Search Results

Search found 10417 results on 417 pages for 'large'.

Page 16/417 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

• Ruby Large HTML getting error, limit to header size

  - by Joe Stein

  def mailTo(subject,msg,folks) begin Net::SMTP.start('localhost', 25) do |smtp| smtp.send_message "MIME-Version: 1.0\nContent-type: text/html\nSubject: #{subject}\n#{msg}\n#{DateTime.now}\n", '[email protected]', folks end rescue => e puts "Emailing Sending Error - #{e}" end end when the HTML is VERY large I get this exception Emailing Sending Error - 552 5.6.0 Headers too large (32768 max) how can i get a larger html above max to work with Net::SMTP in Ruby

  Read the article

• Ruby Large HTML emails getting error, limit to header size

  - by Joe Stein

  def mailTo(subject,msg,folks) begin Net::SMTP.start('localhost', 25) do |smtp| smtp.send_message "MIME-Version: 1.0\nContent-type: text/html\nSubject: #{subject}\n#{msg}\n#{DateTime.now}\n", '[email protected]', folks end rescue => e puts "Emailing Sending Error - #{e}" end end when the HTML is VERY large I get this exception Emailing Sending Error - 552 5.6.0 Headers too large (32768 max) how can i get a larger html above max to work with Net::SMTP in Ruby

  Read the article

• writing large excel spreadsheets

  - by pstanton

  has anybody found a library that works well with large spreadsheets? I've tried apache's POI but it fails miserably working with large files - both reading and writing. It uses massive amounts of memory leaving you needing a supercomputer to parse or create a 20+mb spreadsheet. Surely there is a more memory efficient way and someone has written it?!

  Read the article

• C++ program to calculate large factorials

  - by xbonez

  How can I write a c++ program to calculate large factorials. Example, if I want to calculate (100!) / (99!), we know the answer is 100, but if i calculate the factorials of the numerator and denominator individually, both the numbers are gigantically large.

  Read the article

• Using IF LARGE when there is text in column

  - by Ray

  I have an excel column of numbers and texts. I tried to use "IF LARGE" to find top 3 numbers of the column (A1 to A7), and return "Yes" to the cells right next to the top 3 (in column B). But unfortunately, the cells next to the texts also returned "Yes". This is the data: 0.2 0.3 Yes 0.5 Yes 0.1 0.8 Yes asdf Yes jklm Yes This is the code for cell B7: =IF(A7>=LARGE($A$1:$A$7,3),"Yes","") Any suggestions to fix this? thanks in advance

  Read the article

• Request Entity Too Large error while uploading files of more than 128KB over SSL

  - by tushar

  We have a web portal setup on Java spring framework. It running on tomcat app server. Portal is served through apache web server connected to tomcat through JK connector. Entire portal is HTTPS enabled using 443 port of apache. Apache version is : Apache/2.4.2 (Unix). it is the latest stable version of apache web server. Whenever we try to upload files more than 128 KB into the portal, We are facing 413 error: Request Entity Too Large The requested resource /teamleadchoachingtracking/doFileUpload does not allow request data with POST requests, or the amount of data provided in the request exceeds the capacity limit. In the apache error log we get the following errors: AH02018: request body exceeds maximum size (131072) for SSL buffer AH02257: could not buffer message body to allow SSL renegotiation to proceed We did search over google and there were suggestions to put SSLRenegBufferSize as some high value like 10MB. Based on these suggestions, we had put the following entry in virtualhost section of httpd config file: SSLRenegBufferSize 10486000 But still the error persists. Also we have specified SSLVerifyClient none, but still renegotiation is happening. This is a very inconsistent and frustrating error. Any help will be highly appreciated. Many thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Chunking large rsync transfers?

