Search results for "meeting" - WLUG

Re: [Wlug] RH 8

by jeff

Aramico wrote: > Till now, i still get the problem in downloading RH 8 in several > diffrent places. > Can somebody tell me where can i download it ? > > All available sites are using identification's login for now.. > ..while the other could not be touched using wget...... ;( > > Thanks! this message is for aramico and anyone else concerned: if you guys need cd's burnt, please let me know. i'm the linux 'courier' for a lot of my friends around the area and would be more than happy to get you a copy of whatever you need. i live right here in downtown worcester. i usually do my 'deals' at the worcester public library. just name the time and place and i'll be happy to meet you there. i have all the recent copies of redhat, mandrake, debian, gentoo, crux, and freebsd. my burner and my bike are at your service! later! -jeff mwblug - soon to be a full-time wlug-er since my other half (christian - mwblug) moved to boston and i don't see the guy anymore. :-( p.s. i have copies of everything except for suse.

22 years, 7 months

RE: [Maybe Spam] Re: [Wlug] Anyone running Linux on Pegasos?

by Martin, Eric J.

I put Linux on my Beige G3... -----Original Message----- From: Webmaster [mailto:webmaster@atari-users.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 11:04 PM To: Worcester Linux Users Group Subject: [Maybe Spam] Re: [Wlug] Anyone running Linux on Pegasos? A Pegasos is a PPC based system. MorphOS is somewhat of an Amiga OS clone. The Pegasos has had Linux ported to it. But my question for Pete is.. think Genesi (Pegasos company) will be around a year from now? check out http://www.pegasosppc.com fro info on the board. Rob Mahlert Charles R. Anderson wrote: >On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 07:33:28PM -0500, Pete Wason wrote: > > >>Just curious... I have a Peg I, but I'm running MorphOS. >> >>Boots in about 4 seconds ;-) >> >>Pete Wason >> >> > >What's a Pegasos? > >Looks like we have a volunteer to present at the next meeting :) >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

20 years, 4 months

Re: [Wlug] New to the group

by Christian Roy

Yes, there is parking on both the quad (front of the building) and street (back of the building). There shouldn't be too many problems getting a spot at that hour, I believe. (I live on campus, so I'm not certain how hard it is to get a spot). - Christian Roy On 4/11/07, Tal Cohen <wlug(a)cohen123.com> wrote: > > Doh! Your right, I was being lazy. > > Not being familiar with WPI, is there parking near by? > > Tal > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Frysinger [mailto:vapier@gentoo.org] > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 10:16 AM > To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > Cc: Tal Cohen > Subject: Re: [Wlug] New to the group > > On Wednesday 11 April 2007, Tal Cohen wrote: > > I am new to this group. I want to find out when the meetings are, and > > when. > > if you got on the mailing list then you must have seen the website right ? > > http://wlug.org/ > -mike > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >

18 years, 1 month

Re: [Wlug] WLUG's membership in BUG

by Andy Stewart

HI Everybody, I've enjoyed sitting back for a couple of days, resting my carpal tunnels, and reading the opinions of the WLUG membership. I would like to note that I have expressed WLUG's general displeasure with BUG to the president of BUG, Rick Zach. He told me that the calendar issue would be cleared up if we chose to renew our membership. Clint Moyer is quite correct when he points out that WLUG can afford the $50 if we so choose, but unfortunately we're not at five figures in the bank (unless you count the two figures for cents). :-) Certainly, if we did decide to renew, I would attend any/all BUG meetings, insure that WLUG had a presence at the MegaMeeting, etc. I did this last year after we paid our initial $50 membership fee. I'll sit back a bit longer and wait for any other comments from WLUG members on this topic. I'll probably close the topic by this weekend, unless the discussion is lively at that time. Later, Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

22 years, 9 months

4th annual Installfest a complete success!

by Keller, Tim

Hey All, The installfest was a complete success! Statistics: Total Installs: 8 Percentage successful: 100% Installs that were a no-show: ~2 (both Stratus employees, I'll be hunting them down later today...) Pizzas Ordered: 6 Percentage devoured: 100% Number of junker pc's that one installee cannibalized to make one working machine: 3 Raffle Info: Congratulations to Colin Novick and Bill Mills-Curran who both won copies of "Linux System Administration: A Users Guide." The Installers: Andy Stewart Al Butler Brian Waite Chuck Anderson David Lugwig Mani Sundaram Marc Hughes (If I've forgotten anybody, just send an addendum...) Other Stuff: Someone asked about the goodies CD's... There are a couple of things. 1. If Chuck has the space, I'd gladly upload it and he can mount it on a loopback. 2. I will cut a couple more copies (I might add some more stuff) and bring them to the meeting on Thursday. If you specify want a copy, drop me a line and I'll make you up one explicitly. This year was a resounding success and I'm hoping that the 5th annual will be even better! Later! Tim.

23 years, 3 months

Re: [Wlug] Pizza and snacks...

by Tim Keller

Awesome!!! Thanks Robert! On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Robert Schwein <robert.athol.mass(a)gmail.com> wrote: > The IEEE has put this meeting information out to it's members. There may > be a boat-load of people there tonight. > > Bob > > On 6/9/2016 1:17 PM, Tim Keller wrote: > > Hey, > > Jon has to bug out early tonight. My plan is to bring a pizza for John > and his buddy as well as bring along some snacks for us and we'll go out > afterwards. > > If the crowd is large enough we might have to change venues, but I figure > we'll roll with it. > > Thanks, > Tim. > > -- > I am leery of the allegiances of any politician who refers to their > constituents as "consumers". > > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing listWlug@mail.wlug.orghttp://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > -- I am leery of the allegiances of any politician who refers to their constituents as "consumers".

8 years, 11 months

Re: DECStation 3100 on a RPi2040...

