something. On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 10:32:32AM -0700, Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: > It turns out that the release of Centos-3.3 was so popular, that it threw us > way over the threshold of our ISP's, and now we are stuck with a _very_ large > bill (as in an estimated 6TB of transfers). While in one hand I am ecstatic > that we are so successful, but on the other hand, that is coming out of the > developers pockets. The developers should be the last ones footing these > bills (and this one was very large). > > You can help. Please consider a donation for each of the systems that you are > using. A reasonable donation we think starts at $12US per system per year. > That money is only spent on infrastructure and development. $12 is much > cheaper then a magazine subscription, and if everyone contributes their > share, we will be able to grow our infrastructure to better handle our > growing user base, and continue to provide software to the community. > > Please visit http://www.caosity.org/contributing/ to do your part. > -- > Greg M. Kurtzer > http://runlevelzero.net/ > http://caosity.org/ > http://warewulf-cluster.org/ > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- Greg M. Kurtzer http://runlevelzero.net/ http://caosity.org/ http://warewulf-cluster.org/ From dreamlink at tiscalinet.it Thu Oct 28 03:35:21 2004 From: dreamlink at tiscalinet.it (Graziano) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 03:35:21 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <20041027141020.GA8611@titan.runlevelzero.net> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041027141020.GA8611@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: <4180CB69.2060006@tiscalinet.it> Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: >I have received many emails regarding our mirror setup, and people asking more >specifics about the amount of data transferred and the costs... > >Configuration: We rent 3 systems at a colo, all of which come with 1TB of >pre-payed for bandwidth. Each of these systems are part of a round robin DNS >pool for mirror.caosity.org, and payed for by different members of our devel >team. This is where all of our public Tier1 mirrors are supposed to sync from >(http://caosity.org/download/mirrors/). Now we already know that _many_ more >mirrors then what is listed on our mirror page are sync'ing from it, and >individual computers are running yum against it. We thought that the 3TB >provided by these mirrors would be sufficient to handle our traffic load. We >were right 2-3 months ago. :/ > >Now,... I said an "estimated 6TB", and here is where I got the estimation. One >system's owner is being charged for an _extra_ 1TB of data transfer. I have not >heard from the the owners of the other 2 systems yet,... This is why it was >an _estimation_ of 6TB. rrDNS is known for not implementing an even >rotation (due to caching), so I wouldn't be surprised if the other systems >have _slightly_ different numbers. > >Here is the directory layout of mirror.caosity.org: > > 5.5G cAos-1 > 14G cAos-2 > 6.3G centos-2 > 31G centos-3 > > 18G centos-3/3.1 > 14G centos-3/3.3 > > note: some repos include hard links > >As cAos-2 is also new (but not released yet), it too would have been a >contributor to the transfer load. > >Usually I don't like to divulge finances as publicly as this, but considering >the interest I have gotten I will let on to some numbers... The first bill was >in generous excess of $500US. I would imagine that the other two bills will >also be near that, putting the grand total somewhere around $1500US. Typically >we spend $80US per system (which is reasonable), and this charge is ontop of >that. The Foundation also has a rather substantial "I owe you" list to several >of the developers which we are hoping will be paid back when/if we receive >enough donations. > >How to fix: We have always been throwing the idea around of blocking access to >our primary mirrors and only letting through the Teir1 mirrors. We have not >done that (yet) because of the potential of breaking the update stream to many >systems (most yum.confs currently point to mirror). Another solution is to get >more systems to put into our mirror rrDNS pool. Or we can find someone willing >to host a very large temporary mirror for new releases and point people there. >We will be discussing these issues and more in IRC #caos for anyone that wish >to provide thoughts or input. > >I hope that clears up some confusion. :) > >Thank you for all of the interest and ideas that this has sparked. I am sorry >if I don't respond directly to each of them, but I think I answered all of the >questions that were asked of me in this email. Let me know if I missed >something. > > > >On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 10:32:32AM -0700, Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: > > >>It turns out that the release of Centos-3.3 was so popular, that it threw us >>way over the threshold of our ISP's, and now we are stuck with a _very_ large >>bill (as in an estimated 6TB of transfers). While in one hand I am ecstatic >>that we are so successful, but on the other hand, that is coming out of the >>developers pockets. The developers should be the last ones footing these >>bills (and this one was very large). >> >>You can help. Please consider a donation for each of the systems that you are >>using. A reasonable donation we think starts at $12US per system per year. >>That money is only spent on infrastructure and development. $12 is much >>cheaper then a magazine subscription, and if everyone contributes their >>share, we will be able to grow our infrastructure to better handle our >>growing user base, and continue to provide software to the community. >> >>Please visit http://www.caosity.org/contributing/ to do your part. >>-- >>Greg M. Kurtzer >>http://runlevelzero.net/ >>http://caosity.org/ >>http://warewulf-cluster.org/ >>_______________________________________________ >>CentOS mailing list >>CentOS at caosity.org >>http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> >> > > > do you accept paypal too ? I am avaialble to pay with paypal From