re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Greg Freemyer]

Anthony,

I'd be careful with the IDE Raid controller.

We just built a lab machine with a Promise IDE Raid controller and the assumption that we could get it and XFS to co-exist.

I'm not doing the work, but the engineer that is tells me that the Promise Patch Kit only works with a very limited number of stock Redhat Kernels, and that we are NOT free to add the XFS patch.  Even worse, promise does not supply their patch in source, so we are not free to tweak it ourselves.

I'm not sure I really believe that, but that is what I'm told.

If you do get the 3Ware IDE RAID controller to work with XFS, please let me know.

Greg Freemyer
Internet Engineer
Deployment and Integration Specialist
The Norcross Group
www.NorcrossGroup.com

 >>  On Wednesday 06 March 2002 02:40 pm, Petro wrote:
 >>  > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:52:30AM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
 >>  > > Could someone, please, provide me with a link and/or facilitate some
 >>  > > suggestons for configuration of the following components for a new DB
 >>  > > server hosting MySQL 4.01MAX?  I'm only looking to get a start and
 >>  don't
 >>  > > expect "THE" answer since all things are relative and I will have to
 >>  > > further test the various scenarios.
 >>  > > SuSE 7.3-2.4.18
 >>  > > 512MB RAM
 >>  > > 4x40GB Maxtor IDE (7200RPM) drives
 >>  > > 3Ware 7800 RAID Controller
 >>  > > LVM
 >>  > > XFS
 >>  >
 >>  >     You really don't provide us with enough information here.
 >>  >
 >>  >     How big is your database, both in total size and in number of
 >>  >     tables. How are those tables utilized, when they get used do you
 >>  >     primarily open one table, manipulate it, then close it, or do you go
 >>  >     across a bunch of tables?
 >>  >
 >>  >     All of these, and more will have a dramatic impact on how you set
 >>  >     this stuff up.

 >>  Thanks.  I'm more concerned about any specifics as it applies to MySQL Max
 >>  
 >>  and XFS, RAID and LVM as a whole.  Are there any nuances as it applies to
 >>  the 
 >>  whole?

 >>  Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:59:50PM -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> If you do get the 3Ware IDE RAID controller to work with XFS, please let me know.

Works beautifully.  Have RH7.2, XFS, LVM, and a 3Ware 7410 running the
box that I'm sending this from. :)

The Promise RAID cards are cute but crappy from what I've heard.
The 3ware cards seem to be excellent quality so far, and the driver (as
far as I can tell) was GPLed and is standard in the 2.4 kernel series
(well, it's in 2.4.9 anyway...)

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
I'm a white male, aged 18 to 49.  Everyone listens to me!  No matter
 how dumb my suggestions are.
 
 		-- Homer Simpson
 		   Lisa vs. Malibu Stacy

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anders Widman]

> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:59:50PM -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote:
>> If you do get the 3Ware IDE RAID controller to work with XFS, please let me know.

> Works beautifully.  Have RH7.2, XFS, LVM, and a 3Ware 7410 running the
> box that I'm sending this from. :)

> The Promise RAID cards are cute but crappy from what I've heard.
> The 3ware cards seem to be excellent quality so far, and the driver (as
> far as I can tell) was GPLed and is standard in the 2.4 kernel series
> (well, it's in 2.4.9 anyway...)

I have a Promise FastTrak 100 card and it is very fast and stable. I
think that Toms Hardware had a review of it a while ago (placed the
Promise card as winner).

Anyway. Linux Kernel now days has support for FastTrack cards too.

//Anders

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

> I have a Promise FastTrak 100 card and it is very fast and stable. I
> think that Toms Hardware had a review of it a while ago (placed the
> Promise card as winner).
>
> Anyway. Linux Kernel now days has support for FastTrack cards too.
>
> //Anders

Besides my 3Ware 7800, I also have several promise TX2 100 controllers which 
I have had for around 9 months since at that time their drivers didn't work 
with Linux.  I'll most likely use them later after I get this DB server up 
and running.