by Jon "maddog" Hall

Kevin, I found two articles that gave more technical information on the exact problem. First of all is this issue of the chip that was used to supply "serial control" of various devices. Many people might not think about it, but the keyboard and mice are also "serial devices" and used up two ports of the four port DC7085 gate array: These systems have four asynchronous serial lines that are provided by a > DC7085 gate array. Of the four serial lines, only the third line has the > required modem control signals to support a modem. A 4-pin MMJ connector is > provided for the keyboard line, a 7-pin DIN connector for mouse line, and > two 6-pin MMJ connectors for printer and modem lines. > > Now we put in who articles about what lines and pins were actually implemented: http://www.vanade.com/~blc/DS3100/pinouts.html https://www.tuhs.org/Usenet/comp.unix.ultrix/1991-May/005327.html Now it appears as if the DS 3000 had two "serial ports", one designated for a modem and one designated for a printer. Reading them brings back more of the "issues". One issue is that many Unix systems were not used just as a desktop system, but as "servers" too. A prime example of this was that a VMS Workstation was only allowed a single user to be logged on at one time. A multi-user license was not allowed for VMS Workstations through a dictum put forward by VAX product management. This, of course, was not what Unix people (and particularly Sun customers) would do. They might have a single person using the keyboard, mouse and main screen, but have several others logged onto the system over TCP/IP. *You can now skip ahead to more about the issue of serial ports, but you will be missing an interesting part of DEC history:* For years DEC refused to sell a multi-user license to workstation users. We even had a separate product called Ultrix-32w which was both the Ultrix-32 software plus the graphical server and came with a two user license (so either uucp or the network administrator) could log in at the same time as the user at the main keyboard. However, no other general user could log in at the same time. So the base Ultrix-32w came with that two-user license, and there was no "upgrade". Eventually I found this "rule" so damaging to Digital's Unix business that I decided to fight it. This "rule" might have made sense in the original days of 1 million instructions/second CPUs and unaccelerated graphics, but made NO sense with the much faster and accelerated graphics. We were being whipped senseless by Sun's marketing team. So I traded this "rule" down, and finally found that it had been generated by Jesse Lipcon, at that time a VP of workstations. I called him up and explained the situation. "Oh, I NEVER meant that to apply to UNIX Workstations...only VMS Workstations" said Jesse. "The Unix market is much different." So I held a meeting the next week. I picked the largest meeting room, expecting there would be much argument. I made a huge presentation about the whole issue and how much business we were missing. I pointed out that it was really up to the customer how many people or processes would be on that system, and DEC should not be limiting it artificially. The day of the meeting, the room was packed. There were people standing in the hallways. I stood up at the front, made the presentation, and asked if anyone had objections. No one raised their hand. "Then why are you here?" I asked. "We just came to see the fireworks." was the answer. "Then Digital now sells multi-user workstations." I declared. Of course things were a little more complicated than that, since there were changes to documentation, licensing, and a whole project around adding another graphics tube, keyboard and mouse to the hardware (the "Multi-User Caylith" project), but we charged ahead with the multi-user system. *Back to the serial ports:* So the VMS viewpoint of workstations you *might* have a printer and a modem hooked to the workstation, but more likely these would be attached to a server someplace to be shared with other workstation users. From a Unix standpoint, your workstation might ALSO be a server, and might have a printer and modem OR TWO MODEMS attached to the workstation, On either serial port they worked fairly well at lower transfer speeds with handshaking, but with higher speeds the handshaking tended to break down, especially if you hooked a second modem up to the "printer port". Another issue was the lack of the "CD" line, that tells the system the modem has lost connection, and requires that the software on the system recognize this through a timeout. This violated the concept of "DECstandard 052", a standard that was developed for modems hooked up to DEC's systems. Before the adoption of "DECstandard 052" in order to hook a modem up to a computer and a country's telephone lines you had to test every modem with every piece of hardware and every operating system in every country. This was not only a very expensive process, but took a long time after operating system releases. By developing DECstandard 052 the company made this a lot easier. The hardware and operating system groups only had to certify against DECstandard 052, and customers could then connect up any "standard" modems and know that they had the modem control signals to reliably interact with the modems of the country. The DECstation 3100 did not meet DECstandard 052: DEC STD 052-0 Operational Requirements for Serial Terminals and