=== mundus2018 is now known as mundus | ||
stripe | Hi Everyone, setting up a home 3 disk array (running / on the array), for partitioning would a seperate /boot partition (raid 1), the / partition (raid 5) and the swap partition (raid 0) be an acceptible scheme? (and not cause problems resilvering a disk after faliure) thanks :) | 09:51 |
---|---|---|
TJ- | stripe: why the different RAID levels per FS, if there's the same 3 disks underlying it all? | 09:53 |
stripe | TJ the /boot is raid 1 to allow booting from any drive after faliure, the swap (0) is to minimise the amount of writes. or am I over thinking it (as usual lol) | 09:55 |
TJ- | stripe: I wouldn't like to be using RAID-5; it is very risky especially with 3 disks | 09:57 |
stripe | thanks TJ what would you use? | 09:58 |
TJ- | once you lose a disk you've no resiliance until you've replaced it with a hot spare, and most admins will tell you with RAID-5 *don't touch the array, don't shutdown" until you've got the replacement drive in place (oh, and do a full backup BEFORE adding the replacement disk) ! | 09:58 |
stripe | TJ would you add another spare disk to the array or run a 4 disk (raid 5) array? I will have all my data snapshot'd and backed up. | 10:03 |
TJ- | I wouldn't use RAID-5 at all; RAID-6 or RAID-10 (mirror + stripe) | 10:09 |
TJ- | stripe: are these real spining disks or actually SSD ? | 10:10 |
TJ- | stripe: short informative read here: https://storageswiss.com/2015/01/13/which-raid-level-use-for-ssd-tier/ | 10:12 |
stripe | thank you TJ will look at 6 and 10, all spinning drives, and thanks for the link. all the best :) | 10:21 |
TJ- | stripe: I'd always prefer RAID-10 even if it does give less capacity than 5/6 because it so much easier to rationalise about and work with when a disk (or two) fail | 10:23 |
stripe | TJ the loss of capacity is not an issue, (will mainly be running LXD{lxc} containers) so will do some further reading, thanks again for the help. have a great day :) | 10:33 |
blackflow | GB are cheap. What RAID10 loses in $$ for storage space, it gains with simplicity and robustness. | 10:34 |
stripe | thanks blackflow, my two favourite words simplicity and robustness it looks like I will be using raid 10 :) | 10:35 |
blackflow | also btw I wouldn't recommend RAID0 for swap. In case of disk failure it's crashy-crashy time, and the whole point of RAID is to keep the server running while you resilver the faulty disk | 10:35 |
blackflow | (and if at all possible, use ZFS) | 10:36 |
stripe | blackflow, have used zfs on freebsd, never even thought about using it on linux (facepalm) excelent reminder :) | 10:38 |
blackflow | d'oh! | 10:39 |
blackflow | :) | 10:39 |
blackflow | stripe: the only "problem" (for now) is that you'll have to install Ubuntu from debootstrap, until the installer grows the ZFS capabilities, which is in progress. But hey, I prefer deboostrapping anyway, I end up with most minimalist possible installation, no cloud-init, snapd and similar bloatware. | 10:41 |
stripe | debootstrap is not a problem, thats how I originally built my containers/chroot's (back in the day) | 10:45 |
blackflow | ZFS it is, then :) | 10:46 |
stripe | yep :) | 10:50 |
RoyK | blackflow: the only issue with zfs is the lack of flexibility | 11:10 |
RoyK | blackflow: you can't just toss in a new drive in a VDEV or remove one - it's rather static on the VDEV level - there are talks of this changing, but I haven't seen the code yet | 11:11 |
blackflow | precisely why a 2-disk mirror vdev is best. you just keep expanding by adding 2 disks at a time (or replacing them with bigger ones) | 11:14 |
blackflow | 2-disk mirror vdev, and then many vdevs are "stripes", so it's effectively a RAID10 as ZFS doesn't explicitly have a "RAID10" option | 11:15 |
RoyK | blackflow: for striped mirrors, yes, but I was thinking of raidz things | 11:28 |
blackflow | yeah. | 11:32 |
rbasak | bryce: bug 1773324 came up in triage. Are you OK to re-review/sponsor please? | 15:47 |