Anthony 

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Wednesday 06 March 2002 04:11 pm, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:59:50PM -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> > If you do get the 3Ware IDE RAID controller to work with XFS, please let
> > me know.
>
> Works beautifully.  Have RH7.2, XFS, LVM, and a 3Ware 7410 running the
> box that I'm sending this from. :)
>
> The Promise RAID cards are cute but crappy from what I've heard.
> The 3ware cards seem to be excellent quality so far, and the driver (as
> far as I can tell) was GPLed and is standard in the 2.4 kernel series
> (well, it's in 2.4.9 anyway...)

I should then hope to find all I need in my 2.4.18 kernel to pull this off 
(3Ware/XFS/LVM)?  What RAID/LVM config do you recommend to minimize write 
issues with RAID 5?

Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Theo Van Dinter]

On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 04:45:21PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> I should then hope to find all I need in my 2.4.18 kernel to pull this off 
> (3Ware/XFS/LVM)?  What RAID/LVM config do you recommend to minimize write 
> issues with RAID 5?

If you have a vanilla 2.4.18 kernel, you definately won't have XFS built in,
and I don't think you'll have the latest LVM code built-in (although I'm sure
someone will correct me on this if I'm wrong ...)

The kernel and a lot of patches later, and you should be all set. :)

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Probability ratio 1:1.  We have achieved normality.  Whatever you can't
 deal with is now therefore your own problem."
         - HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Wednesday 06 March 2002 04:57 pm, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 04:45:21PM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> > I should then hope to find all I need in my 2.4.18 kernel to pull this
> > off (3Ware/XFS/LVM)?  What RAID/LVM config do you recommend to minimize
> > write issues with RAID 5?
>
> If you have a vanilla 2.4.18 kernel, you definately won't have XFS built
> in, and I don't think you'll have the latest LVM code built-in (although
> I'm sure someone will correct me on this if I'm wrong ...)
>
> The kernel and a lot of patches later, and you should be all set. :)

My kernel does have XFS and I believe LVM.  I need to find out about 
versions.  This kernel is built by a Kernel person from SuSE and is not a 
fully supported release, however, it was just released the other day.  Maybe 
I'm lucky and have latest and greatest LVM/XFS?  I've never patched a kernel 
before, however, I have built several.

Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Petro]

On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 04:11:30PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:59:50PM -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> > If you do get the 3Ware IDE RAID controller to work with XFS, please let me know.
> Works beautifully.  Have RH7.2, XFS, LVM, and a 3Ware 7410 running the
> box that I'm sending this from. :)
> The Promise RAID cards are cute but crappy from what I've heard.
> The 3ware cards seem to be excellent quality so far, and the driver (as
> far as I can tell) was GPLed and is standard in the 2.4 kernel series
> (well, it's in 2.4.9 anyway...)

    We have 10 of the 3ware cards, and while the drive is GPLd and in
    the kernel, we have not been satisfied with the stability of the
    system 

    We haven't had a chance yet to qual the latest firmware, etc., but
    we went with dumb IDE expansion cards (we're only using 4 ide drives
    per system) and we're getting better speed (RAID0 or 1+0 depending)
    than we were off the 3ware card. 

    We are not using XFS, so no comments there. 

    We're also having some problems with Mysql that people keep pointing
    fingers at LVM for, but at this time we're point right back and
    saying "No!" in a firm voice...


-- 
Share and Enjoy. 

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Benjamin Scott]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, at 7:40pm, Petro wrote:
> We have 10 of the 3ware cards, and while the drive is GPLd and in the
> kernel, we have not been satisfied with the stability of the system

  Can you elaborate?  We have a few 3Ware cards in production, and so far,
they have been rock solid.  <knock on wood>

> We haven't had a chance yet to qual the latest firmware, etc.

  We found upgrading the firmware on our 3Ware cards, and using the latest
driver, helped some.

> ... but we went with dumb IDE expansion cards (we're only using 4 ide
> drives per system) and we're getting better speed (RAID0 or 1+0 depending)
> than we were off the 3ware card.

  Which model?  I am told the 7000 series is significantly faster than the
6000 series.  We only have a few 6200's for simple RAID1, so we don't really
care, but it sounds like you might.

-- 
Ben Scott <bscott@ntisys.com>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not |
| necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or  |
| organization.  All information is provided without warranty of any kind.  |

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Tim]

>     We're also having some problems with Mysql that people keep pointing
>     fingers at LVM for, but at this time we're point right back and
>     saying "No!" in a firm voice...