Tom.DeBlende at dhl.com Thu Oct 28 04:28:17 2004 From: Tom.DeBlende at dhl.com (Tom DE BLENDE (GCC)) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 13:28:17 +0200 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <4180CB69.2060006@tiscalinet.it> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041027141020.GA8611@titan.runlevelzero.net> <4180CB69.2060006@tiscalinet.it> Message-ID: <4180D7D1.2070404@dhl.com> Graziano wrote: >> > do you accept paypal too ? > > I am avaialble to pay with paypal Yes, worked for me. From dreamlink at tiscalinet.it Thu Oct 28 06:15:17 2004 From: dreamlink at tiscalinet.it (Graziano) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 06:15:17 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <4180D7D1.2070404@dhl.com> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041027141020.GA8611@titan.runlevelzero.net> <4180CB69.2060006@tiscalinet.it> <4180D7D1.2070404@dhl.com> Message-ID: <4180F0E5.3000007@tiscalinet.it> which is the paypal email to send paypal payment email , where can I read information ? Thank you > > > Graziano wrote: > >>> >> do you accept paypal too ? >> >> I am avaialble to pay with paypal > > > Yes, worked for me. > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos > From Tom.DeBlende at dhl.com Thu Oct 28 06:26:41 2004 From: Tom.DeBlende at dhl.com (Tom DE BLENDE (GCC)) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:26:41 +0200 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <4180F0E5.3000007@tiscalinet.it> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041027141020.GA8611@titan.runlevelzero.net> <4180CB69.2060006@tiscalinet.it> <4180D7D1.2070404@dhl.com> <4180F0E5.3000007@tiscalinet.it> Message-ID: <4180F391.9000300@dhl.com> Start here: http://www.centos.org/contributing/donations . Graziano wrote: > which is the paypal email to send paypal payment email , where can I > read information ? Thank you > >> >> >> Graziano wrote: >> >>>> >>> do you accept paypal too ? >>> >>> I am avaialble to pay with paypal >> >> From dreamlink at tiscalinet.it Thu Oct 28 06:28:00 2004 From: dreamlink at tiscalinet.it (Graziano) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 06:28:00 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <4180F0E5.3000007@tiscalinet.it> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041027141020.GA8611@titan.runlevelzero.net> <4180CB69.2060006@tiscalinet.it> <4180D7D1.2070404@dhl.com> <4180F0E5.3000007@tiscalinet.it> Message-ID: <4180F3E0.6070000@tiscalinet.it> ok I found and donated for 2 servers. Graziano wrote: > which is the paypal email to send paypal payment email , where can I > read information ? Thank you > >> >> >> Graziano wrote: >> >>>> >>> do you accept paypal too ? >>> >>> I am avaialble to pay with paypal >> >> >> >> Yes, worked for me. >> _______________________________________________ >> cAos mailing list >> cAos at caosity.org >> http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos >> > > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos > From gillian.bennett at celentia.com Thu Oct 28 15:40:40 2004 From: gillian.bennett at celentia.com (gillian) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 08:40:40 +1000 Subject: [cAos] a new kernel Message-ID: <1099003239.15387.203.camel@rh-possum.localdomain> Hi, I am running centos x86_64 and am trying to get samba 3.0.7 talking to OS2. OS2 extended attributes means I have to apply a patch to my kernel and reconfigure with the extended attributes turned on. Looking for the appropriate patches, I only found them for 2.4.24, 2.4.25 and 2.6. Currently the kernel is at 2.4.21 . I downloaded a kernel source from http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/ pf 2.4.25 just to see what happens. I applied the patch and compiled the kernel but on bootup it complains mightily and has a little kernel panic. It gets as far as checking all the filesystems, (vgscan etc) but then says: CPU 0: MAchine Check exception MCG_STATUS: unrecoverable Northbridge MAchine Check exception . . . Kernel panic: Unable to continue In idle task - not syncing Bit ugly ay. Do I need to find a specific amd64 kernel? I have not been able to locate a 2.4.25 64 bit kernel on google. Thanks, Gillian From malcolm at baxteris.com Fri Oct 29 14:59:33 2004 From: malcolm at baxteris.com (malcolm at baxteris.com) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:59:33 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [cAos] HA cluster Message-ID: <44360.127.0.0.1.1099087173.squirrel@127.0.0.1> I would like to turn a web server into a highly available cluster. The server is using Centos 3.3 and I would like to add another to it and eventually another to make it three. Does anyone have experience doing this and are there any specific DOCS or Sites with tools that I should read up on. From Tim.Evans at aepona.com Fri Oct 29 15:00:19 2004 From: Tim.Evans at aepona.com (Tim.Evans at aepona.com) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:00:19 +0100 Subject: Out-of-office-reply: [cAos] HA cluster In-Reply-To: <44360.127.0.0.1.1099087173.squirrel@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: I am out of the office until Monday 1st November If you need to speak to someone from I.T. please call our main switchboard number +44(0)2890 269100 and ask for Philip Jones. From Tim.Evans at aepona.com Fri Oct 29 15:01:43 2004 From: Tim.Evans at aepona.com (Tim.Evans at aepona.com) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:01:43 +0100 Subject: Out-of-office-reply: Out-of-office-reply: [cAos] HA cluster In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I am out of the office until Monday 1st November If you need to speak to someone from I.T. please call our main switchboard number +44(0)2890 269100 and ask for Philip Jones. From geoff at galitz.org Fri Oct 29 20:00:30 2004 From: geoff at galitz.org (Geoff Galitz) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:00:30 -0700 Subject: [cAos] HA cluster In-Reply-To: <44360.127.0.0.1.1099087173.squirrel@127.0.0.1> References: <44360.127.0.0.1.1099087173.squirrel@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: Are you looking to create a high availability web cluster or for other