Server :: FTP Server - Which File System Is The Best For
Sep 16, 2009
I have a remote ftp serwer, witch many of disks, something SATA, some IDE... There are ext3 filesystems. And a lot of files and direcotories/subdirectories. Tell me, which filesystem is the best for serwer like this? I'm not interesting on efficiency... The most important thing is failure-free. On ext3 sometimes is problem witch 'dirty' filesystem, in that case I must handy run e2fsck to fix this. Is any option to automate this, or any power-down proof filesystem?
I am kinda stuck while providing solution for the above problem. I have achieved the fail over using keepalived but not sure how can we replicate the data from one server to other seamlessly and have them in sync with each other. My prime requirement for this project is end user should not notice the fail over and replicated copy of data should be available on the secondary as well.
I have a weird performance issue with a centos 5 running a nfs server and a rh8 client. I think the fact that it is rh8 client should be downplayed. It is just that with rh8 client the performance degradation seems more clear. See test details below OS in server is Centos 5 x86_64 kernel 2.6.18-92.1.22.el5
1Gb connection between machines File to test over NFS is a 1GB file. First of all I wanted to measure how the network alone performs while using NFS. So in the server side I run a "cat" command on the 1GB file to /dev/null. Please note that the disk read speed is about 98MBs. At this point the file system has the 1GB file cached in memory. In the client side a "cat" on the same file gives me a speed of about 113MBs. It seems then that the bottleneck in this instance is the network and it is very close to nominal speed. So the network performance is really good. (BTW I know that the server got that file from cache because a vmstat or iostat shows no disk activity.)
The second test is reading from disk with no caching involve. In the server I flushed the 1GB file from the memory. For instance by reading another 5GB file and I repeat the same thing as above in the client (a cat on the 1GB file). Now, the server has to go to disk.(vmstat or iostat shows the disk activity). However the performance, now, is about 20MBs, I was expecting something closer so 90MBs. (since the reading speed in the server in the first test showed 98MBs).
This second test was repeated for ext2, ext3, xfs with no significant differences. A similar test using a RH8 NFS server and client gets me close to 60MBs for a 1GB file not cache by the file system in the serverSince network speeds and disk read speeds are not the bottlenecks ... what or where is the limiting factor then?
We are trying to define an appliance for an application server so I would like to know which should be the best file system type for this kind of use, basically our web applications uses libraries of 50 KB and our web apps.creates temp and logs files not bigger than 3 MB.
I will be relocating to a permanent residence sometime in the next year or two. I've recently begun thinking about the best way to implement a home-based network. It occurred to me that the most elegant solution might be the use of VM technology to eliminate as much hardware and wiring as possible.My thinking is this: Install a multi-core system and configure it to run several VMs, one each for a firewall, a caching proxy server, a mail server, a web server. Additionally, I would like to run 2-4 VMs as remote (RDP)workstations, using diskless workstations to boot the VMs over powerline ethernet.The latest powerline technology (available later this year) will allow multiple devices on a residential circuit operating at near gigabit speed, just like legacy wired networks.
In theory, the above would allow me to consolidate everything but the disklessworkstations on a single server and eliminate all wired (and wireless) connections except the broadband connection to the Internet and the cabling to the nearest power outlets. It appears technically possible, but I'm not sure about the various virtual connections among VMs. In theory, each VM should be able to communicate with the other as if it was on the same network via the server data bus, but what about setting up firewall zones? Any internal I/O bandwidth bottlenecks? Any other potential "gotchas", caveats, issues? (Other than the obvious requirement of having enough CPU and RAM).Any thoughts or observations welcome, especially if they are from real world experience in a VM environment. BTW--in case you're wondering why I'm posting here, it's because I run Debian on all my workstations/servers (running VirtualBox as a VM for Windows XP on one workstation).