MySQL is weak under real read/write concurrent loads.  PostgreSQL is
terrific for that.  On the other hand, MySQL buries psql for keeping up
with my IDS alerts.  Gotta use the right tool for the job...

-- 
     "To be suspended from the legal profession is the moral equivalent of 
      being ostracized by child molesters."
                                                           --Ian Rowan

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Wednesday 06 March 2002 11:47 pm, Tim wrote:
> >     We're also having some problems with Mysql that people keep pointing
> >     fingers at LVM for, but at this time we're point right back and
> >     saying "No!" in a firm voice...
>
> MySQL is weak under real read/write concurrent loads.  PostgreSQL is
> terrific for that.  On the other hand, MySQL buries psql for keeping up
> with my IDS alerts.  Gotta use the right tool for the job...

Tim, what about read/write concurrent loads with InnoDb tables?
Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

>
>     We have 10 of the 3ware cards, and while the drive is GPLd and in
>     the kernel, we have not been satisfied with the stability of the
>     system

Is there anything that I can avoid while still using the card (ie; specific 
RAID config)?


>
>     We haven't had a chance yet to qual the latest firmware, etc., but
>     we went with dumb IDE expansion cards (we're only using 4 ide drives
>     per system) and we're getting better speed (RAID0 or 1+0 depending)
>     than we were off the 3ware card.
>
>     We are not using XFS, so no comments there.
>
>     We're also having some problems with Mysql that people keep pointing
>     fingers at LVM for, but at this time we're point right back and
>     saying "No!" in a firm voice...

What kind of problems with MySQL, if you don't mind to summarize?
Thank You,
Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Stuart Levy]

<petro@auctionwatch.com> wrote:

>   We have 10 of the 3ware cards, and while the drive is GPLd and in
>   the kernel, we have not been satisfied with the stability of the
>   system 

A 3ware 7850 here  (8 drive hw RAID5) performed erratically
until I got their latest .016 driver, which seems to be in
the 2.4.18 kernel too.  The earlier .010 driver in 2.4.<=17
would sometimes get into a low-performance (~15MB/sec) mode,
but the .016 driver has been doing very well.  3ware tech support
have been very responsive too.  Based on a few weeks' experience,
I'd recommend them.

   Stuart Levy, slevy@ncsa.uiuc.edu

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Wednesday 06 March 2002 11:15 pm, Stuart Levy wrote:
> <petro@auctionwatch.com> wrote:
> >   We have 10 of the 3ware cards, and while the drive is GPLd and in
> >   the kernel, we have not been satisfied with the stability of the
> >   system
>
> A 3ware 7850 here  (8 drive hw RAID5) performed erratically
> until I got their latest .016 driver, which seems to be in
> the 2.4.18 kernel too.  The earlier .010 driver in 2.4.<=17
> would sometimes get into a low-performance (~15MB/sec) mode,
> but the .016 driver has been doing very well.  3ware tech support
> have been very responsive too.  Based on a few weeks' experience,
> I'd recommend them.
>
>    Stuart Levy, slevy@ncsa.uiuc.edu

Are you, too, using XFS and LVM with your 3Ware/RAID5 config?  
Thank You!
Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Stuart Levy]

I'd written:

> A 3ware 7850 here  (8 drive hw RAID5) performed erratically
> until I got their latest .016 driver, which seems to be in
> the 2.4.18 kernel too.  The earlier .010 driver in 2.4.<=17
> would sometimes get into a low-performance (~15MB/sec) mode,
> but the .016 driver has been doing very well.  3ware tech support
> have been very responsive too.  Based on a few weeks' experience,
> I'd recommend them.
>
>    Stuart Levy, slevy@ncsa.uiuc.edu

Anthony Marino asked:
> Are you, too, using XFS and LVM with your 3Ware/RAID5 config?  

XFS yes, LVM no.

Re: re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Seth Mos]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Greg Freemyer wrote:

> Anthony,
> 
> I'd be careful with the IDE Raid controller.
> 
> We just built a lab machine with a Promise IDE Raid controller and the assumption that we could get it and XFS to co-exist.
> 
> I'm not doing the work, but the engineer that is tells me that the Promise Patch Kit only works with a very limited number of stock Redhat Kernels, and that we are NOT free to add the XFS patch.  Even worse, promise does not supply their patch in source, so we are not free to tweak it ourselves.
> 
> I'm not sure I really believe that, but that is what I'm told.
> 
> If you do get the 3Ware IDE RAID controller to work with XFS, please let me know.