purposes? I ask because it makes a difference in terms of how to go about it. -geoff On Oct 29, 2004, at 2:59 PM, malcolm at baxteris.com wrote: > I would like to turn a web server into a highly available cluster. The > server is using Centos 3.3 and I would like to add another to it and > eventually another to make it three. Does anyone have experience doing > this and are there any specific DOCS or Sites with tools that I should > read up on. > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos > > http://www.galitz.org From gravesricharde at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 21:46:53 2004 From: gravesricharde at yahoo.com (Rick Graves) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:46:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [cAos] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? Message-ID: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> Hey, Greg suggested that I take a straw poll. Should cAos take steps to prevent getting stuck with a big ISP bill in the future? For example, should cAos: a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? b) make sure that "yum update" does not substitute a new yum.conf file that points only to mirror.caosity.org? c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org directly, but block direct access by everyone else? On the other hand, do the benefits of allowing direct access to mirror.caosity.org by everyone outweigh the costs of occasionally big ISP bills? Feel free to express your views, Greg is listening. Rick From malcolm at loadbalancer.org Sat Oct 30 00:23:42 2004 From: malcolm at loadbalancer.org (Malcolm Turnbull) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:23:42 +0100 Subject: [cAos] HA cluster In-Reply-To: <44360.127.0.0.1.1099087173.squirrel@127.0.0.1> References: <44360.127.0.0.1.1099087173.squirrel@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <4183417E.9050305@loadbalancer.org> Normal process is to implement either : a) A two node web cluster using heartbeat or better... b) A two node load balancer (LVS) cluster with unlimited load balanced web servers behind it. NB. You'll need to syncronisize your data (rysnc) and share your sessions (mysql? which can also be clustered) Ps. Centos is ace, if we decide to use it for our appliance we'll make a few donations. Regards, Malcolm Turnbull. Loadbalancer.org Limited +44 (0)7715 770523 http://www.loadbalancer.org/ " When a single point of failure is not an option" Why not try our online demonstration ? Or get answers to common questions ? malcolm at baxteris.com wrote: >I would like to turn a web server into a highly available cluster. The >server is using Centos 3.3 and I would like to add another to it and >eventually another to make it three. Does anyone have experience doing >this and are there any specific DOCS or Sites with tools that I should >read up on. >_______________________________________________ >cAos mailing list >cAos at caosity.org >http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos > > From malcolm at baxteris.com Sat Oct 30 07:02:32 2004 From: malcolm at baxteris.com (Malcolm Baxter) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 09:02:32 -0500 Subject: [cAos] HA cluster In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Well it will run all the usuals in a web server. Mysql, PHP, Apache, Exim or Postfix, Bind, and so forth. So yes it will be for web purposes. I also subscribe to the warewulf mail list as well as Rock cluster but those are not what this project will be. Thanks for any help Malcolm Baxter Baxter Information Services (901)270-3971 mobile (662)342-1160 home office Malcolm at Baxteris.com http://baxteris.com -----Original Message----- From: caos-admin at caosity.org [mailto:caos-admin at caosity.org] On Behalf Of Geoff Galitz Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 10:01 PM To: caos at caosity.org Subject: Re: [cAos] HA cluster Are you looking to create a high availability web cluster or for other purposes? I ask because it makes a difference in terms of how to go about it. -geoff On Oct 29, 2004, at 2:59 PM, malcolm at baxteris.com wrote: > I would like to turn a web server into a highly available cluster. The > server is using Centos 3.3 and I would like to add another to it and > eventually another to make it three. Does anyone have experience doing > this and are there any specific DOCS or Sites with tools that I should > read up on. > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos > > http://www.galitz.org _______________________________________________ cAos mailing list cAos at caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos From jp at jpsdomain.org Sat Oct 30 14:55:26 2004 From: jp at jpsdomain.org (JP Vossen) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 17:55:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [cAos] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? In-Reply-To: <20041030120001.17774.61253.Mailman@caos1.caosity.org> Message-ID: > Message: 5 > Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:46:53 -0700 (PDT) > From: Rick Graves > To: caos at caosity.org, centos at caosity.org, caos-mirror at caosity.org > Subject: [cAos] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? [...] > For example, should cAos: > > a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public > mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? > > b) make sure that "yum update" does not substitute a > new yum.conf file that points only to > mirror.caosity.org? > > c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org > directly, but block direct access by everyone else? Assuming that the mirrors are correct and up-to-date (which may actually be a big assumption, I've seen some issues), I like A & C and am not sure I understand b. Why bother to have mirrors if the default is not to use them? I wonder about the mix of users as well. I've pointed some newbies at CentOS and they'll never think to change the yum.conf. HTH, JP ----------------------------|:::======|------------------------------- JP Vossen, CISSP |:::======| jp{at}jpsdomain{dot}org My Account, My Opinions |=========| http://www.jpsdomain.org/ ----------------------------|=========|------------------------------- You used to have to reboot the Windows 9.x series every couple of days because it would crash. Now you have to reboot Windows 200x or XP every month on 'Patch Tuesday.' How is that better or more stable? From randyk at ccsales.com Sat Oct 30 22:01:45 2004 From: randyk at ccsales.com (Randy Katz) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 22:01:45 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [cAos-mirror] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? In-Reply-To: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200410302201.45048.randyk@ccsales.com> Hi, Doesn't it depend on: 1. The cost of the bandwidth usage? 