I'm planning to add 1tb sata disk to my lovely file-server under ubuntu 10.10,what i want is use this disk as additional storage for network user,indows and ubuntu?I mean when my ubuntu server down (worse case) I can easily take out the disk from ubuntu machine and plug in on windows machine
Can windows read files from a home file server with an ext4 file system? or do I have to partition the drive with the server (ext4) and an ntfs partition with the files on?
iam trying to sync file server data into backup server machine by command- rsync -avu path/of/data ipaddress-of-backup-server:/path/where/to/save after running it ask for root password and manually it is successful.but i want to make it automatic.for that i also tried cronjob and also generated authentication key but iam not successful in login automatically..anybody know how to authenticate root to login for storing data in backup server.
I am working on linux server with below specifications.Linux EDT 2008 i686 i686 i386 GNU/LinuxWhile checking the status of the server using the command 'opmnctl status' and when server is down the output is not getting redirected to file.I m using the command as,opmnctl status > abc.txt.
I have install 5.5 kernel in rhel and after rebooting got the error to control+d to continue or rootpassword. I have done the same but df -h not showing the lvm filesystem.I have tried to remounnt but showing resource busy.I have rebooted on the previous kernel but getting the same issue.Its a VM.df -h showing only/dev/ mapper/ vg_osdata-lv_root /
I have a question regarding extending file system. We are using RedHat 4 with update 8.Is it possible to extend an file system with GFS file system type while at the same time the same file system that need to be extended is used as an NFS file system? Is it necessary to stop the nfs daemon before extending the GFS file system? If it is necessary to stop nfs daemon, what can happen if it is not stopped prior extending?
I have lost the data of my drive having file system ext3, please tell me the most reliable softwares for data recovery, please try to tell also GUI software.
I have to move all the files and directories between 2 file systems. Is it good practice to move them at once or first copy them and then move ? How to do this to preserve the permissions and directory structure ?
I have a 2TB file-system and when the machine reboots it fails the fsck, halts and goes into maintenance mode.Stats: I have have RHEL 5, 2.6.18 kernel, the file-system is an ext3. The file-system is on an EMC AX4 connected with fiber channel HBA.So far my reading tells me this should work because under 2.6 4TB is OK. Any ideas why this fails?If I take it out of the fstab file and mount it manually the boot is OK and the file-system behaves well. I can change the fsck check option in the fstab to 0 but I don't think I should have too. Everything I read says that 2TB ext3 file-systems are OK.
I just noticed that one of my blade server has such a abnormal running status.Historically, the three values in file-nr denoted the number of allocated file handles, the number of allocated but unused file handles, and the maximum number of file handles.But it's really strange to see low value for the first column.
I'm using RHEL 5.4 and trying to use the system-config-kickstart to generate a ks.cfg file with all the settings already appeneded. After running the "system-config-kickstart --generate ks.cfg" command, the file gets created but it's missing the firewall configuration, partition information and so on.
How can these settings also be generated with the system-config-kickstart?
When I try to install anything recently, I was getting errors about "No Space". I noticed that the root drive (/dev/sda1) has 100% usage which I'm not sure how that suddenly happened.
There was a powerloss recently and I wondered if some serious corruption had occurred. Since I'm checking the root drive, I had fsck run after a restart:
Code: sudo shutdown -F -r now
FSCK went to work, briefly, and the logs (/var/logs/checkfs and /var/logs/checkroot) remain empty. Speaking of log files, I had a look at all of them and they take up a mere 32MB, so that's not the issue...
Using Code: du -h I know that: /var uses 1.2 GB /root uses 100 K /usr uses 1.4 GB /tmp is empty /home has 35 MB
Have already ran apt-get clean. How can I figure out what is taking up so much room? How can I go about figuring out what is huge and is safe to remove?
I have two web servers. One is active and one is in reserve. I keep the user data (web pages) in sync by running rsync every 10 minutes or so. This copies any changes from the active machine to the reserve machine. But, it's slow, only gets changes every 10 minutes, bogs down the disk, does strange things to files that are changing during the rsync process etc...
I want something that will automatically copy any changes from the active server to the reserve server as they are made. IE I hit 'save' on the active server, it copies the file to the reserve server. Simple!
I've been looking around and I see GFS which is really vastly more complicated than I need. I'm happy with read-only access on the reserve host, so I don't need distributed lock management.
I could theoretically implement this by setting inotify watchers on every file and running an SCP or rsync command when a file gets saved. So, it can't be that hard.