  - by Gabe Martin-Dempesy

  We use rsync to update a mirror of our primary file server to an off-site colocated backup server. One of the issues we currently have is that our file server has 1TB of mostly smaller files (in the 10-100kb range), and when we're transferring this much data, we often end up with the connection being dropped several hours into the transfer. Rsync doesn't have a resume/retry feature that simply reconnects to the server to pickup where it left off -- you need to go through the file comparison process, which ends up being very length with the amount of files we have. The solution that's recommended to get around is to split up your large rsync transfer into a series of smaller transfers. I've figured the best way to do this is by first letter of the top-level directory names, which doesn't give us a perfectly even distribution, but is good enough. I'd like to confirm if my methodology for doing this is sane, or if there's a more simple way to accomplish the goal. To do this, I iterate through A-Z, a-z, 0-9 to pick a one character $prefix. Initially I was thinking of just running rsync -av --delete --delete-excluded --exclude "*.mp3" "src/$prefix*" dest/ (--exclude "*.mp3" is just an example, as we have a more lengthy exclude list for removing things like temporary files) The problem with this is that any top-level directories in dest/ that are no longer present present on src will not get picked up by --delete. To get around this, I'm instead trying the following: rsync \ --filter 'S /$prefix*' \ --filter 'R /$prefix*' \ --filter 'H /*' \ --filter 'P /*' \ -av --delete --delete-excluded --exclude "*.mp3" src/ dest/ I'm using the show and hide over include and exclude, because otherwise the --delete-excluded will delete anything that doesn't match $prefix. Is this the most effective way of splitting the rsync into smaller chunks? Is there a more effective tool, or a flag that I've missed, that might make this more simple?

  Read the article

• Viewing a large-resolution VNC server through a small-resolution viewer in Ubuntu

  - by Madiyaan Damha

  I have two Ubuntu computers, one with a large screen resolution (1920x1600) that is running default ubuntu vnc server. I have another computer that has a resolution of about 1200x1024 that I use to vnc into the server (I use the default ubuntu vnc viewer). Now everything works fine except there are annoying scrollbars in the viewer because the server's desktop resolution is so much higher than the viewer's. Is there a way to: 1) Scale the server's desktop down to the viewer's resolution. I know there will be a loss of image quality, but I am willing to try it out. This should be something like how windows media player or vlc scales down the window (and does some interpolation of pixels). 2) Automatically shrink the resolution of the server to the client's when I connect and scale the resolution back when I disconnect. This seems like a less attractive solution. 3) Any other solution that gurus out there use? I am sure someone has experienced this before (annoying scroll bars) so there must be a solution out there. Thanks,

  Read the article

• Sharing large (multi-Gb) files with clients

  - by Tim Long

  I wasn't sure if this was the best place for this question, but I think it is squarely in the realm of the IT admin so that's the reason I put it here. We need to share large files (several Gigabytes) with external clients. We need a simple way of reliably and automatically publishing these files so that clients can then download them. Our organization has Windows desktops and a Windows SBS 2011 server. Sharing from our server is probably suboptimal from the client's perspective, because of the low upstream bandwidth of typical ADSL (around 1 Mbps) - it would take all day (9 hours for a 4Gb file) for the client to download the file. Uploading to a 3rd party sever is good for the client but painful for us, because we then have to deal with a multi-hour upload. Uploading to a third-part server would be less problematic if it could be made reliable and automatic, e.g. something like a Groove/SharePoint Workspace, simply drop the file in and wait for it to synchronize - but Groove has a 2Gb limit which is not big enough. So ideally I'd like a service with the following attributes: Must work for files of at least 5Gb, preferably 10Gb Once the transfer is started, it must be reliable (i.e. not sensitive to disconnections and service outages) and completely automatic Ideally, the sender would get a notification when the transfer completes. Has to work with Windows based systems. Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Viewing a large-resolution VNC server through a small-resolution viewer in Ubuntu

  - by Madiyaan Damha

  I have two Ubuntu computers, one with a large screen resolution (1920x1600) that is running the default Ubuntu VNC server. I have another computer that has a resolution of about 1200x1024 that I use to VNC into the server using the default Ubuntu VNC viewer). Now everything works fine except there are annoying scrollbars in the viewer because the server's desktop resolution is so much higher than the viewer's. Is there a way to: Scale the server's desktop down to the viewer's resolution. I know there will be a loss of image quality, but I am willing to try it out. This should be something like how Windows Media Player or VLC scales down the window (and does some interpolation of pixels). Automatically shrink the resolution of the server to the client's when I connect and scale the resolution back when I disconnect. This seems like a less attractive solution. Any other solution that gurus out there use? I am sure someone has experienced this before (annoying scroll bars) so there must be a solution out there.