Computer Interfaces Operating as DTEs Connected to EIA RS-232-C or CCITT V.28 Modems - Part: EL-00052-00 - 1981 We've run both UUCP and SLIP on 3100s here; the modem-control "problems" > really aren't that serious a problem unless you are a high-security sort of > place. What is missing is the CD line that lets the modem tell the computer > that it has lost its connection. This means that when the other end (or the > phone company ;-) decides to hang up on you, the modem knows about it right > away, but the software has to use a timeout mechanism, because the modem's > attempt to say "Hey, we just lost the connection" does not get through. > > This allowed another call to arrive at the same port, and perhaps gain control of it without having to authenticate. Unlikely? Yes. Impossible? No. Using the printer port for a modem made the issue even worse. After all, you did not expect the printer to talk back to you at high speed. So now you know the REST of the story. md On Sun, Jul 7, 2024 at 1:32 PM Kevin Stratton <kstratton(a)fastmail.us> wrote: > I found this information interesting. > > The statement > > "To save a couple of pennies per system the > > VAX hardware designers determined that having full hardware modem > > control (DECstandard 52) on the board was not needed, because "very > > few workstation users hook a modem up to their serial line". > > has two different meanings (to me) in the context of this discussion. They > are: > > 1) RI and DCD are not implemented in hardware (Ring indicator and data > carrier detect) > > 2) A subset of RTS, CTS, DSR, DTR as well as RI and DCD are not > implemented in hardware. > > Does anyone want to clarify this in greater detail? Just curious. > > > On 7/6/2024 8:59 PM, Jon "maddog" Hall via WLUG wrote: > > John: > > That's an interesting statement. I would think it was the same case > and port setup, but a different motherboard since you couldn't just > slot a MIPS processor into a VAXstation processor. > > > That is why I said "based". "Based" means that you did not have to > requalify a lot of the parts, that you could use a lot of the same Bill of > Materials....it does not mean you use exactly the same PCB. In the case > of the VAXstation/DECstation 3100 that meant we used the same serial io > chips and did not provide the hardware flow control. > > Yes! It's coming back to me, the 3100s were horrible for serial, >> though I think they had fixed it for the 5000 series systems, since >> the DECstation 5000 and the DECserver 5100 were identical, except the >> DECStation had a graphics card and cost 10-20% _less_ than the >> DECstation 5000. So we bought DECStations and used them as servers. > > > The server groups were different engineers, and the 5000s were designed > after the DECstation 3100/2100 series. > > Actually we MIGHT have caught the issue with the serial port for the > DECstation 3100/2100 because I brought up the issue in a hardware meeting > and was assured that it had been fixed because (and I can still hear this > person's voice in my head) the DECstation was a REAL UNIX MACHINE. I > should have found that person later and beaten him to death. > > David: > >> Actually, Cutler was already in trouble with management because of the >> Prism project. Prism was the first try at building a RISC machine (this >> was in the 1985-1986 time frame) and it was managed by Dave Cutler. >> Unfortunately, Dave was not a good administrator. He was doing a very bad >> job of managing the project and doing a very bad job of keeping management >> up to date on what was going on. Finally, management cancelled Prism and >> that is when they decided to go with the MIPS architecture. >> >> That is not what I experienced. I will not comment on Dave's skills as > an administrator or manager of the project. I do know that he had the > very ambitious project of doing the next-generation architecture and the > next generation operating system. He wanted a micro-kernel based system > with "personalities", one personality being VMS and the other personality > being Unix. One issue he had was when there was a clash between > personalities he would always favor VMS and therefore the Unix personality > would not be "perfect". I felt this was a mistake, since Unix people did > not tolerate things that did not smell like Unix. VMS people could have > been led over to a new environment over time since DEC controlled the path > with VMS. > > The reason I know this is that I personally interviewed with David Cutler > for the position of Unix Product Manager for his new operating system. > The interview was going fine until I tried to explain to Dave why his > strategy was wrong and he had to make the Unix side really compatible. > Then things got ugly, as David really did not like to be told he was wrong. > > Ken did have the bad habit of cutting off Dave's development money, then > giving it back to him again. I seem to remember that Dave was still going > full steam ahead while the PMAX was being developed, which is one reason > why he was caught so flat-footed when PMAX was announced. It was kept > REALLY SECRET. It probably did not help that Ken reportedly asked David > in a gleeful tone if the new chip would be as fast as the PMAX.... > > "Will it be THIS FAST, Dave?" was the reported question. > > It is also my belief that the Alpha chip came directly from Dave's work on > the PRISM, and that Windows NT came directly from David's work on the > microkernel