3Ware IDE controllers and XFS are just fine. The driver is available in
source form and can be added to any kernel. The promise raid controllers
are not really nice. They have never ever been open about the hardware
specs of the cards. For some reason they seem to think that their IDE
controllers are something special. Which they are not.

If you are looking into using the 3Ware controllers watch the following:
The 64xx controllers are underpowered and should better not be used in
raid 5 mode.
The 74xx controllers seem to be good and should be fine with raid5 but
note that raid5 will always have slow write speeds.

Software raid can be used if you need a lot of speed _and_ redundancy.

Cheers
Seth

Re: re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

>
> If you are looking into using the 3Ware controllers watch the following:
> The 64xx controllers are underpowered and should better not be used in
> raid 5 mode.
> The 74xx controllers seem to be good and should be fine with raid5 but
> note that raid5 will always have slow write speeds.
>
Is there a way to minimize the write penalty using both XFS and LVM with RAID 
5?

Thanks,
Anthony

> Software raid can be used if you need a lot of speed _and_ redundancy.
>
> Cheers
> Seth

Re: re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Seth Mos]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Anthony W. Marino wrote:

> >
> > If you are looking into using the 3Ware controllers watch the following:
> > The 64xx controllers are underpowered and should better not be used in
> > raid 5 mode.
> > The 74xx controllers seem to be good and should be fine with raid5 but
> > note that raid5 will always have slow write speeds.
> >
> Is there a way to minimize the write penalty using both XFS and LVM with RAID 
> 5?

Don't use raid5. I always use a combination of raid 1 and 10 for a
database server. If you have a database that frequently updates records
you don't want the extra write overhead.

Software raid 1 or 10 will do fine in that case.
If you have 4 disks you make 2 raid 1 arrays and then stripe those in a
raid 0. You then have optimum speed at the lowest possible overhead.

Generally that is what you want for a database server.

Cheers
Seth

Re: re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Thursday 07 March 2002 01:32 am, Seth Mos wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> > > If you are looking into using the 3Ware controllers watch the
> > > following: The 64xx controllers are underpowered and should better not
> > > be used in raid 5 mode.
> > > The 74xx controllers seem to be good and should be fine with raid5 but
> > > note that raid5 will always have slow write speeds.
> >
> > Is there a way to minimize the write penalty using both XFS and LVM with
> > RAID 5?
>
> Don't use raid5. I always use a combination of raid 1 and 10 for a
> database server. If you have a database that frequently updates records
> you don't want the extra write overhead.
>
> Software raid 1 or 10 will do fine in that case.
> If you have 4 disks you make 2 raid 1 arrays and then stripe those in a
> raid 0. You then have optimum speed at the lowest possible overhead.
>
> Generally that is what you want for a database server.
>
> Cheers
> Seth

I caught a few emails on linux-lvm list where an external log is being used 
as well to better write performance.

Thanks Alot,
Anthony

Re: re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Tim]

> Don't use raid5. I always use a combination of raid 1 and 10 for a
> database server. If you have a database that frequently updates records
> you don't want the extra write overhead.

Yeah, what he said.  However it is sometimes possible to get decent
performance anyways from a hardware RAID5 device if the controller has
enough cache (ie. a LOT).  Generally speaking the Oracle "suggested
layouts" for disks consist of 17-22 spindles, mirrored, with logical
splits among the write-ahead log, the data area, and the redo log...

Boy do I ever Not Miss working with Oracle.


-- 
     "To be suspended from the legal profession is the moral equivalent of 
      being ostracized by child molesters."
                                                           --Ian Rowan

Re: re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Steven Critchfield]

On Wed, 2002-03-06 at 14:59, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> Anthony,
> 
> I'd be careful with the IDE Raid controller.
> 
> We just built a lab machine with a Promise IDE Raid controller and the assumption that we could get it and XFS to co-exist.
> 
> I'm not doing the work, but the engineer that is tells me that the Promise Patch Kit only works with a very limited number of stock Redhat Kernels, and that we are NOT free to add the XFS patch.  Even worse, promise does not supply their patch in source, so we are not free to tweak it ourselves.
> 
> I'm not sure I really believe that, but that is what I'm told.
> 
> If you do get the 3Ware IDE RAID controller to work with XFS, please let me know.

