| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
GrimReaper
n00b
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Posts: 57
Location: Leeds, UK
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:09 am Post subject: Best kernel to use for a raid fileserver? |
 |
|
Normally for a server I just use the vanilla 2.4 kernel or the vanilla 2.4 kernel patched with grsecurity if it's accessible outside of the network. (ie. webserver)
However, whilst I'm bootstrapping this server i've been thinking of what other kernels are out there?
I've always been the school of thought that for a server you use the vanilla kernel or a kernel with the least number of necessary patches in order to have maximum stability.
Are there any other kernels out there (for example gs-sources) that people would recommend? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moocha
Watchman
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 5722
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd go with vanilla 2.4.20 (with security patches applied, see ptrace hole & friends), and with SGI's 1.3.1 XFS patches (using XFS file systems of course) - http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/ (I wouldn't rely on the XFS that comes with the kernel, the original SGI sources are better).
_________________
Military Commissions Act of 2006: http://tinyurl.com/jrcto
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- attributed to Benjamin Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GrimReaper
n00b
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Posts: 57
Location: Leeds, UK
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
The raid fileserver is being used for internal use only.
I should have mentioned that.
It's being used by two mac guys and me. (Netatalk 2 and Samba 3 on it, that's all) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
moocha
Watchman
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 5722
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, what are you looking for? If you're looking for stability, robustness and high throughput, then the setup I mentioned above is a good one. If not - why bother with a RAID array?
_________________
Military Commissions Act of 2006: http://tinyurl.com/jrcto
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- attributed to Benjamin Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GrimReaper
n00b
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Posts: 57
Location: Leeds, UK
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
The raid is for reliability, a lot is being stored on the machine and we don't want to lose anything if a hard disk fails.
I was most likely going to go with a bogstandard vanilla kernel, just curious as to what peoples opinions are on whats best for the setup.
I am currently planning to use Reiser for the raid, any reasons why you suggested xfs? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
moocha
Watchman
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 5722
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, I suggested XFS (the original SGI patches, *not* the vanilla kernel modified XFS implementation) for its rock solid reliability.
_________________
Military Commissions Act of 2006: http://tinyurl.com/jrcto
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- attributed to Benjamin Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
