September 2004 - WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] NFS Trouble

by Dwight A. Ernest

With what options did you mount the volume on the client? Chuck Haines wrote: > I have an interesting problem that is occuring. I have a /home > directory on a file server and I have several login servers that mount > this /home directory via NFS. Now this /home directory has a ton of > files and directorys (about 2000 user accounts). I noticed that when > I perform a copy of a large file ( I tested with a 50 MB file) on a > login server from something like /tmp to the NFS mounted /home, the > load average on the file server jumps up to over 7, and seems to take > forever (around 3-4 minutes). If I copy a large file (once again I > tested with 50 MB) from the NFS mounted /home to like /tmp on the > login server, there is no noticable load average increase and it > occurs in approximately 10-15 seconds. So it seems that writes to the > NFS mounted /home are taking longer than they should and are spiking > the load average. Both the file server and the login servers are dual > P3's with 2 gigs of ram. Has anyone ever seen anything like this, or > knows of any solutions to this problem? > > Thanks, > Chuck >

Sept. 9, 2004

Re: [Wlug] NFS Trouble

by Mike Frysinger

On Thursday 09 September 2004 11:59 am, Chuck Haines wrote: > Has anyone ever seen anything like this, or > knows of any solutions to this problem? i havent seen anything like that before, but i have had random NFS issues ... i found using NFSv3 over TCP resolved pretty much all of the problems i experienced while using NFSv2 or NFSv3 over UDP you could also try tweaking the rsize and wsize parameters for the mount -mike

Sept. 9, 2004

NFS Trouble

by Chuck Haines

I have an interesting problem that is occuring. I have a /home directory on a file server and I have several login servers that mount this /home directory via NFS. Now this /home directory has a ton of files and directorys (about 2000 user accounts). I noticed that when I perform a copy of a large file ( I tested with a 50 MB file) on a login server from something like /tmp to the NFS mounted /home, the load average on the file server jumps up to over 7, and seems to take forever (around 3-4 minutes). If I copy a large file (once again I tested with 50 MB) from the NFS mounted /home to like /tmp on the login server, there is no noticable load average increase and it occurs in approximately 10-15 seconds. So it seems that writes to the NFS mounted /home are taking longer than they should and are spiking the load average. Both the file server and the login servers are dual P3's with 2 gigs of ram. Has anyone ever seen anything like this, or knows of any solutions to this problem? Thanks, Chuck -- Chuck Haines chaines(a)gmail.com ------------------------------------------- Tau Kappa Epsilon Fraternity WPI Class of 2005 ------------------------------------------- AIM: CyberGrex YIM: CyberGrex_27 ICQ: 3707881 -------------------------------------------

Sept. 9, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Linux Photo Printer recommendations

by John Stoffel

Thanks for the quick reply Andy, but I managed to figure it out last night. Background, I've got a Debian system which is pretty aggressively updated with apt. Mostly unstable, with some testing thrown in. CUPs has been working just fine for ages now, since I've got an HP LaserJet 4 on the network that I share with my wife. But this time I couldn't get the CUPs web GUI to even show or accept any URI's on the form of /dev/usb/lp0, which is where the printer shows up under udev. Well, it turned out that half of the backends in /usr/lib/cups/backend/ weren't executable, even though they were there. So I just did a chomd +x /usr/lib/cups/backend/* /etc/init.d/cupsys restart and went back to http://localhost:631/admin and I was able to add the printer without any problems. What a pain! I had also deinstalled and re-installed various versions of cups as well, but obviously there's a problem with the debian setup of version 1.1.20final+rc1-5 which is what I have installed. So at this point I've got my R300 hooked up and working, now to play with GIMP for printing out photos. And boy, is it slow on my system, which is only a PIII Xeon 550mhz dual CPU box. Using the highest resolution of the printer, and the highest resolution picture from my camera, I ended up printing 85mb of data for a 4x6 snapshot. Ouch! John

Sept. 9, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Linux Photo Printer recommendations

by Andy Stewart

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 08 September 2004 10:08 am, John Stoffel wrote: > > Andy, I misplaced the link to your doc on getting CUPS working with > USB printers, can you resend it? http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/users-guide.pdf See Chapter 3, it might help. Andy - -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBP4hZHl0iXDssISsRAkm9AJ4q/6Tva2vQPb2UmHRaSwMkha4ncACggC58 fPIqVBUJCwwDesxAuFqL/R4= =2qj1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Sept. 8, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Linux Photo Printer recommendations

by John Stoffel

>>>>> "Robert" == Robert L Krawitz <rlk(a)alum.mit.edu> writes: Robert> Unless you really need the Ultrachrome inks, I'd go with the Robert> R200 or R300. They're cheaper than the 960 and better tuned. I've gone with an R300, puts out nice output so far, but now to get CUPS to recognize it properly. The docs suck, as does the admin web page thing. Andy, I misplaced the link to your doc on getting CUPS working with USB printers, can you resend it? Thanks, John