Although my first thought is to write RH and remind them how much we
hate it when they build things in a non standard way and therefore cause
other standard systems to break. I have several peices of hardware that
are only supported with a RH kernel. I may be braver than some in the
fact that I have removed the RH kernel and used in to build other
distros with it. RH should provide a source version of the kernel in
which you can attempt to put XFS into, then compile, and should still be
able to load the promise driver into that new kernel. It will take some
effort, but should be usable. Of course you could return it as
essentially broken and buy the 3ware card that has better support.

Steven

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Kirby C. Bohling]

Steven Critchfield wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-03-06 at 14:59, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> 
> Although my first thought is to write RH and remind them how much we
> hate it when they build things in a non standard way and therefore cause
> other standard systems to break. I have several peices of hardware that
> are only supported with a RH kernel. I may be braver than some in the
> fact that I have removed the RH kernel and used in to build other
> distros with it. RH should provide a source version of the kernel in
> which you can attempt to put XFS into, then compile, and should still be
> able to load the promise driver into that new kernel. It will take some
> effort, but should be usable. Of course you could return it as
> essentially broken and buy the 3ware card that has better support.

RedHat does provide the source.  It takes a bit of time to get it just 
the way you want it.  If you have RPM installed on a RedHat machine 
download the SRPM do a

rpm -Uhv kernel.src.rpm
cd /usr/src/redhat/SPECS
rpm -bp kernel.spec

In
/usr/src/redhat/BUILD

there will be a directory with tree with the kernel source that has a 
name that makes it fairly obvious.

This is all based off a stock redhat configuration on a 6.2 machine.

If you find the rpm2cpio or rpm2tar tools and you can extract the source 
files there will be a list of patches.

	The order in which you must apply the patches in in the .spec file from 
the RPM.  It is pain in the ass but it is completely doable.  They ship 
there kernels the way they like them in the format they like.  More 
specifically, the section labelled %prep, has the commands it runs on 
the rpm -bp listed there run those commands with the listed files and 
you'll get the source.  If you really want to try and do the patch dance 
and merge dance, it shouldn't bother you too much if your given the 
order to apply the patches.

	It's my understanding that the patches for XFS are pretty invasive and 
that the latest XFS patches won't apply to the RedHat kernel because RH 
has a different VM from the mainline kernel after 2.4.9 and XFS has lots 
of VM dependencies in it.  That is me just summarizing what I have heard 
on other mailings lists, never used XFS myself.  I thought SGI kept a 
version of a RedHat derived distro ISO  that would work with XFS that 
was relatively recent like RH 7.0 based or 7.1 based.  I can't remember 
the link off hand.

	If you runs those commands in the order listed you will get the entire 
source tree the way they have it when the start.  The rest of the 
commands and steps they take to build the RedHat source are all in the 
.spec file, you just have to read up on the .spec file format.  I had to 
modify some RedHat source code to make Labels work on LVM devices long, 
long ago and learned about how to do it then.

	Thanks,
		Kirby



> 
> Steven
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html
> 

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[José Luis Domingo López]

On Wednesday, 06 March 2002, at 15:56:06 -0600,
Kirby C. Bohling wrote:

> It's my understanding that the patches for XFS are pretty invasive 
> and that the latest XFS patches won't apply to the RedHat kernel because RH 
> has a different VM from the mainline kernel after 2.4.9 and XFS has lots 
> of VM dependencies in it.  That is me just summarizing what I have heard 
> on other mailings lists, never used XFS myself.  I thought SGI kept a 
> version of a RedHat derived distro ISO  that would work with XFS that 
> was relatively recent like RH 7.0 based or 7.1 based.  I can't remember 
> the link off hand.
> 
Just for everyone's information, Andrea Arcangeli's kernel patches for
2.4.x series include XFS since at least version 2.4.18-rc4aa1 (what I am
running now, fine so far). This -aa branch is said to be both stable and
fast on the VM side, and could be interesting to give it a try.

Greetings.

