RE: Partitioning a Web Server
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 09:29, Jones, Steven wrote:
> um....compaq dl320s for 1 wont do it. Look at some bioses, i would be
Compaq is history.
OK, HP whatever, the dl320 is a current model, it doesnt have the capability
to boot anything but 0x80 without a floppy.
> pleased if you could point me at some machines that can, ive not found one
A cheap clone motherboard that I bought from a local computer fair three
years
ago supported it. It even would give a menu on boot to select which device
to boot from if you pressed certain keys.
> yet. Maybe you should actually try it? have you? so far Ive not found a
box
Yes I have tried it. I didn't get it fully working however because this was
before the recent improvements in the LILO code for software RAID. By the
time the newer versions of LILO were around I had lost interest in it.
I couldnt get an asus board to boot, therefore at the end of the day if its
not reliable and repeatable dont do it.
> Have you tested this on the Dell? sounds scsi, might be possible if the
Of course I have tested it on the Dell. I even published a little HTML file
on my experiences with the Dell (to this list too). You must be new to this
list.
> second device which was sdb now becomes sda,
I believe that this is standard SCSI functionality. However I usually use
IDE
so I'm not an expert on this.
> Of the two machines with bioses that allowed alternative devices it would
> not boot. It would take alterations to grub or lilo, from a maintenance
> point of view its a non-starter.
Which version of LILO did you try?
After I get my next desktop machine I'll do some more tests on this and
write
some detailed docs.
> re, setting up lilo, this means on your 2 disks there is a seperate mbr
> setup etc...never seen a doc on this, if we are talking doing it each time
The standard setup for LILO on software RAID has the LILO blocks installed
on
both disks and the debian-mbr package used for the MBR. If the BIOS makes
the boot disk device 0x80 then all will be fine. If not then it will be
much
more difficult (but should still be possible if you adjust the lilo config).
Like I said messy
> we update the kernel its beginning to get messy and time consuming, its
> certainly not standard as far as I am aware. A hardware raid card is a way
> more reliable solution as its simpler.
If you are talking about IDE RAID then avoid all the cheap cards. Promise
etc
just cause problems. Your choices for IDE are a good card (the only option
I
know of is 3ware) or software RAID.
> As for testing the /var issue you suggest, I would need to come up with a
> test that covers all eventualities, rather difficult to guarantee, way
> better to assume the worst and plan accordingly.
In that case you would need separate file systems for /var/tmp, /var/log,
/var/cache, /var/spool, /var/lib, and /var/lock. :-#
You missed /var/www, depending on the use I often seperate out /var/spool
and /var/log.
Steven
In the course of SE Linux policy development I have tested denying many
different file accesses for many different programs, and found no evidence
to
suggest that having /var become full will deny logins.
Before writing my previous email I deliberately filled /var and logged in as
a
non-root user with no problems. I have also had /var fill up from cron jobs
on many occasions without any such problems.
--
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: