***: easymac is now known as Guest96446
Guest96446 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest78361 mercutio: is it normal for the he.net tunnel servers to have high pings?
maybe cos it's free
i'm getting 135 to 145 msec ping to tunnel end point in lax, then like 190 msec to ge9-12.core1.lax1.he.net ***: Guest78361 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest37300 brycec: mercutio: You could check out https://smokeping.cobryce.com/?target=Internet.HENet
which fpings all HE tunnel endpoints from ARM mercutio: ahh cool
oh
it's hop one after tunnel endpoint that's the issue brycec: *ARP mercutio: and it's an issue even getting to www.he.net over the tunnel from lax
where www.he.net is in fremont afaik
cool
very useful none hte less
https://smokeping.cobryce.com/?target=Internet.HENet.NorthAmerica.HEtserv15lax1v4
looks coincidental
but i'm on tserver15.lax1
and it seemed to be getting worse and worse brycec: That would be the same server mercutio: it is
it's called tserv anyway
i wasn't thinking and completed it :) brycec: you'd said "but I'm on" so I thought that you thought you were on a different one
(it's 02:31, I'm very tired) mercutio: heh brycec: (so I could've misread, or misunderstood) mercutio: it sucks when you want to test stuff
and then you find random other unrelated issues :/
but it does seem that by far he.net having issues seems to be the central issue with arp ipv6 atm
and it's hard to know if they're deprioritising tunnel servers or not
you'd think they wouldn't because advertising and all
looks like i should get fremont tunnel though
hmm, los angeles is full now it says
yeh fremont is more stable ***: Guest37300 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest88284
Guest88284 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest36510
Guest36510 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest96443
Guest96443 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest78631
Guest78631 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest47870
Guest47870 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest77483
Guest77483 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest48181
Guest48181 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest2326 JC_Denton: i wonder if i could get a tour of he's fremont dc :D grody: mercutio, is there a provider physically located in NZ that offers dedi (looking for a buddy)
?
think it's you lives out that way... ***: Guest2326 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest58118
Guest58118 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest14559 mercutio: grody: i'm not sure if there's anything good as far as good spec, service, network, etc.
on front pages or anything JC_Denton: ugh. racking my brain trying to figure out how to save off ACLs & xattrs w/ rsnapshot/rsync to a ZFS share. i guess this would be the only way: http://superuser.com/questions/247689/backup-file-attributes-restore-them-later mercutio: JC_Denton: that looks like a way
i don't envy your position :) JC_Denton: mercutio: yeah. i could run the job after rsnapshot runs. my only concern would be if the file's ACL is changed during that time.
seems unlikely, though. mercutio: is this for windows acl's or something JC_Denton: nah, POSIX
have some interesting dirs that allow things like Apache to write, other users to individually access & execute files, etc. mercutio: maybe i should try that
i've always used the normal unix permission system
hangon
so you have them on zfs JC_Denton: i like the ACLs, a lot more powerful
nah mercutio: oh JC_Denton: i setup a NAS with ZFS
and i'm trying to backup with rsnapshot mercutio: i see JC_Denton: which i've done to another ext4 system w/o issue, obviously :) mercutio: i was going to ask why you're using rsnapshot instead of zfs snapshot JC_Denton: but yeah, with no xattr support on ZFS for FreeBSD
i'm kinda up the creek w/o a paddle mercutio: you could make a zfs volume on it JC_Denton: hm? mercutio: and put ext4 on it :/
zfs create -V 200G raid/aclbackup
or something
then mkfs.ext4fs /dev/zvol/raid/aclbacku
+p
sure it's not as clean JC_Denton: an interesting idea
but mercutio: hmm, opensolaris had acl support JC_Denton: no EA/ACL support on FreeBSD's extfs mercutio: ahh JC_Denton: my really hideous thought is to just make a huge ext4 container served out over NFS that the rsnapshot hosts mount
but to me that's hideous
so maybe the recursive getfacl solution is the trick mercutio: so the basic problem is not in zfs but in freebsd? JC_Denton: yeah, because Linux w/ ZFS supports xattrs and POSIX ACLs mercutio: then maybe you shoudl just use linux? :) -: mercutio is not suggesting windows mercutio: zfs on linux works ok JC_Denton: *shrug*
i bought a freenas mini, so it's running freenas
i actually kind of like it mercutio: ahh.