2. Who pays for it? 3. Whether the machines can handle the load that are at mirror.caosity.org? ? It would seem at some point the machines would not be able to handle all the requests quickly and that would be a problem as well? On Friday 29 October 2004 09:46 pm, Rick Graves wrote: > Hey, > > Greg suggested that I take a straw poll. > > Should cAos take steps to prevent getting stuck with a > big ISP bill in the future? > > For example, should cAos: > > a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public > mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? > > b) make sure that "yum update" does not substitute a > new yum.conf file that points only to > mirror.caosity.org? > > c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org > directly, but block direct access by everyone else? > > On the other hand, do the benefits of allowing direct > access to mirror.caosity.org by everyone outweigh the > costs of occasionally big ISP bills? > > Feel free to express your views, Greg is listening. > > Rick > > _______________________________________________ > cAos-mirror mailing list > cAos-mirror at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos-mirror -- --- Take care, Randy Katz From B.vanBurk at fi.uu.nl Sun Oct 31 06:30:17 2004 From: B.vanBurk at fi.uu.nl (B.vanBurk at fi.uu.nl) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:30:17 +0100 (CET) Subject: [cAos] Re: [cAos-mirror] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? In-Reply-To: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3325.82.157.151.213.1099233017.squirrel@82.157.151.213> If traffic is such an issue, i'd definately force the yum.conf to point to the public mirrors. Most mirrors dont care about a few extra TB of traffic. That way, you releave (lazy) users of doing (complex) editing of the yum.conf file, as they are suppose to do now. So my answer is 'a'. regards Barrie > Hey, > > Greg suggested that I take a straw poll. > > Should cAos take steps to prevent getting stuck with a > big ISP bill in the future? > > For example, should cAos: > > a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public > mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? > > b) make sure that "yum update" does not substitute a > new yum.conf file that points only to > mirror.caosity.org? > > c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org > directly, but block direct access by everyone else? > > On the other hand, do the benefits of allowing direct > access to mirror.caosity.org by everyone outweigh the > costs of occasionally big ISP bills? > > Feel free to express your views, Greg is listening. > > Rick > > _______________________________________________ > cAos-mirror mailing list > cAos-mirror at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos-mirror > From gravesricharde at yahoo.com Sun Oct 31 06:53:59 2004 From: gravesricharde at yahoo.com (Gravesricharde) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:53:59 +0800 Subject: [cAos] Re: Hello Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.infiscale.org/pipermail/caos/attachments/20041031/e758efea/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Joke.cpl Type: application/octet-stream Size: 30644 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.infiscale.org/pipermail/caos/attachments/20041031/e758efea/attachment.obj From kveton at oregonstate.edu Sun Oct 31 07:28:38 2004 From: kveton at oregonstate.edu (Scott Kveton) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 07:28:38 -0800 Subject: [cAos] Re: [cAos-mirror] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? Message-ID: <20041031152838.GB7348@osuosl.org> > a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public > mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? Why not point at dists.caosity.org (or something equivalent) that is essentially a DNS round-robin of mirrors? One machine simply cannot handle the load of an entire distribution. > c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org > directly, but block direct access by everyone else? I would do either or; the big problem you have with both end-users and mirrors accessing the same data is that then you have mirrors competing for bandwidth. Giving the mirrors unfettered access to the archives allows you to push updates out to clients more quickly than having a single choke point. > On the other hand, do the benefits of allowing direct > access to mirror.caosity.org by everyone outweigh the > costs of occasionally big ISP bills? Not that the way we are doing it is necessarily the best, but it seems to be working pretty well for us right now. We have a dedicated machine (rsync.osuosl.org) that only mirrors can access. We are primary for several projects (Gentoo, KDE, Debian, etc) and allow them to push the updates to rsync.osuosl.org. End users access ftp.osuosl.org which is updated via triggers when updates to rsync.osuosl.org are completed. Before we put this into place, the 2004.1 release of Gentoo took almost 5 days to propagate out to the mirrors. This was mainly due to competition between mirrors and end-users to the same data. We put the new infrastructure into place for the 2004.2 release and were able to push updates out to all of the mirrors in just 5 hours. Long story short, I would recommend splitting out mirrors from end-users for the sake of growth and to limit frustration during releases. As always, we'd love to host the primary mirror that secondary's sync from ... :-) Scott :-) From