Sept. 8, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Linux Photo Printer recommendations

by Robert L Krawitz

Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 15:24:33 -0400 From: "John Stoffel" <stoffel(a)lucent.com> >>>>> "Robert" == Robert L Krawitz <rlk(a)alum.mit.edu> writes: Robert> The only one that's cheaper is the R800, but that's currently Robert> marginally supported at best. In particular, it only operates Robert> in CMYK mode right now, and it's going to take me a while to Robert> get the red and blue inks (and gloss optimizer) working Robert> correctly. So it really sounds like the R200 or the R300(M) might be a better choice for me, since I don't want to spend a ton of money here. I know I'll be spending it on the paper/ink no matter what. Or an 960 might still be an ok choice? Unless you really need the Ultrachrome inks, I'd go with the R200 or R300. They're cheaper than the 960 and better tuned. -- Robert Krawitz <rlk(a)alum.mit.edu> Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2 Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf(a)uunet.uu.net Project lead for Gimp Print -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works." --Eric Crampton

Sept. 7, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Linux Photo Printer recommendations

by John Stoffel

>>>>> "Robert" == Robert L Krawitz <rlk(a)alum.mit.edu> writes: Robert> The only one that's cheaper is the R800, but that's currently Robert> marginally supported at best. In particular, it only operates Robert> in CMYK mode right now, and it's going to take me a while to Robert> get the red and blue inks (and gloss optimizer) working Robert> correctly. So it really sounds like the R200 or the R300(M) might be a better choice for me, since I don't want to spend a ton of money here. I know I'll be spending it on the paper/ink no matter what. Or an 960 might still be an ok choice? Robert> You're not using less ink at lower resolution. Paper is very Robert> important. I'd suggest the Epson papers, since the inks and Robert> papers are designed to work together. Thanks for the comments, so sticking with Epson supplies is the way to go here.

Sept. 7, 2004

Re: [Wlug] printers

by Son Nguyen

Charles and all, LPRng is not bad at all. For those who still have it available for use and have been working with it for a while, it works great. For beginners, I forsee the use of CUPS ia an easier learning curves. In my situation, I have to upgrade all of my linux boxes every two years. Sinces cups is built in to the distributions that I am using it is best for me to adapt to the change (as long as it does not disrupt functionality and the way my users works). Last I have checked, LPRng is not be updated recently ( I could be wrong). Its just seems to be a bit painful to build LPRng into new distributions that already have working printing solution. >From what I have read so far...some of us are having issues here and there with cups. I guess...luck fo rme...I have not. Sonny >From: Chuck Haines <chaines(a)gmail.com> >Reply-To: Chuck Haines <chaines(a)gmail.com>, Worcester Linux Users Group<wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> >To: Worcester Linux Users Group <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> >Subject: Re: [Wlug] printers >Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 11:25:48 -0400 > >LPRng is not that bad for a print server. In the ECE dept at WPI, we >use LPRng beause CUPS IMHO is still rather buggy. We've tried >switching over to CUPS on many occasions however have always ran into >a bug that prevents us from performing the switch over. We've also >used CUPS on our other servers to connet to the printer server running >LPRng and have run into some troubles with that, which we have not >using LPRng. > >Chuck > >On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 13:21:45 +0000, Son Nguyen <snguyen(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > Don, > > > > I would recommend not using LPRng. It is too old. I understand that CUPS > > seems difficult, but once you understand it, it is the next best thing. In > > my office, I have setup my kickstart to install 300+ printers on all of my > > Redhat Linux V3 Workstation machines (100+). You can configure it via > > console, applet, or even web. Fedora and Redhat has gone that route and I > > believe that others have too. It is much better than LPRng can every be. > > > > Sonny > > > > &gt;From: &quot;Don Peterson&quot; &lt;dpeterson(a)sterilite.com&gt; > > &gt;Reply-To: Worcester Linux Users Group &lt;wlug(a)mail.wlug.org&gt; > > &gt;To: &quot;Worcester Linux Users Group&quot; &lt;wlug(a)mail.wlug.org&gt; > > &gt;Subject: RE: [Wlug] printers > > &gt;Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 08:13:56 -0400 > > &gt; > > &gt;Thanx for the reply John. > > &gt;I had looked into CUPS but it looked pretty involved (the install and > > &gt;setup). > > &gt;Maybe I will give LPRng a shot. > > &gt; > > &gt;-----Original Message----- > > &gt;From: wlug-bounces(a)mail.wlug.org [mailto:wlug-bounces@mail.wlug.org] On > > &gt;Behalf Of John Stoffel > > &gt;Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 3:51 PM > > &gt;To: Worcester Linux Users Group > > &gt;Subject: Re: [Wlug] printers > > &gt; > > &gt; > > &gt;Don&gt; I've got a quick question about printers. Is there a > > printers.conf > > &gt; > > &gt;Don&gt; file in Red Hat like there is in Solaris (I couldn't find one). > > &gt;Don&gt; Here's my issue: > > &gt; > > &gt;Don&gt; I have 5 servers in a 9i RAC array and I don't want to set up my > > 50 > > &gt; > > &gt;Don&gt; printers on each server. Can anyone suggest a way to > > &quot;copy&quot; > > &gt;Don&gt; the printers I set up on one server to the other 4? > > &gt; > > &gt;Sure, just setup one box as your master, using LPRng. Then you install > > &gt;LPRng on all the client systems with an /etc/printcap sorta like this: > > &gt; > > &gt; # LPRng: /etc/printcap file > > &gt; # > > &gt; # Forward all jobs to the print server > > &gt; # > > &gt; *:force_localhost@:client:rm=printmaster.foo.com > > &gt; > > &gt; > > &gt;Then when you add/delete printers on the server, they appear on the > > &gt;client without any intervention. > > &gt; > > &gt;Now, I can't say I love LPRng, mostly because the Docs are baroque and > > &gt;hard to follow, and the output of various commands is also archane. > > &gt; > > &gt;You might want to look at using CUPS instead, since it's based on and > > &gt;support the Internet Printing Protocol. I use CUPS at home and it's > > &gt;fine. > > &gt; > > &gt;_______________________________________________ > > &gt;Wlug mailing list > > &gt;Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > > &gt;http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > &gt; > > &gt;_______________________________________________ > > &gt;Wlug mailing list > > &gt;Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > > &gt;http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wlug mailing list > > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > > > >-- >Chuck Haines >chaines(a)gmail.com >------------------------------------------- >Tau Kappa Epsilon Fraternity >WPI Class of 2005 >------------------------------------------- >AIM: CyberGrex >YIM: CyberGrex_27 >ICQ: 3707881 >------------------------------------------- >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