  Read the article

• Exim and receiving email with large recipient lists

  - by AceJordin

  I have Exim4 running on Debian configured to receive mail on multiple domains. Exim is set to forward all email that is received to one of the domains to another box. This box is configured with a catchall mailbox that everything goes in. My issue is that when an email is sent to the domain, which contains a large amount of addresses (all to the same domain, but different users), Exim will receive the single email over multiple connections. This means that the catchall mailbox receives multiple copies of the single email all containing the full recipient list. For example, I was able to reproduce it by sending an email from my gmail account that contained 500 recipients (eg [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; etc. for a total of 500). Exim received the message as 20 messages (25 recipients per; appears to be a gmail server setting). So the catchall mailbox received 20 messages, each containing all 500 addresses. I'm pretty sure I understand why this is happening but is there any way I can configure Exim to only receive it once, or to combine it into one? Is there anything that can be done on my end, or am I at the mercy of the sending email server? This is causing havoc with a process that polls the catchall mailbox and parses each recipient in each email.

  Read the article

• Two large, linked Excel files take 30 minutes to save, except in VMWare environment

  - by Gerald L

  I support some tax consultants who love to use Excel when they should probably be using Access. Anyway, they have created two Excel files, A and B. File B has cells linked to file A. File A is 27 MB and file B is 16 MB. One worksheet has roughly 1 million rows and there is another worksheet doing a whole bunch of SUMIF on the 1 million rows. Not the best idea, but whatever. Both Excel files open and recalculate within a reasonable amount of time (1-2 minutes). For a files that large, this is acceptable. Here is the problem: Once you change a cell, and save the file B, it takes a solid 30 minutes to save the file, and the processors are going full speed. I've tried this on 6 different machines, all running Windows XP SP3 with Office 2007 SP2 and all patches. The specs vary from one machine with 512 MB or RAM to a machine with 4 GB of RAM and quad processors. Same result every time. Here is the clincher: If I do this same save operation on a VMWare virtual machine, the file gets saved in 1 minute. I've tried this with my ESX servers at the office, my Mac Fusion at home, and VMWare workstation at the office. It does not matter how much RAM the virtual machine has... it saves in about 1 minute every time. Does anybody have any idea why this is happening and how to fix?

  Read the article

• copy large LVM volume(14TB) from one server to another

  - by bruce

  recently,I have to copy a very large LVM volume()rom server A to server B. Below is the filesystem of server A and server B - server A [root@AVDVD-Filer ~]# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/vg_avdvdfiler-lv_root 16T 14T 1.5T 91% / tmpfs 3.0G 0 3.0G 0% /dev/shm /dev/cciss/c0d0p1 194M 23M 162M 13% /boot /dev/mapper/vg_avdvdfiler-test 2.3T 201M 2.1T 1% /test /dev/sr0 3.3G 3.3G 0 100% /mnt server B [root@localhost ~]# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/VolGroup-LogVol00 20G 2.5G 16G 14% / tmpfs 3.0G 0 3.0G 0% /dev/shm /dev/cciss/c0d0p1 194M 23M 162M 13% /boot /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00 16T 133M 15T 1% /xiangao/lv1 /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol01 4.7T 190M 4.5T 1% /xiangao/lv2 I want to copy LVM volume /dev/mapper/vg_avdvdfiler-lv_root on server A to LVM volume /dev/mapper/VolGroup00-LogVol00 on server B . The server A and server B is in the same IP segment. IN the LVM volume on server A , there is all average 500M avi wmv mp4 etc. I tried mount /dev/mapper/vg_avdvdfiler-lv_root on server A to server B through NFS , then use cp command copy. It is clear I faild . Because the LVM volume is too big , I do not have good idea . I hope a good solution here. I'm a chinese, my english is very pool. sorry thanks everyone!