jcoleman at rstrat.com Sat Oct 30 06:31:38 2004 From: jcoleman at rstrat.com (Jeff Coleman) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 06:31:38 -0700 Subject: [cAos] RE: [Centos] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? In-Reply-To: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041030133254.07110B30012@mail.caosity.org> > -----Original Message----- > [mailto:centos-admin at caosity.org] On Behalf Of Rick Graves > Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 9:47 PM > > For example, should cAos: > > a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public > mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? Yes, simply make sure that you have enough free mirrors that the bandwidth supply is not limited. > > b) make sure that "yum update" does not substitute a > new yum.conf file that points only to > mirror.caosity.org? > Yes - requires good FAQs > c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org > directly, but block direct access by everyone else? > Yes - requires good FAQs > On the other hand, do the benefits of allowing direct > access to mirror.caosity.org by everyone outweigh the > costs of occasionally big ISP bills? > Not if it impacts your ability to continue providing your core services. Feeding everyone off of mirror sites is just a minor inconvenience. To those who want the latest updates within 30 secs of announcements, fine. Just don't make the announcements until the mirrors have been rsync'd. Post instructions for modifying yum.conf anf for rsyncing isos in your faq and move on. Let the community bear some of the burden for the wonderful work that you are doing. Just my $.02 -jeff From taj at jdmz.net Sat Oct 30 08:05:45 2004 From: taj at jdmz.net (Troy Johnson) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:05:45 -0500 Subject: [cAos] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? In-Reply-To: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4183ADC9.2030703@jdmz.net> Yes! If possible, put an URL in a denial of access message to a page detailing what to do. Rick Graves wrote: > Hey, > > Greg suggested that I take a straw poll. > > Should cAos take steps to prevent getting stuck with a > big ISP bill in the future? > > For example, should cAos: > > a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public > mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? > > b) make sure that "yum update" does not substitute a > new yum.conf file that points only to > mirror.caosity.org? > > c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org > directly, but block direct access by everyone else? > > On the other hand, do the benefits of allowing direct > access to mirror.caosity.org by everyone outweigh the > costs of occasionally big ISP bills? > > Feel free to express your views, Greg is listening. > > Rick > > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos From scott at osuosl.org Sat Oct 30 08:44:55 2004 From: scott at osuosl.org (Scott Kveton) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:44:55 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [cAos-mirror] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? In-Reply-To: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041030154455.GA27410@osuosl.org> > a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public > mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? Why not point at dists.caosity.org (or something equivalent) that is essentially a DNS round-robin of mirrors? One machine simply cannot handle the load of an entire distribution. > c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org > directly, but block direct access by everyone else? I would do either or; the big problem you have with both end-users and mirrors accessing the same data is that then you have mirrors competing for bandwidth. Giving the mirrors unfettered access to the archives allows you to push updates out to clients more quickly than having a single choke point. > On the other hand, do the benefits of allowing direct > access to mirror.caosity.org by everyone outweigh the > costs of occasionally big ISP bills? Not that the way we are doing it is necessarily the best, but it seems to be working pretty well for us right now. We have a dedicated machine (rsync.osuosl.org) that only mirrors can access. We are primary for several projects (Gentoo, KDE, Debian, etc) and allow them to push the updates to rsync.osuosl.org. End users access ftp.osuosl.org which is updated via triggers when updates to rsync.osuosl.org are completed. Before we put this into place, the 2004.1 release of Gentoo took almost 5 days to propagate out to the mirrors. This was mainly due to competition between mirrors and end-users to the same data. We put the new infrastructure into place for the 2004.2 release and were able to push updates out to all of the mirrors in just 5 hours. Long story short, I would recommend splitting out mirrors from end-users for the sake of growth and to limit frustration during releases. As always, we'd love to host the primary mirror that secondary's sync from ... :-) Scott :-) From gillian.bennett at celentia.com Sun Oct 17 15:14:41 2004 From: gillian.bennett at celentia.com (gillian) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 08:14:41 +1000 Subject: [cAos] Centos-3 x64 install hangs Message-ID: <1098051280.11794.575.camel@rh-possum.localdomain> Hi, Thanks for this great facility. I have been using opensource for a lot of years and am very glad to find this distro which embodies the philosophy of the opensource community. I have tried joining the mailing list and the forum, but so far no confirmation email. I have not yet recieved notification that I can join the mailing list or the forum even though I applied almost 12hrs ago. Thus I am writing this email to you guys. I have just downloaded the centos-3 x64 isos and am attempting to install. Unfortunately the install hangs just past the initial spash menu - ie it comes up with loading vmlinuz..................... loading initrd.img............................... Ready . Decompressing Linux...done. Booting the kernel. then just stops. The 32bit version installed, but this is a 64bit