weird - getting some net breakage not to here, but to other sites
traceroute from laptop to delta.com stops at gblx.net for example
--glbx.
been giving me hell all week at a couple of sites
(i.e., my connectivity output through them has sucked)
up_the_irons: you work for arp, right and aren't just one of the clueful customers that hangs out in the channel?
it's true
he practically *is* arp. :)
up_the_irons: haaalp
RandalSchwartz: did you get an arp tshirt yet?
something we clueful people can help with?
fink - I don't think so
RandalSchwartz: me neither :(
haven't seen any recent packages
unfortunately not.
ww - then send email to support@
it'll get done as fast as it can get done then. :)
machine has become unstable, probably because of zfs and insufficient ram (and i recently added some things that eat an extra 400Nb of ram)
so need a ram upgrade... erm urgently...
then you should probably back that out until you get more ram
i sent an email...
"urgent add of ram" is not a service provided here
"adding ram in a day or two" is more likely
you could temporarily add more swap space
that'd at least give you the option of pushing stuff out to disk that's less active.
backing out would be hard, in this case... spinning up another host elsewhere more likely if it'll take a while, but i'd rather not
poor planning then. :(
swap... well... 4s-backend (see 4store.org) gets very unhappy if it gets swapped (which happens now from time to time and is painful)
damn, 400Nb!
RandalSchwartz: planning? well...
Nanobytes!
nebibyte?
fink: 400Mb out of 1024 is... well... significant
ww: out of curiosity, what did you add?
i switched from apache to cherokee, and saved a shload of ram
actually, added nothing substantial new in terms of software (some minor upgrades)
what i did add was a pile of data
... Optimum price/performance can be got with clusters of machines with large amounts of RAM. 16+GB per node is typical currently.
you mean you didn't read that and go "heck, I need more ram">
that'd be my first clue
RandalSchwartz: depends on the quantity of data, actually
yeah - but anytime people say "this will need a lot of ram" what they mean is "I don't code very well" :)
with 16Gb of Ram you're talking ~100-150 million triples (rows, approximately)
i've only about 10 million
so why can't you just get rid of your data for now
roll it back, and wait for ram?
you didn't go live without testing did you?
because of a dog and pony show tomorrow
here we go…
again - poor planning. :(
what me plan?
;)
remind me not to subcontract to you. :)
i DO have that tshirt
:D
oh, not a paying customer dog and pony show
if it were a paying customer they would be paying for bigger hardware
you missed the point, but that's fine
everyone else here got it. :)
anyways, re: planning... plenty of time to spin up a machine elsewhere if this can't be sorted quickly
I don't know why you seem to think that answers or contradicts my claim
ww: what OS?
because... there is no problem that can be attributed to inadequate planning?
fink freebsd 8.1
and i'm *assuming* that Fatal trap 9: general protection fault while in kernel mode
is caused by ZFS WARNING: Recommended minimum kmem_size is 512MB; expect unstable behavior.
ww: i run fbsd 8.1 with zfs on root on a 768 vps, but i tweaked the zfs settings a bit, and i doubt i have your load
what processes / data are you running?
misc small things - it's the laboratory host
and, the metadata aggregator
which i would point you to, if the machine wasn't thrashing around again at the moment
ww: ok, what's your largest process group, maybe we can think of ways to make it leaner?
4s-backend
not much to be done really. it alone occupies half the ram.
and there's an obligatory 4s-httpd whose size depends on the complexity of queries
then there's nginx, and a harvesting daemon
most everything else has been turned off
fink: mind sharing some of the tweaking you did to run ZFS on a 768VPS?  I considered it but figured that it'd freak out due to lack of ARC space if I used ~650mb of that 768 for actual running processes
... http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSTuningGuide
for interest's sake, the service in question http://semantic.ckan.net/ (pretty pictures here, http://semantic.ckan.net/record/2ab28263-a1fe-4839-9409-fa7ef03e123e and here http://semantic.ckan.net/group/?group=http://ckan.net/group/lld) is noww back up and running smoothly
unfortunately, elsewhere (rackspace)
elastichosts is a lot more flexible than rackspace
at least in my observation
we're using elastichosts for BCP behind ARP
with elastichosts, if you want more ram, you slide a slider, and reboot. :)
it's *that* fast
I'm building a 8.2 box on elastichosts right now
yes, i'm familiar with them, but there's already an account, etc. set up with rs...
randalschwartz: elastichosts.com/could-hosting/pricing clearly shows that their smallest server is 1gb mem .. if you do a 'subscription' for 1gb mem 40gb disk 400gb xfer (same as arp's $30/mo system) you'd pay $107.92/mo there. huge difference in my world.
though as BCP plans go, it surely is good to make them
that doesn't make sense
I also don't note IPv6 mentioned, perhaps you could answer if there is remote encrypted console access and/or serial console access
I was dialing in some plans at $70/mo
so the minimum can't be 107.92
randalschwartz: minimum isn't 107.92
its just that if you compare apples to apples their minimum mem is 1gb
finding the 1gb mem option at arpnetworks, I chose the values from arpnetworks and plugged it into their little slider pricing guide
... https://sat-p.elastichosts.com/docs/pricing
yeah - it's a bit more expensive overall
nothing is as cheap as ARP :)
and yeah, no ipv6 yet
they say "just use a tunnel" :(
"let he.net deal with IPv6 till we get our heads out of the sand"
indeed.  anyone not dealing with ipv6 today has their heads firmly hidden :)
I've seen some 4U plans for 100mbit links unmetered if I provided the server. so after it approaches $100 for finite resources i tend to gloss over and out
"plans" => for $100
toddf: I'm ready for OpenBSD 4.9 BTW, so whenever you want to make those templates...
ack
ahh - so you *can* use freebsd-update to go from 8.1 to 8.2 without recopying the boot blocks
unlike 8.0 to 8.1
for zfs-on-root
just verified this in a private vm
nice
so that means I can upgrade my 4 VPS with minimal steps
everything at the # prompt :)
up_the_irons: tell me how to make templates.  I'll make you one for CentOS  5.6  (and 6.0 if they ever release it)  and RHEL 5.6/6.0
jpalmer: can you do FreeBSD 8.2 as well?  I can write-up the docs tonight
up_the_irons: I'd love to.