-- 
Jos� Luis Domingo L�pez
Linux Registered User #189436     Debian Linux Woody (Linux 2.4.18-rc4aa1)
 
jdomingo AT internautas DOT org   =>  Spam at your own risk

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[José Luis Domingo López]

On Wednesday, 06 March 2002, at 15:56:06 -0600,
Kirby C. Bohling wrote:

> Steven Critchfield wrote:
> >On Wed, 2002-03-06 at 14:59, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> >
> >Although my first thought is to write RH and remind them how much we
> [...]
>
I forgot something important in my last email :). 2.4.18-rc4aa1 also
seems to include newer LVM code than mainline, namely:
LVM version 1.0.2(23/01/2002) module loaded

So 2.4.18-rc4aa1 could provide you with everything you need in just one
patch, not two (not a great advantage, but maybe XFS and LVM patches
conflict somewhere, and you avoid that).

-- 
Jos� Luis Domingo L�pez
Linux Registered User #189436     Debian Linux Woody (Linux 2.4.18-rc4aa1)
 
jdomingo AT internautas DOT org   =>  Spam at your own risk

Re: re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Tim]

Whatever other people may say about RedHat, I have found that (with rare
and well-documented exceptions) their kernels (as kernel-2.x.x-source
and kernel-2.x.x-headers RPMs) accept patches fairly well (if not, I'm
comfortable doing it manually) and have been reliable in some extremely
high-load environments, when properly customized.  RH is most definitely
not perfect, but 7.2 is IMHO a perfectly serviceable starting point for
large systems.  I have used Debian, LinuxPPC, Solaris, AIX, FreeBSD,
etc. in the past and they all have their ups and downs, but my *nix
systems are either OpenBSD or RedHat these days, and the reason is
simply that I can get better support for them than anything else.

LVM on RH7.2 has worked well for me, but as I previously mentioned, the
support for LSI Logic boards is quite solid, and using hardware
enclosures eliminates an enormous number of potential problems.


> Although my first thought is to write RH and remind them how much we
> hate it when they build things in a non standard way and therefore cause
> other standard systems to break. I have several peices of hardware that
> are only supported with a RH kernel. I may be braver than some in the
> fact that I have removed the RH kernel and used in to build other
> distros with it. RH should provide a source version of the kernel in
> which you can attempt to put XFS into, then compile, and should still be
> able to load the promise driver into that new kernel. It will take some
> effort, but should be usable. Of course you could return it as
> essentially broken and buy the 3ware card that has better support.

-- 
     "To be suspended from the legal profession is the moral equivalent of 
      being ostracized by child molesters."
                                                           --Ian Rowan

Re: re[2]: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

> If you do get the 3Ware IDE RAID controller to work with XFS, please let me
> know.
>
I'm going to get moving on this within the next day or two after I've had 
time to do some research on what partitioning and levels of RAID to put where 
...

Thank You,
Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Tim]

If you're going with Promise consider an enclosure.  The UltraTrak100TX4
and 100TX8 both act like standard hardware RAID arrays, hot swap + hot
spare, but appear to the system as an Ultra2 LVD-SE SCSI device.  With
the Symbios cards we use (kernel patch supplied by Symbios as source --
LSI Logic is a TERRIFIC company to work with) we have not had any
problems and throughput has been exceptional.

Promise makes good cheap hardware, but I prefer a more specialized
vendor for my SCSI controllers, especially with the torture I put our
systems through.  (how many other people do you know running RAIDframe
on OpenBSD for example -- LSI/Symbios even attempts to help with THAT!)



