| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Comments:
<0> smsie_, having a usb cdrom isnt strange voodoo these days :)
<1> fredk: the boot device is detected differently by the kernel anyways
<1> fredk: the usb cdrom still works doesn't it?
<2> fredk: I installed off of a USB dvd drive a few months ago, and it worked fine ;)
<0> smsie_, well, yeah, but its detached since I only used it for the install
<3> fredk: even better here...
<1> fredk: /dev/cdrom should DTRT if you only have 1 cdrom
<1> fredk: you're just looking to whine :P
<0> smsie_, yes :)
<0> it makes me feel good
<0> s/good/better/ :)
<0> One of those days :\
<3> fredk: SYSFS{vendor}=="SEAGATE ",SYSFS{model}=="ST373207LW "
<1> fredk: so basically what you are complaining about is that it's not deterministic what device node a device that you ONLY used for the install is given? That's insane and silly of you to expect it to
<3> ehrm..
<1> fredk: if you WANT it to be deterministic, then you can configure it that way. That shouldn't be the default IMO
<3> I don't seem to find a way to get the serial nr though
<0> smsie_, mmm, I know, I'm ranting.
<0> smsie_, that said, I know alot of people in here prefer debian installs, which I respect. It's a very decent system once installed. However, what i've seen from installs i've been watching is something which is far from streamlined :)
<4> sal
<0> I mean, s/installs/installation processes/
<1> fredk: would you prefer that the cdrom you used to install was always sda, the cdrom you used after the install was always sdb, the 25 different usb pens you use are different as well, and always the same? That's not reasonable to want (and breaks VERY quickly)
<4> as vrea sa va pun o intrebare daca se poate
<3> Bai3tasu: english
<5> Bai3tasu: we speak english here.
<4> ok
<1> fredk: the install isn't hard. It's just different (IMO it's tons easier and far less guesswork than say a RHES install)
<1> fredk: if you're used to it, then it's easy. if you're not it's not. That's true of ALL installers
<2> hmm, I must say, checkgmail is a much niftier tool than gmail-notify, despite beeing written in perl ;)
<3> wlfshmn: hehe
<6> perl>*
<0> smsie_, I would expect it to try and be somewhat smart about putting what is intended as a hot pluggable device latest on the chain if possible :)
<2> NineVolt: it has little to do with language here, it's just a much much better UI
<0> I mean, people tend to plug/unplug their usb devices all the time.
<1> fredk: why would it do that?
<6> i know, i'm just throwing in my three cents.
<1> fredk: they do? I don't
<6> perl's my favorite language.
<2> NineVolt: for example, it shows my previews and allows me to mark stuff as read withotu opening a browser
<6> meh.
<1> fredk: I have USB drives which are permanently attached
<6> email is overrated.
<6> i use outlook express :)
<0> smsie_, sure they do, usb sticks, for example
<3> smsie_: annoys me when they switch names though, hehe
<1> fredk: what other scsi devices do you have?
<0> smsie_, what if you accidentally have your usb stick in your pc during the install, it detects that as SDA, you're the out of luck when you try to reboot without it.
<6> my ipod took over my mom's computer.
<0> then
<6> rebooted with it plugged in, i thought my mbr was wiped.
<2> ufhpc: unstable is moving a bit slugishly at the moment, as it's the route updates for etch take for some reason
<6> got a bunch of gibberish chars after the bios screens.
<6> eventually i go into bios to check boot order...
<6> device 1 : Ipod
<6> device 2 : Ipod
<0> smsie_, on this box? only the drive system and the virtual usb cdrom
<6> not sure how/why that happens.
<7> Fetched 214MB in 1m24s (2522kB/s) <-- Thank god for a fast mirror
<8> NineVolt: that's a secret apple weapon ;)
<6> but why the **** would anyone ever be booting off an ipod?
<0> the drives are technically SATA on a SAS controller :)
<2> what are the beneifts of SAS really?
<8> NineVolt: ipod are usb m*** storage devices ... bios can boot on that
<0> wlfshmn, mostly a speedup they say.
<6> so that's a reason to automagically change my boot order?
<1> fredk: any fixed drives should keep the same scsi ID always. Removable drives get allocated in the order they are detected/connected. That's the Right Way
<0> wlfshmn, one channel to each drive instead of a shared bus
<6> afaik, my boot order never had "Ipod" listed as the first device before.
<6> or as any device, for that matter.
<1> fredk: umm, "accidentally"? DDTT!
<0> smsie_, yes, so with that analogy the fixed drives should have been SDA and the usb drive should have been SDB or whatever is next, yes?