machine so I would like to try the 64bit one. Thanks, Gillian From jcoleman at rstrat.com Tue Oct 26 10:43:48 2004 From: jcoleman at rstrat.com (Jeff Coleman) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:43:48 -0700 Subject: [cAos] RE: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: <20041026174455.852D4B300EE@mail.caosity.org> > -----Original Message----- > From: centos-admin at caosity.org > [mailto:centos-admin at caosity.org] On Behalf Of Greg M. Kurtzer > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 10:33 AM > To: centos at caosity.org; caos at caosity.org > Subject: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill > > It turns out that the release of Centos-3.3 was so popular, > that it threw us > way over the threshold of our ISP's, and now we are stuck > with a _very_ large > bill (as in an estimated 6TB of transfers). While in one hand > I am ecstatic > that we are so successful, but on the other hand, that is > coming out of the > developers pockets. The developers should be the last ones > footing these > bills (and this one was very large). > > You can help. Please consider a donation for each of the > systems that you are > using. A reasonable donation we think starts at $12US per > system per year. > That money is only spent on infrastructure and development. > $12 is much > cheaper then a magazine subscription, and if everyone > contributes their > share, we will be able to grow our infrastructure to better > handle our > growing user base, and continue to provide software to the community. > > Please visit http://www.caosity.org/contributing/ to do your part. > -- > Greg M. Kurtzer Greg, 1 - I will be glad to make a donation to your project. I would be happier using Paypal than entering my CC info on every site that has a donations policy. Any chance of you creating a PayPal account? 2 - As founder of www.contribs.org (SME Server) I ran into the bandwidth issue bigtime each time there was a release or upgrade. The solution we finally came to worked well for everyone. We simply got a mirror at Ibiblio and a few others and then we rsync the appropriate directories over to the mirrors. All downloads happen at the mirror sites and the bandwidth that you have is reserved for the website. Thanks to you and all the other folks who make it possible for us to lurk the lists and utilize your work product. -Jeff Coleman From kevin1a at varlog.net Tue Oct 26 19:50:49 2004 From: kevin1a at varlog.net (Kevin Brouelette) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 19:50:49 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <20041027013456.GB3909@titan.runlevelzero.net> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041026174455.7BE88B30012@mail.caosity.org> <20041026180450.GD1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041027013456.GB3909@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: <1098845449.14884.1.camel@pc-00128.kblan.com> On Tue, 2004-10-26 at 18:34, Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: > On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 11:04:50AM -0700, Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 10:43:48AM -0700, Jeff Coleman wrote: > > > Greg, > > > > > > 1 - I will be glad to make a donation to your project. I would be happier > > > using Paypal than entering my CC info on every site that has a donations > > > policy. Any chance of you creating a PayPal account? > > > > Kintera (our donation management partner) used to take paypal donations, but > > don't seem to be doing that anymore. I am checking with them now. > > This has been fixed. The Kintera page now support using Paypal again. Please > follow the normal contribute links, and on the Paypal page, there is a link > (middle of page) with the payment options for Paypal payments. > > Let me know how it works out. > > Thanks! Hello Looks like it works. Thanks to all for the work you do. Kevin Brouelette > Name: > Kintera (The recipient of this payment is Verified) Email: > paymaster at kintera.com > ______________________________________________________________________ > Total Amount: > -$25.00 USD > ______________________________________________________________________ > Item Amount: > $25.00 USD Shipping: > $0.00 USD Handling: > $0.00 USD Quantity: > 1 Item Title: > Donation for Basic donation Date: > Oct. 26, 2004 Time: > 19:41:22 PDT Status: > Completed From chris at tac.esi.net Wed Oct 27 07:23:16 2004 From: chris at tac.esi.net (Chris Hammond) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 10:23:16 -0400 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <20041027141020.GA8611@titan.runlevelzero.net> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> <20041027141020.GA8611@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: <417FAF54.3010803@tac.esi.net> How about making the primary download of "NEW RELEASES" to be bittorrent. And put a limit on the amount that can be downloaded via ftp or http (if that is something you can do with your current setup). Let the people that are downloading share in the process and make things much easier on your servers, bandwidth and bank account. Chris Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: >I have received many emails regarding our mirror setup, and people asking more >specifics about the amount of data transferred and the costs... > >Configuration: We rent 3 systems at a colo, all of which come with 1TB of >pre-payed for bandwidth. Each of these systems are part of a round robin DNS >pool for mirror.caosity.org, and payed for by different members of our devel >team. This is where all of our public Tier1 mirrors are supposed to sync from >(http://caosity.org/download/mirrors/). Now we already know that _many_ more >mirrors then what is listed on our mirror page are sync'ing from it, and >individual computers are running yum against it. We thought that the 3TB >provided by these mirrors would be sufficient to handle our traffic load. We >were right 2-3 months ago. :/ > >Now,... I said an "estimated 6TB", and here is where I got the estimation. One >system's owner is being charged for an _extra_ 1TB of data transfer. I have not >heard from the the owners of the other 2 systems