New server migration
scooter6 at gmail.com
scooter6 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 4 16:03:39 PST 2019
haha duly noted Mark
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 6:57 PM Fairlight via Filepro-list <
filepro-list at lists.celestial.com> wrote:
> All I can say is that I would never willingly use ext4. It has issues.
> Past everything I've said thus far on the matter, you're getting into paid
> "re-research the comparisons of merits and detractors between valid current
> filesystems" territory, which is well beyond the scope of this list.
>
> You can totally do whatever you like with it. I'm not being paid to ensure
> it works until OS End-of-Life and possibly beyond, so it's not really my
> problem. It's your box to enjoy or suffer through as you see fit. ;)
>
> m->
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 06:44:02PM -0500, scooter6 at gmail.com thus spoke:
> > Mark,
> > So this really would only apply to the /u filesystem (that is 3.9TB)
> > where fP and data will be
> > The others can remain ext4 with no issues ? Or just best to convert
> all
> > ext4 file systems to XFS?
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 6:10 PM Fairlight via Filepro-list
> > <[1]filepro-list at lists.celestial.com> wrote:
> >
> > 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.Â
> > 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.Â
> > 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, [2]scooter6 at gmail.com
> thus
> > spoke:
> > >Â Â Just to add - I installed CentOS 7 on RAID 10 hardware RAID
> > on the new
> > >Â Â Dell PowerEdge
> > >Â Â I have the OS installed at this point and this is as far as
> > I've gotten
> > >Â Â The server has four (4) 2TB NLSAS hot plug hard drives
> > >Â Â I installed all filesystems as ext4 -- I allowed Centos to
> > partition
> > >Â Â automatically this leaves with a 3.9TB /u file system that is
> > ext4
> > >Â Â Would you recommend a different filesystem?
> > >
> > >Â Â On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:36 PM Scott Walker via Filepro-list
> > >Â Â <[1][3]filepro-list at lists.celestial.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >Â Â Â Mark,
> > >Â Â Â Brian White was nice enough to help us out with this last
> > year.
> > >Â Â Â This is from my notes:
> > >Â Â Â CentOS Version 7ÃÂ Installation Issues
> > >Â Â Â
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >Â Â Â --------
> > >Â Â Â
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > >Â Â Â You must have libtermcap.so.2 installed!
> > >Â Â Â Ã On CentOS 7 you mustÃÂ first install libc.so.6
> > >Â Â Â ÃÂ ÃÂ ÃÂ ÃÂ yum install libc.so.6
> > >Â Â Â Then install:
> > >Â Â Â ÃÂ ÃÂ ÃÂ ÃÂ rpm -ivh
> > >Â Â Â compat-libtermcap-2.0.8-50flt.el7.centos.i686.rpm
> > >Â Â Â The above file was provided by Brian.ÃÂ I can email you a
> > copy if
> > >Â Â Â desired.
> > >Â Â Â Regards,
> > >Â Â Â Scott Walker
> > >Â Â Â [2][4]scott.walker at ramsystemscorp.com
> > >Â Â Â -----Original Message-----
> > >Â Â Â From: Filepro-list
> > >Â Â Â
> > [mailto:
> [3]filepro-list-bounces+scottwalker=ramsystemscorp.com at lists
> > >Â Â Â .celestial.
> > >Â Â Â com] On Behalf Of Fairlight via Filepro-list
> > >Â Â Â Sent: Monday, February 4, 2019 1:58 PM
> > >Â Â Â To: [4][5]filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > >Â Â Â Subject: Re: New server migration
> > >Â Â Â My previous comments about XFS were for 32-bit
> > binaries.ÃÂ The bit
> > >Â Â Â depth is
> > >Â Â Â important, as even 6.0.0 comes in both 32-bit and
> > 64-bit.ÃÂ If
> > >Â Â Â you're running
> > >Â Â Â 64-bit, you can use inode64 on any filesystem size, and it
> > shouldn't
> > >Â Â Â cause
> > >Â Â Â issues.
> > >Â Â Â If you're running 64-bit binaries, compat-libtermcap may
> > still be an
> > >Â Â Â issue
> > >Â Â Â (probably is).ÃÂ I'd have to revisit that directly to
> > confirm or
> > >Â Â Â deny.ÃÂ I
> > >Â Â Â remember that the i686 architecture build target did not
> > exist in
> > >Â Â Â the spec
> > >Â Â Â file I got from the official SRPM, but that's only
> > necessary if you
> > >Â Â Â run
> > >Â Â Â 32-bit binaries.ÃÂ The package itself likely still needs
> > to be built
> > >Â Â Â properly, so you're not relying on what I remember as
> > being the
> > >Â Â Â default
> > >Â Â Â broken configuration.
> > >Â Â Â m->
> > >Â Â Â On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 11:02:34AM -0500, scooter6--- via
> > >Â Â Â Filepro-list thus
> > >Â Â Â spoke:
> > >Â Â Â > To clarify, this is with fP 5.6.10R4
> > >Â Â Â >
> > >Â Â Â >
> > >Â Â Â >
> > >Â Â Â > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 10:22 AM [5][6]
> scooter6 at gmail.com
> > >Â Â Â > <[6][7]scooter6 at gmail.com>
> > >Â Â Â > wrote:
> > >Â Â Â >
> > >Â Â Â > > Just purchased our new Dell PowerEdge server that I
> > have
> > >Â Â Â installed
> > >Â Â Â > > CentOS
> > >Â Â Â > > 7 on
> > >Â Â Â > >
> > >Â Â Â > > Am migrating from older Dell PowerEdge that has Centos
> > 5.10 on
> > >Â Â Â it
> > >Â Â Â > >
> > >Â Â Â > > Is there a 'recipe book' anyone may have on steps to
> > migrate all
> > >Â Â Â data
> > >Â Â Â etc?
> > >Â Â Â > > Can a simple copy of the fp directories etc do the
> > trick or does
> > >Â Â Â the
> > >Â Â Â > > new server need to go through fpinstall ?
> > >Â Â Â > >
> > >Â Â Â > > I know there are significant changes in CentOS from
> > 5.10 to 6
> > >Â Â Â and
> > >Â Â Â > > then to
> > >Â Â Â > > 7 but in what I've read I don't think there too much
> > of a
> > >Â Â Â concern
> > >Â Â Â > > for purposes of what we do here
> > >Â Â Â > >
> > >Â Â Â > > Curious if anyone has done this similar migration and
> > what to
> > >Â Â Â watch
> > >Â Â Â > > out for or best steps in order to make this as
> > seamless as
> > >Â Â Â possible
> > >Â Â Â > >
> > >Â Â Â > > Thanks for any insight
> > >Â Â Â > >
> > >Â Â Â > > Scott
> > >Â Â Â > > PDM
> > >Â Â Â > >
> > >Â Â Â > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML
> > attachment was
> > >Â Â Â > scrubbed...
> > >Â Â Â > URL:
> > >Â Â Â >
> > >Â Â Â
> > <[7][8]
> http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachmen
> > ts/
> > >Â Â Â 20190
> > >Â Â Â > 204/1b6775da/attachment.html>
> > >Â Â Â > _______________________________________________
> > >Â Â Â > Filepro-list mailing list
> > >Â Â Â > [8][9]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > >Â Â Â > Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> > >Â Â Â >
> > [9][10]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > >Â Â Â >
> > >Â Â Â --
> > >Â Â Â Audio panton, cogito singularis.
> > >Â Â Â _______________________________________________
> > >Â Â Â Filepro-list mailing list
> > >Â Â Â [10][11]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > >Â Â Â Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> > >Â Â Â
> > [11][12]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > >Â Â Â _______________________________________________
> > >Â Â Â Filepro-list mailing list
> > >Â Â Â [12][13]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > >Â Â Â Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> > >Â Â Â
> > [13][14]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > >
> > > References
> > >
> > >Â Â 1. mailto:[15]filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > >Â Â 2. mailto:[16]scott.walker at ramsystemscorp.com
> > >Â Â 3. mailto:[17]filepro-list-bounces%2Bscottwalker
> > >Â Â 4. mailto:[18]filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > >Â Â 5. mailto:[19]scooter6 at gmail.com
> > >Â Â 6. mailto:[20]scooter6 at gmail.com
> > >Â Â 7.
> > [21]
> http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/
> > 20190
> > >Â Â 8. mailto:[22]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > >Â Â 9.
> > [23]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > >Â Â 10. mailto:[24]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > >Â Â 11.
> > [25]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > >Â Â 12. mailto:[26]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > >Â Â 13.
> > [27]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > --
> > Audio panton, cogito singularis.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Filepro-list mailing list
> > [28]Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> > [29]http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> >
> > References
> >
> > 1. mailto:filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 2. mailto:scooter6 at gmail.com
> > 3. mailto:filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 4. mailto:scott.walker at ramsystemscorp.com
> > 5. mailto:filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 6. mailto:scooter6 at gmail.com
> > 7. mailto:scooter6 at gmail.com
> > 8. http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/
> > 9. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 10. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > 11. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 12. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > 13. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 14. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > 15. mailto:filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 16. mailto:scott.walker at ramsystemscorp.com
> > 17. mailto:filepro-list-bounces%252Bscottwalker
> > 18. mailto:filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 19. mailto:scooter6 at gmail.com
> > 20. mailto:scooter6 at gmail.com
> > 21.
> http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/20190
> > 22. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 23. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > 24. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 25. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > 26. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 27. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> > 28. mailto:Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > 29. http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>
> --
> Audio panton, cogito singularis.
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/20190204/5db1f6d1/attachment.html>
More information about the Filepro-list
mailing list