<1> fredk: yes, they should have
<0> smsie_, but they weren't :) that was the problem, it detected the removable *first* not last
<1> fredk: and if that's what happened (the fixed drives are what...sata? real scsi?) then that's a bug and you are justified in whining
<0> smsie_, yeah, the fixed drives were SATA on a SAS raid controller
<1> fredk: then yes, that should have been detected and fixed (not necessarily first, but always to the same place). File a bug report
<0> thank you :P
<0> wlfshmn, everyone seems to be going SAS these days.
<0> wlfshmn, it also has the advantage of what I just did, using SATA drives on a SAS subsystem
<9> I'm going LVM for raid on the new box I think
<2> fredk: this is a server technology I ***ume?
<0> wlfshmn, mostly, yes
<2> fredk: you still get the benefits with sata on sas?
<9> cheap as ****, and decent enough on a fast box
<0> wlfshmn, yes you do
<0> wlfshmn, similar design, so you can mix and match to whatever your budget needs. Speed or capacity.
<2> smsie: I was thinking of going LVM too, but I only have two drives so I figure I play nice and not raid at all instead ;)
<2> smsie: I need a drive with write caching off anyway for postgres
<9> wlfshmn: the new system will have 6 250G sata drives. I want a TB of usable storage, so I'll raid them up for performance
<0> wlfshmn, on another box here I have a SAS raid controller with 15 x 500GB sata drives. Performance is really impressive for what it is.
<2> fredk: sounds like a replacement for scsi then
<0> wlfshmn, well, you can use SAS drives for performance and SATA for capacity. The unique thing is they are interchangable on the same controller
<6> 15x500GB
<0> NineVolt, yeah
<6> ...
<6> i think my server has a single 10GB ide drive.
<10> What's a good command line program for reading /var/mail/[username]?
<6> perhaps you have a few old drives laying around :P
<0> hehe
<3> tybalt: any that read the mbox format
<0> NineVolt, you can buy larger than 10GB ide drives fairly cheap =)
<10> nvm, I already found one
<6> so far it's made of donated parts only.
<0> hehe
<6> d-side hooked it up nice.
<6> i have a few raid cards even i think.
<2> NineVolt: meh, my home server had a terrabyte of storage.. it's dead easy, and cheap, to reach that
<6> no drives to hook up to em though.
<6> o_O
<0> i'd throw some hardware at you, but shipping would cost more than the actual hardware I have scattered here
<6> my home server has 40GB of storage. and it's been completely full for 5 years.
<0> NineVolt, hehe
<6> cheap for a terabyte?
<6> how so?
<0> dev/sda1 6.4T 1.2T 5.3T 18% /opt
<0> NineVolt, hm?
<6> the cheapest hdd's i can find are ****ty usb external ones.
<6> $100 for like 300GB
<6> so at best, you're still looking at $300 for 1TB
<8> NineVolt: where are you living ?
<2> NineVolt: how you get a cheap TB? in my case, 4x250GB SATA
<6> and that's ****ty drives.
<0> NineVolt, sounds about right
<6> kool : nj, isa
<6> usa even
<0> wlfshmn, you might want to go 400 or 300GB
<6> actually no, isa
<6> international states of america :)
<0> heh
<6> now that we've got iraq and afghanistan.
<2> fredk: yeah, I tend to aquire disks at whatever capacity price/performance ratios make the most sense
<0> wlfshmn, yeah
<0> wlfshmn, 500 wasnt too bad
<0> I paid about 40K nok for this raid array I have + tax
<2> fredk: it's probably 320GB now I suspect, hang on and I'll update my graphs ;)
<0> which isnt *cheap* but it's not bad either
<8> NineVolt: I can get 300GB sata2 disk for 80 euros ...
<0> i'd prefer 146 scsi for about EUR 200 :)
<7> wlfshmn: Last time I checked, the 320gb drives were the best price/size ratios... that was a couple of months ago, so 400's might be getting in there now
<0> you might want to wait for when 1TB drives show up
<0> which should be very soon
<2> yeah, 320s are the best locally among the seagate satas, closly followed by 400 and then 250
<0> wlfshmn, how is 500?
<2> the factor I calculated here is 2.24 for 320 (SEK/GB), 400 is 2.49 and 250 is 2.54. 500 is 3.11 and 750 is 3.71
<2> these are all the 16GB variety where applicable, and not the ES version, which is a little more expensive
<0> yeah
<2> er, 16MB that is
<0> wlfshmn, you need to factor in raid controller, cost/capacity
<11> I haven't even filled up my 320gb drive yet.
<0> as a base cost, this will also change the cost/gigabyte and which drives makes sense
Return to
#linux
or
Go to some related
logs:
#c
coppermine critical error mysql said access denied
factorydepot
#apache
dumb-ro server
maratab ali video clips
#c
#linux
#AllNiteCafe
tista tkun int
|
|