I can likely do FreeBSD this week.   are you interested in centos/rhel?
yeay freebsd :)
and,   can I get away from the single / partition?   like,   the sysinstall defaults?  :)
jpalmer: I think that single partition on these relatively small VPSs is probably preferable?
single partition is NEVER preferable.
(but, I'll do whatever garry wants)
jpalmer: ummm strictly speaking, Red Hat likely wouldn't like the idea of a RHEL VM image if there is now VM/Cloud licensing
*no
G good point.  they'd want licensing.  so CentOS only
that said....
jpalmer: due to the different access patterns on the different POSIX dirs, or something else I'm not thinking of?
I guess you could label it as bring your own license, no updates otherwise
reardencode: filling up you / is a lot more dangerous than filling up most other mountpoints.
reardencode: but that aside,   a small / is preferable, because all of the other paritions can be background fsck'd.   / has to be done at boot.  in the case of an unclean mount,  a 20g / takes longer to fsck than a 512m /
jpalmer: both valid points -- I guess you'd probably have to do at least two different templates, one for 5G vps and another for any other size, in order to leave even a reasonable amount of space for /usr on the 5G
a single ZFS partition is fine
because I can rehack it at will
personally,  I'm ok with whatever garry wants for a template.  I can always resize on my own.
really as ZFS matures, the many filesystem roots in a single pool of storage will win
RandalSchwartz: yep.
so if you could also offer /-as-ZFS as a template, that'd be great
I doubt most people will want to run ZFS on a vps due to the limited RAM resources.
and yet, I have four of them
and it's all working fine
also,  to this day, I've never messed with ZFS (I don't have a need for it)  so,  I don't think I'd be the right guy to build a ZFS-as-root template
RandalSchwartz: guess we're not most people
apparently
we don't run in jpalmer's circles :)
heh
my circles are small,  I chase my own tail a lot.
I chase tail a lot too.
oh - "my own" no
RandalSchwartz: how much RAM do you use for programs of your 768MiB with ZFS?
I have to think which one of the boxes are like that.
probably mabel.  lemme look
says 278MB free
that box is just email and DNS
What do you have arc and kmem tuned to?
the recommedations on ZFSTuningGuide
arc = 40M
kmem = 330M
search for 768 in http://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSTuningGuide
I'm using those
haven't had a problem in 10 months or so
even with a fair amount of spam
running postfix with postgrey and amavisd
amavisd is such a memory hog!
i have two vpses with the same setup as RandalSchwartzDoppleGanger
up_the_irons here?
jaja - why?
I dont see the payment on my CC, I want to know if there's a problm.
jaja: it can take a couple days
up_the_irons: second VPS requires the /29 subnet right?
jaja: wait…payment or charge?
is this a soviet russia joke?
arp pays you?
jaja: I don't think the billing cycle has happened yet
charge sorry
I am french my english isn't perfect, and I am abit tired tonight
fink: payment is fine imo, because he's making a payment to arp
you won't get your service disabled until he calls you
nothing to worry about
so if there's a problem with payment, it won't matter until he gets around to turning it off :)
just wait for the thugs in the black suits to appear :)
and the helicopters!
don't forget the helicopters!
RandalSchwartz: I thought he replaced the helicopters w/ drones
with the silent blades
I prefer fellow my billing, I am here since 6 month and generally charge is done 1th day of each month, sorry !
whooop whooop whooop
all of the sudden they dart out of nowhere and pin you to the nearest brick wall :)
G: yes
jpalmer: OK, I'll write up the docs tonight.  I don't have any templates for centos/rhel, so i can't give you a description of what is needed; you'd have to "figure it out" based on the Debian / Ubuntu template creation docs I have, and b/c the network is different, you might not want to go down that road
up_the_irons: jpalmer: if help is needed regarding CentOS let me know
that said, I'm running Ubuntu on my VPS atm :)
up_the_irons: nice.  I'm setting up a pretty large bacula environment over the next 2-3 days.  but, after that.. fbsd 8.2 template!
jpalmer: sweet!
up_the_irons: support ticket best for second VPS I take it right?
up_the_irons: actually, if I only needed IPv6 on my second VPS, would you be able to do that w/o a /29?
G: yes, i would in fact
G: and yeah, support ticket for 2nd vps
up_the_irons: okay, sent
roger
up_the_irons: I only need IPv4 very occassionally, so if I can just use a private IP, and route the occasional packet via VPN or over the private network, then it save the pool and everything
I noticed the other day that American IP's a worth more than Asian IPs
*are
lol
up_the_irons: APNIC have a crazy formula for working out the costs of IP address assignment,s but I did the math and yeah, for big assignments APNIC look cheaper, kinda crazy in a way I guess
i c
so IP addresses do in fact have a real dollar value now?
interesting
of course, they're not marketable
since you can't reassign without the NICs getting involed
RandalSchwartz: well, there is the membership fees etc
RandalSchwartz: ARIN look to charge by the size of the assignment on a broadbasis, APNIC charge essentially on a per-ip basis
I actually had to remember how to do log's with the APNIC pricing