  Read the article

• Better approach to archiving large amounts of original video footage using optical media (DVD/Blu-ra

  - by Rob

  This question is to share my experience as well as ask for suggestions for better methods. Along with 2 friends, I completed the making of a short documentary film in 2006. Clip is at: http://www.youtube.com/mediamotioninvision The film was edited in Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 on Windows XP. More details and screenshot here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/smilingrobbie/1350235514/ ( note this is not intended to be a plug, we've moved on from this initial learning curve project ;) ) The film is in 4:3 standard definition 720x576 PAL format. As well as retaining the final 30minute film, I wanted to keep all original files that assembled together to make the film. The footage was 83.5Gb So I archived them to over 20 4.7Gb DVD recordables in the original .avi format (i.e. data DVD-ROM format, NOT DVD-Video Mpeg2) Some .avi DV video files were larger than 4.7Gb so I used 7-zip to split them ( here is a guide as to how to do that: http://www.linglom.com/2008/10/12/how-to-split-a-large-file-using-7-zip/ ) To recombine them, a dos shell command like this would do that: copy /b file.avi.* file.avi would do the job, where .* is a wild card to include all the split parts e.g. 001, 002...00n assuming they are all in the same directory path folder. file.avi is the recombined file identical to the original. Later on, I bought a LG BE06 LU10 USB 2.0 Super-multi Blu-ray burner and archived the footage to 2 (two) x 50Gb BD-R DL discs. Again in the original format, written as files to a BD-R in the BD-R BD-ROM UDF format readable by PC/Mac etc, NOT Blu-ray video/film format. This seems to be a good solution for me, because: the archive is in a robust, reasonably permanent, non-volatile medium, i.e. DVD recordable / Blu-ray (debates about stability of optical media organic chemical dye compounds/substrates aside) the format of the archive is accessible by open source tools or just plain Windows Explorer and it's not in a proprietary format I just thought I'd ask folks for their experience on better methods, if such exist.

  Read the article

• Compressing and copying large files on Windows Server?

  - by Aaron

  I've been having a hard time copying large database backups from the database server to a test box at another site. I'm open to any ideas that would help me get this database moved without having to resort to a USB hard drive and the mail. The database server is running Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise, 16 GB of RAM and two quad-core 3.0 GHz Xeon X5450s. Files are SQL Server 2005 backup files between 100 GB and 250 GB. The pipe is not the fastest and SQL Server backup files typically compress down to 10-40% of the original, so it made sense to me to compress the files first. I've tried a number of methods, including: gzip 1.2.4 (UnxUtils) and 1.3.12 (GnuWin) bzip2 1.0.1 (UnxUtils) and 1.0.5 (Cygwin) WinRAR 3.90 7-Zip 4.65 (7za.exe) I've attempted to use WinRAR and 7-Zip options for splitting into multiple segments. 7za.exe has worked well for me for database backups on another server, which has ~50 GB backups. I've also tried splitting the .BAK file first with various utilities and compressing the resulting segments. No joy with that approach either- no matter the tool I've tried, it ends up butting against the size of the file. Especially frustrating is that I've transferred files of similar size on Unix boxes without problems using rsync+ssh. Installing an SSH server is not an option for the situation I'm in, unfortunately. For example, this is how 7-Zip dies: H:\dbatmp>7za.exe a -t7z -v250m -mx3 h:\dbatmp\zip\db-20100419_1228.7z h:\dbatmp\db-20100419_1228.bak 7-Zip (A) 4.65 Copyright (c) 1999-2009 Igor Pavlov 2009-02-03 Scanning Creating archive h:\dbatmp\zip\db-20100419_1228.7z Compressing db-20100419_1228.bak System error: Unspecified error