i just do things the manual way :) JC_Denton: i usually do the same until i get an admin headache ;) mercutio: i'm still wondering about grody's dedicated question :)
and where i'd go to try and get dedicated server heh JC_Denton: i could probably ask someone that lives out that way mercutio: the cheapest i've found so far is $295+GST
and that was without even having redundant power.
at least that list prices
there is somewhere i know is cheaper, but they have always been on the dubious side to me ***: Guest14559 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest15841 mercutio: there's actually quite a few places that do it it seems
but they all to have high prices for old hardware
like $250 for dell poweredge 1950 with 2gb of ram and 1 har-didsk brycec: I thought tar and rsync both had switches to enable ACL copying. Think rsync's was X
-A, --acls preserve ACLs (implies -p)
-X, --xattrs preserve extended attributes
from my man page for rsync 3.1.1 mercutio: he's using rsnapshot though brycec ?
which does symlinks etc.
so even if tar and rsync can support acl's then if the underlying filesystem doesn't support it you're in a dark place. brycec: (Unless I'm missing something, which I could well be)
mercutio: I was going with12:48:35 JC_Denton | ugh. racking my brain trying to figure out how to save off ACLs & xattrs w/ rsnapshot/rsync to a ZFS share. mercutio: oh hmm
i suppose it could end in tarball on the server :)
and still meet that brycec: But apparently I was wrong about FreeBSD's ZFS supporting them in the first place. 12:53:57 JC_Denton | but yeah, with no xattr support on ZFS for FreeBSD mercutio: freebsd might now
freenas usually lags behind
apparently freebsd supports nfsv4 acl's brycec: "man zfs" says xattr "is currently not supported on FreeBSD" for 10.1
but acl stuff is still good mercutio: https://clusterhq.com/2014/09/11/zfs-suitable-replacement-file-system/
this seems to haev a table brycec: Or as you sorta-mentioned earlier, he could create disk volumes, exported over iscsi and mounted on each system
Then every guest can format it whatever filesystem works best for the machine being backed up, including ext4 with full ACL/xattr support mercutio: there's something dirty about using iscsi for a backup system :) brycec: I disagree mercutio: a lot of os's go funny if backup server has issues
if using iscsi, nfs etc. brycec: Can't say I've ever experienced that myself mercutio: well if it's down or such
i suppose as long as you have your cron script so it checks that its' not already running and don't type df it's not toob ad
although tehre can be things like locate etc too brycec: Last I checked, locate's default config didn't index netfs mounts
(on Debian)
(but it's been awhile since I cared)
(And it's easy enough to add further exceptions) mercutio: hmm.
what do you think JC? JC_Denton: iscsi was my next thought, but meh
seems like a PITA for such a small backup set mercutio: heh JC_Denton: i think i could use rsnapshot's post exec to do the recursive getfacl mercutio: it's probably a hell of a lot easier JC_Denton: trying to decide if i could live with the small and significant chance of the ACL changing brycec: Are you actively using acls/xattrs? It's been my limited experience that people don't, so perhaps you're not actually losing anything? mercutio: it sounded like he was JC_Denton: brycec: yeah, i'm using ACLs mercutio: i think the chance of losing things is similar to the chance of losing things from not backing up frequently enough JC_Denton: i was using xattrs too at one point courtesy of SELinux, but i've since turned that system off mercutio: if you're behind in time and some permissions don't work properly that you just applied
then at least it'll be stuff you've done recently that you were checking anyway
because you had to restore from backup.. brycec: There's also the point to be made that if you're backing up data, you care about the data and not so much the properties of the files. (I worded that funny)
(tl;dr At least you backed up the contents of the files) mercutio: and having recent data with outdated permissions seems better than having stale data with up to date permissions brycec: ^ or no data at all ;P mercutio: no data at all sounds easier :)
why would people want data anyway! brycec: You can always just create new data mercutio: that's how i used to feel about backups
why would you want to cling onto the past? :)
uhh for personal stuff that is JC_Denton: yeah
shame ZFS on BSD doesn't have xattr
worse shame i think is that Linux doesn't support the richacls ZFS/NFSv4 has
well, support w/o patching the kernel and a ton of coreutils mercutio: aren't nfs acl's better than posix acl's?