with personalities. DEC never "decided to go with MIPS" > except as a stop-gap measure for Unix. If DEC had "decided to go with > MIPS" they would have ported VMS to it, and since that never happened, it > was obvious that DEC had not embraced MIPS. > > md > > > On Sat, Jul 6, 2024 at 3:27 PM John Stoffel <john(a)stoffel.org> wrote: > >> >>>>> "Jon" == Jon \"maddog\" Hall via WLUG <wlug(a)lists.wlug.org> writes: >> >> > The DECstation 3100 (aka the PMAX) was a system based on the same >> > motherboard as the VAXstation 3100, except with a MIPS processor. >> > It was the first time that Digital had built a system using another >> > company's chip architecture. >> >> That's an interesting statement. I would think it was the same case >> and port setup, but a different motherboard since you couldn't just >> slot a MIPS processor into a VAXstation processor. >> >> > We had a choice between supporting the MIPS R2000 chip as "big >> > endian" or "little endian". We chose to support "little endian" to >> > be compatible with PDP-11s, VAXen and Intel chips, rather than be >> > compatible with other manufacturers. This, in my mind, was very >> > important since it let us share data over NFS and give greater >> > compatibility with programs and libraries of applications already >> > running on other Unix-like systems such as Ultrix, BSD, etc. Sun >> > experienced this grief when they ported Solaris off the big endian >> > Motorola and SPARC chips to little endian Intel. >> >> > One of the few issues of the DECstation 3100 (and 2100, known as the >> > "PMIN" after that) was that the serial I/O port did not support >> > hardware handshaking. To save a couple of pennies per system the >> > VAX hardware designers determined that having full hardware modem >> > control (DECstandard 52) on the board was not needed, because "very >> > few workstation users hook a modem up to their serial line". What >> > they meant was that "very few VMS workstation users hooked a modem >> > up to their serial line", opting for DECnet to handle their >> > networking. Therefore the pins necessary to support hardware modem >> > control were missing from the DECstation product lines. >> >> Yes! It's coming back to me, the 3100s were horrible for serial, >> though I think they had fixed it for the 5000 series systems, since >> the DECstation 5000 and the DECserver 5100 were identical, except the >> DECStation had a graphics card and cost 10-20% _less_ than the >> DECstation 5000. So we bought DECStations and used them as servers. >> :-) >> >> I used to live and breathe the DEC options catalog, which was >> something like an inch thick book in purple (maybe blue? maybe changed >> each year?) with all the various options and configurations you could >> get. >> >> > Unix users, on the other hand, often had modems hooked up to their >> > workstation, to handle cu(1), uucp(1) and other serial line >> > protocols. We eventually got around this by better refining >> > software modem control, but it was painful. >> >> The EE department had Sun 1s at WPI, and they have the 9600 baud >> bitnet connection running of a VAX 11/780 at the time. >> >> > The proposal, design and release of the DECstation 3100 was a >> > top-secret project inside of DEC, kept secret from even many people >> > in the Digital Unix group in Nashua, New Hampshire. The >> > development of the system was done in Palo Alto's WorkStation >> > Engineering group and the software engineering was done in the >> > Western Software Labs in Palo Alto, albeit by taking key engineers >> > from the Nashua facility and transplanting them temporarily to Palo >> > Alto. >> >> > The implementation was kept so secret that it caught Dave Cutler, >> > then working on DEC's next-generation operating system and chips, by >> > surprise when it debuted at a Board Meeting in Maynard, >> > Massachusetts. Shortly after that board meeting Mr. Cutler left >> > Digital and moved (with some of his team) to Microsoft. >> >> Do you think that was just the straw that broke the camel's back? >> >> > The DECstations only were manufactured for a couple of years, as the >> > DEC Alpha processor replaced MIPS in Digital's lineup. Although >> > originally promised that OSF/1 would be ported to the DECstation >> > line, this port was dropped due to realizing that there would never >> > be an application base to support the customers of a DECstation >> > OSF/1 port. It was better for ISVs and customers to maintain the >> > Ultrix base for the DECstations than to split the base into Ultrix >> > and OSF/1. >> >> Yeah, we had a ton of DECstations and a bunch of various early model >> Alphas at WPI which we beta tested for DEC. The AS2100 with 8 DEC >> StorageWorks canisters (which Netapp used on their early F220, F330, >> F740 NAS systems) holding 3.5" disks, dual ported, hot-swapable. Nice >> gear. >> >> The move from Ultrix to DEC OSF/1 was a bit painful, but not terrible >> as I recall, but I'm sure I've blocked all the bad memories from then. >> >> Thanks for the walk down memory lane! >> John >> > > _______________________________________________ > WLUG mailing list -- wlug(a)lists.wlug.org > To unsubscribe send an email to wlug-leave(a)lists.wlug.org > Create Account: https://wlug.mailman3.com/accounts/signup/ > Change Settings: https://wlug.mailman3.com/postorius/lists/wlug.lists.wlug.org/ > Web Forum/Archive: https://wlug.mailman3.com/hyperkitty/list/wlug@lists.wlug.org/message/UUCPQ… > >