  Read the article

• iptables, blocking large numbers of IP Addresses

  - by Twirrim

  I'm looking to block IP addresses in a relatively automated fashion if they look to be 'screen scraping' content from websites that we host. In the past this was achieved by some ingenious perl scripts and OpenBSD's pf. pf is great in that you can provide it nice tables of IP addresses and it will efficiently handle blocking based on them. However for various reasons (before my time) they made the decision to switch to CentOS. iptables doesn't natively provide the ability to block large numbers of addresses (I'm told it wasn't unusual to be blocking 5000+), and I'm a bit cautious over adding that many rules into an iptable. ipt_recent would be awesome for doing this, plus it provides a lot of flexibility for just severely slowing down access, but there is a bug in the CentOS kernel that is stopping me from using it (reported, but awaiting fix). Using ipset would entail compiling a more up-to-date version of iptables than comes with CentOS which whilst I'm perfectly capable of doing it, I'd rather not do from a patching, security and consistency perspective. Other than those two it looks like nfblock is a reasonable alternative. Is anyone aware of other ways of achieving this? Are my concerns about several thousand IP addresses in iptables as individual rules unfounded?

  Read the article

• Clipboard bug in Wordpad in Windows 7 (accidentally pasting large file into application)

  - by frenchglen

  In Win7, I use Wordpad, and I really like it. For my needs it's lean and fast, yet has the formatting functionalities I'm after when working on my TXT/RTF files on a daily basis. I don't intend to change text editors. There's a really bad bug which has ALWAYS plagued me. If you have a large file contained in the clipboard, like a 238MB FLAC file, and you accidentally paste it into Wordpad for whatever reason - it hangs the application for a VERY long time (like 2 hours, it depends on how big the file is, because it tries to 'handle' it). You either have to close the application and lose any unsaved changes, or go do something else until the item has finished pasting into Wordpad (it actually eventually drops the file's icon in wordpad just like how it appears in Windows Explorer). It's a Windows bug, a Wordpad bug. Is there some solution for this? Or is the problem fixed in Windows 8 (if anyone can tell me)? .....I'm not going to try out Win8 myself, merely to answer this question - that's what I'm asking it on SuperUSer for! I'm really hoping it's one of those little-yet-big things that they've fixed in Win8 (like removing the 255-character file path limit in Explorer, which is awesome). Thank you for your help, if you have Win8 handy and can test this. :)

  Read the article

• running chkdsk /F on a large mounted NTFS image file gets BSOD (Windows Vista)

  - by Citizentools

  Using ddrescue, I've created ISO files from the C: and D: drives on my Windows XP laptop's harddisk (after the laptop stopped booting and chkdsk etc. wouldn't fix it). I was able to mount the 60 GB D.iso file use OSFmount, and successfully recreated the D: drive on another laptop. The C.iso image is more problematic. ddrescue left about 3mb unrecovered of 85 GB total, after multiple passes (no big worries about this) and I'm able to mount it with OSFmount on a Windows Vista laptop. However, when I run chkdsk /F /V on the mounted drive (which was mounted as H:), I consistently get a blue screen (BSOD). CHKDSK makes it through the first three passes, including index fixing and security descriptor fixes, without errors, but triggers a BSOD when it attempts to fix the volume records or bitmap If I attempt to fix the drive by clicking on Properties-Tools-Error checking-Check Now-Automatically fix file system errors, I get an alert box reading "WIndows was unable to complete the disk check." I'd try a tool other than OSFMount, but it's the only thing I've found so far that will mount large ISO files, and it has worked for me up to now in this process. [Update 2011-11-13 18:41 EST] Just ran the same process using the original Windows XP laptop, with a different internal drive, and chkdsk worked like a champ. So the question is still interesting, but decidedly less urgent.