yet,... This is why it was >an _estimation_ of 6TB. rrDNS is known for not implementing an even >rotation (due to caching), so I wouldn't be surprised if the other systems >have _slightly_ different numbers. > >Here is the directory layout of mirror.caosity.org: > > 5.5G cAos-1 > 14G cAos-2 > 6.3G centos-2 > 31G centos-3 > > 18G centos-3/3.1 > 14G centos-3/3.3 > > note: some repos include hard links > >As cAos-2 is also new (but not released yet), it too would have been a >contributor to the transfer load. > >Usually I don't like to divulge finances as publicly as this, but considering >the interest I have gotten I will let on to some numbers... The first bill was >in generous excess of $500US. I would imagine that the other two bills will >also be near that, putting the grand total somewhere around $1500US. Typically >we spend $80US per system (which is reasonable), and this charge is ontop of >that. The Foundation also has a rather substantial "I owe you" list to several >of the developers which we are hoping will be paid back when/if we receive >enough donations. > >How to fix: We have always been throwing the idea around of blocking access to >our primary mirrors and only letting through the Teir1 mirrors. We have not >done that (yet) because of the potential of breaking the update stream to many >systems (most yum.confs currently point to mirror). Another solution is to get >more systems to put into our mirror rrDNS pool. Or we can find someone willing >to host a very large temporary mirror for new releases and point people there. >We will be discussing these issues and more in IRC #caos for anyone that wish >to provide thoughts or input. > >I hope that clears up some confusion. :) > >Thank you for all of the interest and ideas that this has sparked. I am sorry >if I don't respond directly to each of them, but I think I answered all of the >questions that were asked of me in this email. Let me know if I missed >something. > > > >On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 10:32:32AM -0700, Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: > > >>It turns out that the release of Centos-3.3 was so popular, that it threw us >>way over the threshold of our ISP's, and now we are stuck with a _very_ large >>bill (as in an estimated 6TB of transfers). While in one hand I am ecstatic >>that we are so successful, but on the other hand, that is coming out of the >>developers pockets. The developers should be the last ones footing these >>bills (and this one was very large). >> >>You can help. Please consider a donation for each of the systems that you are >>using. A reasonable donation we think starts at $12US per system per year. >>That money is only spent on infrastructure and development. $12 is much >>cheaper then a magazine subscription, and if everyone contributes their >>share, we will be able to grow our infrastructure to better handle our >>growing user base, and continue to provide software to the community. >> >>Please visit http://www.caosity.org/contributing/ to do your part. >>-- >>Greg M. Kurtzer >>http://runlevelzero.net/ >>http://caosity.org/ >>http://warewulf-cluster.org/ >>_______________________________________________ >>CentOS mailing list >>CentOS at caosity.org >>http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> >> > > > From tengel at fluid.com Wed Oct 27 09:25:26 2004 From: tengel at fluid.com (Troy Engel) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 09:25:26 -0700 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill In-Reply-To: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> References: <20041026173232.GA1123@titan.runlevelzero.net> Message-ID: <417FCBF6.9070002@fluid.com> I have been a member of CommunityColo (aka 'CCCP') in the past, and it worked very well for me for about 2 years. Perhaps another solution path to take a look at: http://www.communitycolo.net/ -te Greg M. Kurtzer wrote: > It turns out that the release of Centos-3.3 was so popular, that it threw us > way over the threshold of our ISP's, and now we are stuck with a _very_ large > bill (as in an estimated 6TB of transfers). While in one hand I am ecstatic > that we are so successful, but on the other hand, that is coming out of the > developers pockets. The developers should be the last ones footing these > bills (and this one was very large). > > You can help. Please consider a donation for each of the systems that you are > using. A reasonable donation we think starts at $12US per system per year. > That money is only spent on infrastructure and development. $12 is much > cheaper then a magazine subscription, and if everyone contributes their > share, we will be able to grow our infrastructure to better handle our > growing user base, and continue to provide software to the community. > > Please visit http://www.caosity.org/contributing/ to do your part. -- Troy Engel | Systems Engineer Fluid, Inc | http://www.fluid.com From tnorth at gmail.com Thu Oct 28 09:01:52 2004 From: tnorth at gmail.com (tom northcutt) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:01:52 -0400 Subject: [cAos] Re: [Centos] Release of centos-3.3 ISP bill Message-ID: [snip] > You can help. Please consider a donation for each of the systems that you are > using. A reasonable donation we think starts at $12US per system per year. > That money is only spent on infrastructure and development. $12 is much > cheaper then a magazine subscription, and if everyone contributes their > share, we will be able to grow our infrastructure to better handle our > growing user base, and continue to provide software to the community. [snip] Sometimes it is hard (impossible) to get an employer or government procurement to make a donation to an organization. We have had much better success getting them to purchase a software subscription or newsletter, for example. OpenBSD CD subscriptions. http://www.openbsd.org/orders.html Perhaps a "CentOS software download subscription" or a CentOS newsletter subscription would be worthwhile. No change to your current format, just the opportunity for people to pay for the support you are already providing. -Tom Northcutt From scott at osuosl.org Sun Oct 31 15:21:09 2004 From: scott at osuosl.org (Scott Kveton) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:21:09 -0800 Subject: [cAos] Re: [cAos-mirror] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? Message-ID: <20041031232109.GB21151@osuosl.org> > a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public > mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? Why not point at dists.caosity.org (or something equivalent) that is essentially a DNS round-robin of mirrors? One machine simply cannot handle the load of an entire distribution. > c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org > directly, but block direct access by everyone else? I would do either or; the big problem you have with both end-users and mirrors accessing the same data is that then you have mirrors competing for bandwidth. Giving the mirrors unfettered access to the archives allows you to push updates out to clients more quickly than having a single choke point. > On the other hand, do the benefits of allowing direct > access to mirror.caosity.org by everyone outweigh the > costs of occasionally big ISP bills? Not that the way we are doing it is necessarily the best, but it seems to be working pretty well for us right now. We have a dedicated machine (rsync.osuosl.org) that only mirrors can access. We are primary for several projects (Gentoo, KDE, Debian, etc) and allow them to push the updates to rsync.osuosl.org. End users access ftp.osuosl.org which is updated via triggers when updates to rsync.osuosl.org are completed. Before we put this into place, the 2004.1 release of Gentoo took almost 5 days to propagate out to the mirrors. This was mainly due to competition between mirrors and end-users to the same data. We put the new infrastructure into place for the 2004.2 release and were able to push updates out to all of the mirrors in just 5 hours. Long story short, I would recommend splitting out mirrors from end-users for the sake of growth and to limit frustration during releases. As always, we'd love to host the primary mirror that secondary's sync from ... :-) Scott :-) From jn at it.swin.edu.au Sun Oct 31 16:33:19 2004 From: jn at it.swin.edu.au (John Newbigin) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 11:33:19 +1100 Subject: [cAos] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? In-Reply-To: <4183ADC9.2030703@jdmz.net> References: <20041030044653.56823.qmail@web14714.mail.yahoo.com> <4183ADC9.2030703@jdmz.net> Message-ID: <4185844F.9040809@it.swin.edu.au> Is it possible to feed yum an HTTP redirect? The default yum server could attempt to locate a mirror which is geographically close to the client and redirect yum to that server. I have seen open source IP -> country mapping tools so there might be an existing server side product which can be used for this. If yum could remember where it was redirected then it would not have to go back to the default server again. Just an idea. John. Troy Johnson wrote: > Yes! If possible, put an URL in a denial of access message to a page > detailing what to do. > > Rick Graves wrote: > >> Hey, >> >> Greg suggested that I take a straw poll. >> Should cAos take steps to prevent getting stuck with a >> big ISP bill in the future? >> For example, should cAos: >> >> a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public >> mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? >> >> b) make sure that "yum update" does not substitute a >> new yum.conf file that points only to >> mirror.caosity.org? >> >> c) allow public mirrors to access mirror.caosity.org >> directly, but block direct access by everyone else? >> >> On the other hand, do the benefits of allowing direct >> access to mirror.caosity.org by everyone outweigh the >> costs of occasionally big ISP bills? >> >> Feel free to express your views, Greg is listening. >> >> Rick >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cAos mailing list >> cAos at caosity.org >> http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos > > > _______________________________________________ > cAos mailing list > cAos at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/caos > > > -- John Newbigin Computer Systems Officer Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies Swinburne University of Technology Melbourne, Australia http://www.it.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin From jason at rtfmconsult.com Sun Oct 31 16:48:06 2004 From: jason at rtfmconsult.com (jason andrade) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:48:06 +1000 (EST) Subject: [cAos] Re: [cAos-mirror] should cAos block access to mirror.caosity.org? In-Reply-To: <20041031232109.GB21151@osuosl.org> References: <20041031232109.GB21151@osuosl.org> Message-ID: On Sun, 31 Oct 2004, Scott Kveton wrote: >> a) for new installs, have the yum.conf point to public >> mirrors, rather than to mirror.caosity.org? > > Why not point at dists.caosity.org (or something equivalent) that is > essentially a DNS round-robin of mirrors? One machine simply cannot > handle the load of an entire distribution. the one issue i have with round robin implementations is that there is no guarantee of getting the same server consistently. i definitely prefer to add some element of user education to the process to get them to pick regional mirrors.. and i guess reluctantly that there probably is some requirement for a RR system because of the inability or laziness of many to bother. on the other hand the CPAN system is quite nice in that a first time installation requires you to pick a mirror.. > I would do either or; the big problem you have with both end-users and > mirrors accessing the same data is that then you have mirrors competing > for bandwidth. Giving the mirrors unfettered access to the archives > allows you to push updates out to clients more quickly than having a > single choke point. my main argument for why medium to large projects should quickly start looking at tiered infrastructure and concentrate on getting data pushed to mirrors quickly rather than sizing up their own kit. it is similar resources but a simpler problem to deal with 100+ mirrors than 100+ simultaneous clients from a userbase of 1000-100000 people. regards, -jason