ubottu | bug 1773324 in rabbitmq-server (Ubuntu Eoan) "rabbitmqadmin shows %%VSN%% as version" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1773324 | 15:47 |
rbasak | bryce: and nice job helping the volunteer to get the patch into shape :) | 15:49 |
bryce | rbasak, sure will take a look at it now | 16:28 |
supercool | Hello! | 23:11 |
supercool | Could someone tell me if Ubuntu Server comes with an active firewall nowadays? | 23:11 |
supercool | Please? | 23:13 |
sarnold | supercool: ufw is available to install if you want a friendly front end to iptables | 23:14 |
supercool | sarnold: actually I am just trying to figure why am an unable to access a server from a client server | 23:15 |
supercool | I think iptables are not initialized here | 23:17 |
supercool | So, no firewall? | 23:18 |
sarnold | how about nftables or ebtables? | 23:18 |
ploxiln | I don't think there is a firewall config blocking SSH or HTTP etc by default. probably no significant firewall by default | 23:18 |
supercool | I am trying to use 8000 and 8080 port and none of them worked | 23:19 |
supercool | I mean couldn't get anything from host side | 23:19 |
ploxiln | are you on the same lan, the same subnet? | 23:19 |
ploxiln | how do you know some application is listening on those ports? | 23:20 |
supercool | ploxiln: I am running a Django server on those ports | 23:20 |
supercool | I can acess from 127.0.0.1:8000 or 127.0.0.1:8080 using curl | 23:21 |
ploxiln | is it listening on 0.0.0.0 or 127.0.0.1? | 23:21 |
supercool | But the host doesn't receive anything | 23:21 |
supercool | I bridged the guest, So I think it is listening on 0.0.0.0 from outside | 23:22 |
ploxiln | so this is running in a VM on your laptop/desktop | 23:22 |
ploxiln | and you are trying to access from the browser on your laptop/desktop? | 23:22 |
supercool | My network IP would be 192.168.15.45:8000 for example | 23:23 |
supercool | Yes, exactly | 23:23 |
tds | can you reach it on the non-loopback IP if you curl on the same box? | 23:23 |
supercool | tds: yes | 23:24 |
ploxiln | hmm, well, that might not do it, the VM might not have the same ip as your laptop. depends on VM setup. how do you ssh to the VM? | 23:24 |
ploxiln | the laptop/desktop may have a firewall enabled by default | 23:24 |
supercool | ssh user@192.168.15.45 | 23:24 |
ploxiln | hmm. ok, I would expect that accessing http://192.168.14.45:8000 from the same context as you ssh would work | 23:25 |
ploxiln | from the laptop/desktop, outside the VM | 23:26 |
supercool | ploxiln: yes, but it is not | 23:26 |
ploxiln | if run "ip addr" inside the vm, do you see the same or similar address in the output | 23:26 |
supercool | inet 192.168.15.45/24 brd 192.168.15.255 scope global dynamic | 23:27 |
tds | what's the full output of `iptables-save`? | 23:29 |
supercool | tds: nothing shows | 23:30 |
supercool | or shows nothing* | 23:30 |
tds | ok, doesn't sound like firewall then | 23:30 |
tds | unless there's ebtables of nft rules as sarnold suggested, seems unlikely though | 23:30 |
ploxiln | looks like django listens on 127.0.0.1 by default, you need to specify 0.0.0.0:8000 | 23:31 |
ploxiln | https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27537 | 23:31 |
ubottu | Django bug 27537 in Core (Management commands) "Provide a simpler way to default runserver IP/port to 0.0.0.0:8000" [Normal,Closed] | 23:31 |
supercool | ploxiln: you are right! o/ | 23:33 |
tds | sounds like it's already bound to the right ip if you can reach it from 192.168.15.45 on the same host though? | 23:33 |
tds | oh, weird | 23:33 |
supercool | I had to runserver as 0:8000 | 23:33 |
supercool | 0 is a shortcut for 0.0.0.0. Full docs for the development server can be found in the runserver reference. | 23:34 |
ploxiln | good to hear :) | 23:34 |
supercool | Thank you a lot! What is your account number for the deposit? | 23:35 |
supercool | Thank you guys!!! | 23:36 |
ploxiln | haha. uh, 42 | 23:36 |
supercool | ploxiln: \o/ | 23:38 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!