  Read the article

• Backing up large network (~200 clients) -- Enough Bandwidth?

  - by mtkoan

  My company wants to institute a backup plan for all of the clients on our network, which is about 200. We back up our servers and SQL databases regularly, but its been our policy to not backup individuals. What is most critical for people is their Documents and PST files in Outlook. PST files can be very large, and most people's are ~1-1.5 GB around here. So with PST files alone that is 200-300 GB of data needing to be transferred daily to a sever for backup. Or compressing first, then transferring, but many of the machines are VERY old and such a task would grind their computer to a halt. Isn't this the reason networks use things like VMware -- to reduce network traffic and streamline backups? Or is this only to reduce hardware costs? Would this much network traffic everyday drastically slow down our network? Enough to the point we'd have to mandate it to be done at night only? Or could we stagger then through out the day? Really appreciate any input, thank you.

  Read the article

• configuring lighttpd for large downloads

  - by ahmedre

  i run a web site that hosts pages that are just general scripts (php, etc) and mp3 downloads (some of which are fairly large - up to 200mb). i am running lighttpd on the servers on linux (ubuntu 64). everything is fine, but under high load, the server is not accessible (or very slow - even sshing in takes a while), and i am guessing this is due to a huge number of mp3 downloads at that time. consequently, dns sees the server as down and redirects all the traffic to the other servers, and after a while, it comes back up and things work again. so what's the best way to fix this? ideally, i want the server to continue running (and the web pages - php etc - to always work, but downloads don't always have to work). should i just have 2 web servers running (one for the downloads and one for the php pages), or is it perhaps something i can fix in my lighttpd configuration? here are the snippets from my configuration: server.max-worker = 4 server.max-fds = 2048 server.max-keep-alive-requests = 4 server.max-keep-alive-idle = 4 server.stat-cache-engine = "fam" fastcgi.server = ( ".php" => (( "bin-path" => "/usr/bin/php-cgi", "socket" => "/tmp/php.socket", "max-procs" => 1, "idle-timeout" => 20, "bin-environment" => ( "PHP_FCGI_CHILDREN" => "64", "PHP_FCGI_MAX_REQUESTS" => "1000" ), "bin-copy-environment" => ( "PATH", "SHELL", "USER" ), "broken-scriptfilename" => "enable" )) ) # normal php site $HTTP["host"] =~ "bar.com" { server.document-root = "/usr/local/www/sites/bar.com/" accesslog.filename = "|/usr/sbin/cronolog /var/log/lighttpd/%m/%d/%H/bar.log" } # download site $HTTP["host"] =~ "(download|stream).foo.com" { server.document-root = "/home/audio/" dir-listing.activate = "enable" dir-listing.hide-dotfiles = "enable" evasive.max-conns-per-ip = 1 evasive.silent = "enable" # connection.kbytes-per-second = 256 accesslog.filename = "|/usr/sbin/cronolog /var/log/lighttpd/%m/%d/%H/download.log" }

  Read the article

• Compressing and copying large files on Windows Server?

  - by Aaron

  I've been having a hard time copying large database backups from the database server to a test box at another site. I'm open to any ideas that would help me get this database moved without having to resort to a USB hard drive and the mail. The database server is running Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise, 16 GB of RAM and two quad-core 3.0 GHz Xeon X5450s. Files are SQL Server 2005 backup files between 100 GB and 250 GB. The pipe is not the fastest and SQL Server backup files typically compress down to 10-40% of the original, so it made sense to me to compress the files first. I've tried a number of methods, including: gzip 1.2.4 (UnxUtils) and 1.3.12 (GnuWin) bzip2 1.0.1 (UnxUtils) and 1.0.5 (Cygwin) WinRAR 3.90 7-Zip 4.65 (7za.exe) I've attempted to use WinRAR and 7-Zip options for splitting into multiple segments. 7za.exe has worked well for me for database backups on another server, which has ~50 GB backups. I've also tried splitting the .BAK file first with various utilities and compressing the resulting segments. No joy with that approach either- no matter the tool I've tried, it ends up butting against the size of the file. Especially frustrating is that I've transferred files of similar size on Unix boxes without problems using rsync+ssh. Installing an SSH server is not an option for the situation I'm in, unfortunately. For example, this is how 7-Zip dies: H:\dbatmp>7za.exe a -t7z -v250m -mx3 h:\dbatmp\zip\db-20100419_1228.7z h:\dbatmp\db-20100419_1228.bak 7-Zip (A) 4.65 Copyright (c) 1999-2009 Igor Pavlov 2009-02-03 Scanning Creating archive h:\dbatmp\zip\db-20100419_1228.7z Compressing db-20100419_1228.bak System error: Unspecified error

