[15:14] <danstoner> eye of gnome does not respect the system umask.
[15:15] <danstoner> seems to be hard-set to owner has rw.
[15:15] <danstoner> exposed when rotating an image and then saving.
[15:15] <danstoner> discovered when my wife was unable to view a random number of images on our home fileserver.
[15:24] <danstoner> this in 10.04 LTS
[15:38] <danstoner> er... seems to actually be a Gnome thing, not limited to eog.
[15:44] <danstoner> Maybe setting umask in /etc/profile or each users .profile works.
[15:44] <danstoner> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gdm/+bug/241198
[15:45] <DammitJim> do you guys think that performance for a virtual machine could be improved if you had a separate hard drive for it?
[15:46] <danstoner> not if the separate hard drive is USB.
[15:46] <danstoner> Is this KVM / libvirt ?
[15:48] <DammitJim> virtualbox
[15:48] <DammitJim> I would buy a separate hard drive bay for my precision laptop
[15:49] <danstoner> If i/o contention is the issue, then adding another drive might help.  But if it is slow because of some other reason, might not help.
[15:51] <danstoner> Won't hurt. KVM gets better performance off "raw" partitions rather than file-based images stored on a file system.
[15:51] <danstoner> Virtual Box I don't know.
[16:18] <DammitJim> danstoner, what do you mean by raw partitions? like if I just used /dev/sdb5 for that virtual machine?
[16:18] <DammitJim> I don't know if I can do that with virtualbox
[16:19] <danstoner> DammitJim: yes, a raw block device (could be a partition, a logical volume, ...)
[16:20] <danstoner> I don't think virtualbox io sucks in general, so it might be fine keeping images on a filesystem.
[16:21] <danstoner> What are the performance issues you notice that led you to think adding a drive might help?
[16:21] <DammitJim> I just see this little hard drive light on ALL the time now that the VM is running
[16:21] <DammitJim> and everything on my host has slowed down, but CPU and memory doesn't look pegged
[16:22] <danstoner> using any swap space?
[16:22] <DammitJim> no
[16:22] <danstoner> what guest OS?
[16:22] <DammitJim> 7
[16:22] <danstoner> Windows 7?
[16:23] <DammitJim> yes
[16:23] <danstoner> How much RAM did you give to the guest?
[16:23] <danstoner> How much RAM in the host computer (your workstation)?
[16:24] <DammitJim> 2gb
[16:24] <DammitJim> 2gb
[16:25] <danstoner> ?  virtualbox let you give the guest 2 GB?
[16:25] <DammitJim> yeah, why?
[16:25] <danstoner> with only 2 GB of real RAM in the system?
[16:26] <DammitJim> oh no, I have 4GB total, I'm sorry
[16:26] <danstoner> ah.
[16:26] <danstoner> any other vms running at the same time?
[16:26] <DammitJim> no
[16:28] <danstoner> Your Windows 7 is already infected with malware.  ;)
[16:28] <DammitJim> lmao
[16:28] <DammitJim> I actually wish for that
[16:29] <DammitJim> maybe it doesn't help that I have playonlinux running with powerpoint
[16:29] <danstoner> Does it ever settle down?  Windows does a bunch of stuff in the background but I would expect idle system would not keep the hard drive going.
[16:29] <DammitJim> I know it will, I mean.. I want to be able to let Visual Studio compile it's thing while I'm on LInux doing my thing
[16:30] <DammitJim> that's why I thought another hard drive would help... then I keep them separate
[16:31] <danstoner> There is a good chance it will help, but depends on where the bottleneck really is.
[16:34] <danstoner> Are all of the files the windows vm uses local to the machine (e.g. not talking to a fileserver somewhere)?
[16:34] <DammitJim> right now... all local
[16:36] <danstoner> If I had to solve your issue without spending money, I would try changing the virtual storage controller.
[16:36] <danstoner> If I could bill someone for the hd, I'd buy the hd.
[16:37] <danstoner> Here is (possibly) how to use raw disk:
[16:37] <danstoner> http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ch09.html#rawdisk
[16:39] <danstoner> I always used "fixed-size images" rather than dynamically expanding images.
[16:39] <danstoner> http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ch05.html
[16:42] <DammitJim> interesting... this time I decided to go with a dynamically expanding image
[16:43] <danstoner> KVM also has really crummy performance with disk images on ext4 filesystem.  So if you get a second drive, use bare storage or a better filesystem.
[16:45] <danstoner> You could also try changing i/o controller from SCSI to IDE or vice versa.
[16:46] <DammitJim> the controller is a SATA controller now
[16:47] <DammitJim> thanks for the link, though... looks promising to do a raw disk
[16:49] <DammitJim> I just took away 1 CPU from the VM... let's see how the host behaves
[16:49] <DammitJim> like I said... I don't care as much as the Windows VM as I do of the linux host