Sept. 6, 2004

Re: [Wlug] printers

by Son Nguyen

Keith, >From: Keith Wright <kwright(a)free-comp-shop.com> >Reply-To: Worcester Linux Users Group <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org> >To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >Subject: Re: [Wlug] printers >Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 17:26:53 -0400 > > > From: "Son Nguyen" <snguyen(a)hotmail.com> > > > > I would recommend not using LPRng. It is too old. > >As an old codger in training, I take that personally. >You remind me of Perlis's comment on Algol60: > Not perfect, but a big improvement over its successors. > This commend is not meant to insult. Just that almost every distributions are using cups. I have had request from my users that I should retro fit lrpng into my network. Although it is not impossible, it is less versitile than cups. I have not had much problems with both the applets and web based configuration. >I don't even know what LPRng is, I suppose it's the New-Gnu version >of the ancient bin/lpr program, from back in the days when programs >were more prized for working than for having a Web interface. I totally agree. I would rather use the console command instead, but it is nice to have an alternative configuration method for those who are not confortable at the command line. > >My printer is attached to a dual boot machine that now runs >Linux only, with a Samba server so that Diane can print >via the network from her laptop. It worked pretty much >the first time, the main problem being getting the Windows >laptop to notice it. > >I can print from the printer/Linux machine, but when I tried >to use the much-touted CUPS web-based set-up to connect to the >printer from another Linux machine, it went totaly wonky. >Certain buttons sent the browser in an apparent infinite loop. >(By Turing, you can never be sure, but I waited long with no action) >Sometimes it would take me to some crazy random place in the >Internet, to pictures of buildings that had the same name >as my server machine, as though some mad programmer had >rewritten bin/hostname to search Google for its name. > Have you considered connecting the printer to the windows box, share it and then map it via the linux? How about a a dsl router with the network printer capability? I love the external jetdirect parrellel to ethernet device. >It was not high priority, since ftp works and I have to walk >to the printer machine anyway to get the paper, so I quit. > > > I understand that CUPS seems difficult, but once you understand it, > > it is the next best thing. > >At first I thought you were recommending it as second-best, but >maybe "next best" means Best Real Soon Now. > > > In my office, I have setup my kickstart > > to install 300+ printers on all of my Redhat Linux V3 Workstation > > machines (100+). > >Eh? You need 300 printers for 100 workstations? > My offices are in Bedford (MA), McLean (VA), NJ, and Tampa (FL). I have to allow users to printer to any printers on my network for virtual meeting purposes. Sonny > > You can configure it via console, applet, or even web. > >Not me, maybe you can. > > > Fedora and Redhat has gone that route and I believe that > > others have too. It is much better than LPRng can every be. > >Oh, I suppose, but much better can you make something that >does what I used to with "cat scratch.ps >/dev/lp0"? > > -- Keith >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

Sept. 6, 2004