New server migration
Fairlight
fairlite at fairlite.com
Mon Feb 4 15:10:28 PST 2019
It really depends whether you're using 64-bit or 32-bit filePro binaries.
If you're using 64-bit, you're fine in any event. If you're using 32-bit,
I suspect you may run into inode number issues. I'd have to look up how
ext4 handles its internal structure, and see if it's BTree+ as well in
order to say definitively. Or do some testing.
I would -never- willingly recommend ext4. The problem with ext4 is that it
has a static inode table. If you create a filesystem of 'x' size (say
100GB), by default it allocates 'z' inodes. It's a steady default
relationship between filesystem size and inode count. Two problems with
this being static:
1) If you use heavily heirarchical filesystem structures for storage of
data (think postfix-type queues or storage in nested directories), you will
probably exhaust inode space well before you exhaust disk space. You can
read 50% disk available, but be out of inodes and will be unable to write
any new files. You can add data to existing files, but once you hit the
inode limit, you're done adding files or directories. Which might not be
so bad, if not for the fact that:
2) The inode table is so static that it is immutable, post-mkfs. It
cannot be retuned by any means. If you allocate 1TB worth of disk to the
filesystem, then later add 2TB (which it will happily let you do, and
which obviously LVM2 supports with ease), you will -still- only have the
same quantity of inodes to use under 3TB that you originally had under
1TB. There is no way around this, short of syncing the entire lot to
another drive, redoing the whole filesystem from scratch with mkfs, and
then syncing everything back. ext4 itself has no inherent accomodation for
increasing the inode table size. None.
Do yourself a huge favour, and rework it using XFS if you care about
maintaining scalability.
m->
On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 03:08:24PM -0500, scooter6 at gmail.com thus spoke:
> Just to add - I installed CentOS 7 on RAID 10 hardware RAID on the new
> Dell PowerEdge
> I have the OS installed at this point and this is as far as I've gotten
> The server has four (4) 2TB NLSAS hot plug hard drives
> I installed all filesystems as ext4 -- I allowed Centos to partition
> automatically this leaves with a 3.9TB /u file system that is ext4
> Would you recommend a different filesystem?
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:36 PM Scott Walker via Filepro-list
> <[1]filepro-list at lists.celestial.com> wrote:
>
> Mark,
> Brian White was nice enough to help us out with this last year.
> This is from my notes:
> CentOS Version 7Â Installation Issues
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> You must have libtermcap.so.2 installed!
>  On CentOS 7 you must first install libc.so.6
> Â Â Â Â yum install libc.so.6
> Then install:
> Â Â Â Â rpm -ivh
> compat-libtermcap-2.0.8-50flt.el7.centos.i686.rpm
> The above file was provided by Brian. I can email you a copy if
> desired.
> Regards,
> Scott Walker
> [2]scott.walker at ramsystemscorp.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Filepro-list
> [mailto:[3]filepro-list-bounces+scottwalker=ramsystemscorp.com at lists
> .celestial.
> com] On Behalf Of Fairlight via Filepro-list
> Sent: Monday, February 4, 2019 1:58 PM
> To: [4]filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: Re: New server migration
> My previous comments about XFS were for 32-bit binaries. The bit
> depth is
> important, as even 6.0.0 comes in both 32-bit and 64-bit. If
> you're running
> 64-bit, you can use inode64 on any filesystem size, and it shouldn't
> cause
> issues.
> If you're running 64-bit binaries, compat-libtermcap may still be an
> issue
> (probably is). I'd have to revisit that directly to confirm or
> deny. I
> remember that the i686 architecture build target did not exist in
> the spec
> file I got from the official SRPM, but that's only necessary if you
> run
> 32-bit binaries. The package itself likely still needs to be built
> properly, so you're not relying on what I remember as being the
> default
> broken configuration.
> m->
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 11:02:34AM -0500, scooter6--- via
> Filepro-list thus
> spoke:
> > To clarify, this is with fP 5.6.10R4
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 10:22 AM [5]scooter6 at gmail.com
> > <[6]scooter6 at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Just purchased our new Dell PowerEdge server that I have
> installed
> > > CentOS
> > > 7 on
> > >
> > > Am migrating from older Dell PowerEdge that has Centos 5.10 on
> it
> > >
> > > Is there a 'recipe book' anyone may have on steps to migrate all
> data
> etc?
> > > Can a simple copy of the fp directories etc do the trick or does
> the
> > > new server need to go through fpinstall ?
> > >
> > > I know there are significant changes in CentOS from 5.10 to 6
> and
> > > then to
> > > 7 but in what I've read I don't think there too much of a
> concern
> > > for purposes of what we do here
> > >
> > > Curious if anyone has done this similar migration and what to
> watch
> > > out for or best steps in order to make this as seamless as
> possible
> > >
> > > Thanks for any insight
> > >
> > > Scott
> > > PDM
> > >
> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was
> > scrubbed...
> > URL:
> >
> <[7]http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/
> 20190
> > 204/1b6775da/attachment.html>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Filepro-list mailing list
> > [8]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> > [9]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> >
> --
> Audio panton, cogito singularis.
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> [10]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> [11]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> [12]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> [13]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> 2. mailto:scott.walker at ramsystemscorp.com
> 3. mailto:filepro-list-bounces%2Bscottwalker
> 4. mailto:filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> 5. mailto:scooter6 at gmail.com
> 6. mailto:scooter6 at gmail.com
> 7. http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/20190
> 8. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> 9. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> 10. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> 11. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> 12. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> 13. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
--
Audio panton, cogito singularis.
More information about the Filepro-list
mailing list