I do not need a true networked file system, as in something I mount over the network. I just want something to keep my disks in sync.
Blue sky thinking at the moment:I have a number of file servers, each at different sites. I would like to be able to make these appear as one, so that files on any server can be accessed from any site, and the user doesn't even see there are multiple servers.Obviously, the internet is slow, especially the upload speeds. So when a file is written the write ought to go to the server on the client's LAN - even if it was previously on another of the servers.However, for robustness, some sort of background mirroring is also wanted. If all the servers were left on and connected, they eventually end up all in sync. But this mirroring needs to be mindful of bandwidth usage; if someone writes a big file to their local server, copying that to the other servers can't interfere with normal internet usage.I think UnionFS or similar might be able to handle the unioning side, but not the mirroring stuff.
I have a videos server here at work running Mandriva 2009 Spring and I need to copy a 10 gig file from it to a USB drive. The drive needs to be readable and writable from Windows. The file size rules out FAT, and when I try to write to it when formatted as NTFS I get an error about it being a read-only file system. How can I get NTFS support up and running?
I need a webserver (LAMP) running inside a virtual machine (#1) running as a service (#2) in headless mode (#3) with part or the whole file system encrypted (#4).The virtual machine will be started with no user intervention and provide access to a web application for users in the host machine. Points #1,#2 and #3 are checked and proved to be working fine with Sun VirtualBox, so my question is for #4:Can I encrypt all of the file system and still access the webserver (using a browser) or will GRUB ask me for a password?If encrypting all of the file system is not an option, can I encrypt only /home and /var/www? Will Apache/PHP be able to use files in /home or /var/www without asking for a password or mounting these partitions manually?
I have configured a "Syslog" server on /var directory as a separate ext3 partition - to receive the logs and events from the clients & the firewall as well. The directory needs to grow dynamically as the logs are populated. Is there a way i can make the filesystem grow dynamically as and when the directory is full.
There isn't any separate file system for /home and we have only one (/) root file system for everything else on the system. Is there any way that we can still implement quotas for users through their home directories was mounted on (/) root file system. Do we need to have a separate file system (/home) compulsory for implementing disk quotas?
I am currently looking for a file system that needs to be distributed over several nodes and need redundancy, like RAID5, and the ability to grow if needed, like LVM. Also not all nodes are going to be located in the same data center, but I guess that's not that important as long as the connection between DCs is sufficiently fast. I am currently looking at AFS, Coda, GFS and OCFS to see if they have what I need.
Edit: I just figured that it may be better to have the RAID5-like setup within one location, and have RAID1-like mirroring between the locations. That would probably better for performance, right?
For my project, it's absolutely necessary to have a read-only root partition system. I have a writable /opt/project partition.But, I also need to start x server. startx This tries to write to some temporary files and fails as / is readonly. Is there any how-to on how to move this temporary files to the writable portions of the file system.
I have just bought two SSD, Intel X25-M 80GB, to install Ubuntu 10.04 64-bit server with vmware on a computer with 8GB RAM. I have tried to find out how to set up the system, but is somewhat confused on the setup. The idea is to use software raid to aviod data loss if one SSD is giving up in the future. When installing I have thought about using tree partitions.Swap Root Vmware vhd When reading about how to optimize vwware I found this:
Quote: Disks, Disks, Disks: I always attempt to put my guest OSs on their own partition and I format that partition thusly because VMWare server reads guests in huge blocks (/dev/sdb1 is the partition my guests reside on): mke2fs -b 4096 -R stride=8 /dev/sdb1
Then I set the block readahead value to somewhere around 16384, but you can go as high as twice that value (in my case this is an entire disk array, so I dropped the partition indicator): blockdev �setra 16384 /dev/sdb
How should I setup the file system on each partition? When using an SSD, each partition should be aligned. How do I do that? Let say I would like to have 4GB swap, 60GB root and the rest for vmware. At last, I have fount out that full support for TRIM is supported by kernel v2.6.33. Ubuntu 10.04 is using v2.6.32? If so, for full TRIM support I must upgrade kernel to v2.6.33.