Quoth Greg Freemyer:
> Anthony,
> 
> I'd be careful with the IDE Raid controller.
> 
> We just built a lab machine with a Promise IDE Raid controller and the assumption that we could get it and XFS to co-exist.
> 
> I'm not doing the work, but the engineer that is tells me that the Promise Patch Kit only works with a very limited number of stock Redhat Kernels, and that we are NOT free to add the XFS patch.  Even worse, promise does not supply their patch in source, so we are not free to tweak it ourselves.
> 
> I'm not sure I really believe that, but that is what I'm told.
> 
> If you do get the 3Ware IDE RAID controller to work with XFS, please let me know.
> 
> Greg Freemyer
> Internet Engineer
> Deployment and Integration Specialist
> The Norcross Group
> www.NorcrossGroup.com
> 
>  >>  On Wednesday 06 March 2002 02:40 pm, Petro wrote:
>  >>  > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:52:30AM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
>  >>  > > Could someone, please, provide me with a link and/or facilitate some
>  >>  > > suggestons for configuration of the following components for a new DB
>  >>  > > server hosting MySQL 4.01MAX?  I'm only looking to get a start and
>  >>  don't
>  >>  > > expect "THE" answer since all things are relative and I will have to
>  >>  > > further test the various scenarios.
>  >>  > > SuSE 7.3-2.4.18
>  >>  > > 512MB RAM
>  >>  > > 4x40GB Maxtor IDE (7200RPM) drives
>  >>  > > 3Ware 7800 RAID Controller
>  >>  > > LVM
>  >>  > > XFS
>  >>  >
>  >>  >     You really don't provide us with enough information here.
>  >>  >
>  >>  >     How big is your database, both in total size and in number of
>  >>  >     tables. How are those tables utilized, when they get used do you
>  >>  >     primarily open one table, manipulate it, then close it, or do you go
>  >>  >     across a bunch of tables?
>  >>  >
>  >>  >     All of these, and more will have a dramatic impact on how you set
>  >>  >     this stuff up.
> 
>  >>  Thanks.  I'm more concerned about any specifics as it applies to MySQL Max
>  >>  
>  >>  and XFS, RAID and LVM as a whole.  Are there any nuances as it applies to
>  >>  the 
>  >>  whole?
> 
>  >>  Anthony
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm@sistina.com
> http://lists.sistina.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://www.sistina.com/lvm/Pages/howto.html

-- 
     "To be suspended from the legal profession is the moral equivalent of 
      being ostracized by child molesters."
                                                           --Ian Rowan

[linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

Could someone, please, provide me with a link and/or facilitate some 
suggestons for configuration of the following components for a new DB server 
hosting MySQL 4.01MAX?  I'm only looking to get a start and don't expect 
"THE" answer since all things are relative and I will have to further test 
the various scenarios.

SuSE 7.3-2.4.18
512MB RAM
4x40GB Maxtor IDE (7200RPM) drives
3Ware 7800 RAID Controller
LVM
XFS


Thank You,
Anthony

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Petro]

On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:52:30AM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> Could someone, please, provide me with a link and/or facilitate some 
> suggestons for configuration of the following components for a new DB server 
> hosting MySQL 4.01MAX?  I'm only looking to get a start and don't expect 
> "THE" answer since all things are relative and I will have to further test 
> the various scenarios.
> SuSE 7.3-2.4.18
> 512MB RAM
> 4x40GB Maxtor IDE (7200RPM) drives
> 3Ware 7800 RAID Controller
> LVM
> XFS

    You really don't provide us with enough information here. 

    How big is your database, both in total size and in number of
    tables. How are those tables utilized, when they get used do you
    primarily open one table, manipulate it, then close it, or do you go
    across a bunch of tables? 

    All of these, and more will have a dramatic impact on how you set
    this stuff up. 

    

-- 
Share and Enjoy. 

Re: [linux-lvm] System Suggestions

[Anthony W. Marino]

On Wednesday 06 March 2002 02:40 pm, Petro wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:52:30AM -0500, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
> > Could someone, please, provide me with a link and/or facilitate some
> > suggestons for configuration of the following components for a new DB
> > server hosting MySQL 4.01MAX?  I'm only looking to get a start and don't
> > expect "THE" answer since all things are relative and I will have to
> > further test the various scenarios.
> > SuSE 7.3-2.4.18
> > 512MB RAM
> > 4x40GB Maxtor IDE (7200RPM) drives
> > 3Ware 7800 RAID Controller
> > LVM
> > XFS
>
>     You really don't provide us with enough information here.
>
>     How big is your database, both in total size and in number of
>     tables. How are those tables utilized, when they get used do you
>     primarily open one table, manipulate it, then close it, or do you go
>     across a bunch of tables?
>
>     All of these, and more will have a dramatic impact on how you set
>     this stuff up.

Thanks.  I'm more concerned about any specifics as it applies to MySQL Max 
and XFS, RAID and LVM as a whole.  Are there any nuances as it applies to the 
whole?

Anthony