11 months

looking forward to the 15th!

by Wes Allen

Hi gang, I'm looking forward to the 15th of January so I can finally say good-bye to Brother Bill on my iPAQ. I got a couple of questions..... Has anyone used the perl-script that syncs the ipaq and evolution? Other then the notorious, "Don't run this while Evolution is open" are there any other problems? Which CF wireless nics work with linux on the iPAQ. I'm seriously thinking that I'm going to get the cf-plus expansion pack and a wireless nic for my iPAQ (linux's true strength is networking, right?). So which one's work? And, sadly, how easy is it to reverse the process? On the off-chance that I can't stand OPIE as a working environment. I've read the howto, how hard is it in "real life." It might be fun to invite some of the people from the compaq lab to the meeting if anyone who worked on ipaq linux is based in the Worcester area.... Wes -- ------ This message may be signed using GPG, for my public key please send me a message with "Key Request" in the subject line.

22 years, 5 months

Re: [Wlug] Test needed on declared-ill Modem. Who has a lab?

by E Johnson

PS: This evening, Ch4rter Billing has deleted the upcoming service charge for this morning's tech call. Amazing how it took 2 guys to check line levels, then hang one moden where my other modem was, + plug in one coax & one wall wart , then make 30-sec call to the office to get their repacement modem provisioned & watch for blinking green lights. 2 guys. If this happens to you (they discontinued your router & required you to use theirs), don't eat the bill. it does work fine, FWIW, but not impressed. --EJ On 20 September 2012 19:11, E Johnson <iris.gates(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Umm. Non-happy camper. ISP things have changed here, without me being > informed. Recently (2 days ago) my modem started rebooting every little > while. Zillions of T3 & T4 timouts in the modem log, Signal lavels were > perfect when it was online. I own this thing, a Motorola SB6120 purchased > late June 2010. It has not been abused. > > I am in Woosta & we all know the ISP available here. 2 techs showed up > mid-morning, to diagnose and fix this issue. One guy stood there watching; > the other guy "did stuff." They checked the signal levels on incoming line > from the box connected to the pole our back, and declared my moden Dying. > They talked to each other (not me) & seemed to think I was Granny-in-a-Box, > until they let me say more than one sentence. > > These guys also confessed that since July 202, Ch4rter does not "allow" > customers to own/run their own modems. Their consolation prize is that they > don't charge modem rental fees any more. (it's not on the bill, anyway, > FWIW). They mumbled some other mumbo jumbo and fled 5 seconds after they > learned I have my own router too, & didn't care if the modem and router > were yet in communication. They just said "better reboot" and they "no > longer" service "wireless" --which I am not running except when certain > visitors appear. I think they meant they don't diagnose routers, which has > always been the policy, and which is fine. Internal LAN issues aren't their > problem. > > So now I have a modem which may or may not be sick, but no way to test it > to make sure. Is there anyone here who can take a look at this thing & test > to see if it's Really Dying, or if Ch4rter deaded it with their latest > firmware revision of their firmware & policy change in July 2012? > > An interesting meeting theme sometime might be how to get the Verizon FIOS > in Worcester. Several years ago I watched Verizon trucks & Verizon moles > installing their fiber optics in manholes all over town. Ch4rter is running > on Verizon's infrastructure. Ch4rter internet has been working better since > then, but we're still locked out of the option to use verizon. Is this a > topic of interest to anyone? If so, I'll lead the discussion and even buy > the Pizz4. To me, this is a Large Pizza problem. > > Another interesting but probably futile discussion might center around why > we have suddenly been deprived of the ability to watch the behavior and > effectiveness of our modems, which serve internet coming from our ISP.. I > was not informed of this -- was anyone who is just a 'regular' customer? > > Meanwhile, if anyone has a test lab or whatever, where they can test my > declared-dead modem, please let me know. Otherwise it's probably a > giveaway, or another piece of Landfill Fodder. I can bring to a meeting & > can wait for results. > > Thanks & happy pizzaz, > Liz J > > > > > > >