i wonder if it's possible to store the stuff using nfs acl's rather than posix acl's
NFSv4/Windows ACLs are more fine-grained than POSIX ACLs.
so freebsd supports nfs acl's, so does freenas support? nfs may be simpler than iscsi
or it may be possible to use them anyway with rsync or such somehow brycec: Or maybe just store a copy of the acls/xattrs (getfacls > blah) alongside the backup - no worries whether the underlying filesystem supports it, and no information lost. JC_Denton: brycec: that's the current plan, the issue is what happens if the ACL changes in between that short time
mercutio: yeah, rich/nfs acls are nicer, but there's no native linux support for them and rsync can't convert between thet wo brycec: JC_Denton: take a dump before and a dump after. then compare the two after the copy
Heck even rsync isn't invulnerable to that and will complain if files have disappeared since rsync started running
That's why people take filesystem snapshots, backup from that, and destroy the snapshot when complete
So nothing is changing during the backup (relative to the backup process) JC_Denton: actually, duplicity might be a better bet for this, no?
since it tarballs first brycec: You could just tar in the first place for that matter
Of course depending on how long the tar takes, you're looking at the same issue
I think it really boils down to how do you want your backup files, JC_Denton JC_Denton: *sigh* BryceBot: *sigh* JC_Denton: https://bugs.launchpad.net/duplicity/+bug/558385 brycec: eg: rsnapshot-like, just a bunch of dated tar files, something more advanced with incremental backups, etc ***: Guest15841 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest18142 m0unds: damn. caught my headphone cable on my chair and broke the suspension hardware on the left side.
audio-technica discontinued them too. grr. mercutio: hmm, zsh just made a huge change to cut and paste
i'm still trying to figure out how to deal with it :)
basically if you cut and paste stuff with new lines in it it will come through as a new line, rather than the end of a statement.
oh it's not so bad, you can still do multiple commands, you just press enter to do them all mike-burns: I'm in favor. mercutio: yeh as soon as i realised you can press enter and do them all it's fine
i used to stick echo on the front of stuff i was cut and pasting
so as to not run it
or #
hopefully it makes the next ubuntu lts
actually it should
main concern would be getting used to it, and finding it hardly anywhere JC_Denton: just rolled a quick ruby script to do the acl and xattr dump on all three rsnapshot instances. cross your fingers for me :) -: mercutio crosses fingers ***: Guest18142 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest39286
Guest39286 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest35441
Guest35441 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest51726
m0unds1 has joined #arpnetworks
m0unds has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
m0unds1 has quit IRC (Client Quit)
m0unds has joined #arpnetworks
Guest51726 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest70739
NiTe_ has joined #arpnetworks
neish_ has joined #arpnetworks
gizmoguy_ has joined #arpnetworks
neish has quit IRC (*.net *.split)
trobotham has quit IRC (*.net *.split)
gizmoguy has quit IRC (*.net *.split)
rendrag has quit IRC (*.net *.split)
NiTe has quit IRC (*.net *.split)
RandalSchwartz has quit IRC (*.net *.split)
dne has quit IRC (*.net *.split)
NiTe_ is now known as NiTe
Guest70739 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest57846
dne has joined #arpnetworks
mike-bur1 has joined #arpnetworks
ChanServ sets mode: +o mike-bur1
mike-burns has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
mike-bur1 is now known as mike-burns
hive-mind has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
Seji has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
Seji has joined #arpnetworks
hive-mind has joined #arpnetworks
Guest57846 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest29882
rendrag has joined #arpnetworks
Guest29882 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest71863
Guest71863 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest50219 mercutio: easymac seems to have issues for a while now
seems to be around once an hour ***: Guest50219 is now known as easymac
easymac is now known as Guest24371