12 years, 8 months

Re: Stuck in traffic

by John Stoffel

>>>>> "Althea" == Althea Shaheen <lists(a)altheashaheen.com> writes: > I would love to hear more from you John about what your experience > is with TrueNAS Enterprise versus NetApp, as I am looking at the > same options myself. We have used NetApp for longer than I have been > around but the cost of it is a whole different level than what I > imagine TrueNAS would be. I've used Scale personally and Core for > backup systems at work, but the HA/failover is what I am most > curious about if we went the route of Enterprise. With Netapp... it's solid. Rock solid. It just works. Failover works, no interrupptions with clients. It's really really really solid. I love them. And you can split things up and add tons of VLANs, volumes, etc. Snapshots, ESX integration if you want to go that route, etc. But it's not cheap. You pay for what you get. It's annoying that they now do capacity based licensing. TrueNAS. It's easy enough to use (though the CLI sucks, I've got a bunch of scripts to pull data out using the API with python). I'm using the legacy 13.0 Enterprise BSD based stuff. TrueNAS recently moved to the linux based SCALE edition, but I have no experience with it. So far performance is good, it's ZFS, and it just runs. But we're not putting it under huge performance stress, so I can't talk to how well it scales or performs. I've used Netapps for 26+) years now. Super solid systems. I love how you can grow/shrink volumes (NFS/CIFS) on the fly. No hassles. TrueNAS is fixed volumes you can expand only. So you need to look at Scale Enterprise and see what they will quote you for support, and maybe you can get in a test system to see how failover works. In my case, since TrueNAS Enterprise is Active/Passive, failover takes too long in my book. Sorry, this reply is all over the place as I free associate my reply. > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024, at 09:36, John Stoffel via WLUG wrote: >>>>>>> "Tim" == Tim Keller via WLUG <wlug(a)lists.wlug.org> writes: >> >>> I'm currently stuck in traffic I should be there for about 7:10 >> >> So how did the meeting go? Any comments or thoughts on ZFS and how >> it's useful and how it can be abused? >> >> I'm using ZFS on a TrueNAS Enterprise cluster, which works, but has >> it's issues, mostly around failover speed. Been spoiled by Netapps >> for too many years. >> >> I've also managed to make Oracle branded ZFS appliances fall over due >> to load, so I have reservations about ZFS to this day. >> >> I do like the *ideas* behind it, and some of the powerful features it >> has. But the layering violations make me worry. >> >> Just go look at the problems btrfs has had trying to do it's own RAID5 >> instead of just layering on top of MD RAID5 (which I also admit has had >> problems too! Nothing is perfect...). >> >> The goals of ZFS in terms of file content checksums are awesome, I >> really like that. I just wish there was a better way to actually >> shrink ZFS filesystems (even if done as any offline process) without >> jumping through all kinds of hoops. >> >> Anyway, I hope to see you all at the next meeting! >> John >> _______________________________________________ >> WLUG mailing list -- wlug(a)lists.wlug.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to wlug-leave(a)lists.wlug.org >> Create Account: https://wlug.mailman3.com/accounts/signup/ >> Change Settings: >> https://wlug.mailman3.com/postorius/lists/wlug.lists.wlug.org/ >> Web Forum/Archive: >> https://wlug.mailman3.com/hyperkitty/list/wlug@lists.wlug.org/message/SQAQ6…

7 months, 4 weeks

WLUG search results for query "meeting"