  Read the article

• iptables, blocking large numbers of IP Addresses

  - by Twirrim

  I'm looking to block IP addresses in a relatively automated fashion if they look to be 'screen scraping' content from websites that we host. In the past this was achieved by some ingenious perl scripts and OpenBSD's pf. pf is great in that you can provide it nice tables of IP addresses and it will efficiently handle blocking based on them. However for various reasons (before my time) they made the decision to switch to CentOS. iptables doesn't natively provide the ability to block large numbers of addresses (I'm told it wasn't unusual to be blocking 5000+), and I'm a bit cautious over adding that many rules into an iptable. ipt_recent would be awesome for doing this, plus it provides a lot of flexibility for just severely slowing down access, but there is a bug in the CentOS kernel that is stopping me from using it (reported, but awaiting fix). Using ipset would entail compiling a more up-to-date version of iptables than comes with CentOS which whilst I'm perfectly capable of doing it, I'd rather not do from a patching, security and consistency perspective. Other than those two it looks like nfblock is a reasonable alternative. Is anyone aware of other ways of achieving this? Are my concerns about several thousand IP addresses in iptables as individual rules unfounded?

  Read the article

• ext3: maximum recommended partition size / handling large partitions

  - by Hansi

  Hi! I would like to do an encrypted install of Ubuntu on a 2 Terabyte drive (i.e., using LUKS/DMcrypt). In order to not have to type in passwords too often, the partitioning scheme will be 50 GB for / and about 1 TB for /home (and the rest for Windows 7), just for clarity. Even though by now LVM is regarded as being stable, I don't want to bother having more room for errors by introducing unnecessary layers of complexity. For both Ubuntu partitions I want encrypted ext3 with the default blocksize of ext3 (4k?). Thoughts: When I look at most partition schemes here on this site or elsewhere, I usually see at most about 400 or 500 GB partitions (maybe I didn't see enough). There may be different reasons for this, but is reliability an issue here? Are larger ext3 partitions, like about 1 TB, harder to handle for the OS or filesystem driver or at some other level? If I make the partition too large, will it be harder to repair in case of corruptions? Are there some default settings for ext3 that I should change for 1 TB partitions? Question: What maximum partition size for ext3 do you recommend and why? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Maintenance window and recovery for a large database

  - by NYSystemsAnalyst

  One of our teams is developing a database that will be somewhat large (~500GB) and grow from there (I know 500 Gigs may seem small to many of you, but it will be one of the larger databases in our shop). One of the issues they are grappling with is backing up and restoring the database. Basically, the database will have several "data" tables and one table used for storing images / documents. We need to accomplish the following: Be able to quickly backup and restore only the data tables (sans images) to our test server for debugging and testing purposes. In the event of a catastrophic database failure, restore the data tables only to get most of the application up and running ASAP. Then, restore the images table when possible. Backup the database within the allotted nightly time window (a few hours). My questions are: Is it possible to accomplish the first two goals while still having the images stored in the same database? If so, would we use filegroups, filestream, or something else? How do other shops backup their databases in a reasonable time window while maintaining high availability? Do you replicate to a second server and backup from there?

  Read the article

• Long 'pause' after copying large files on windows 2008

  - by Ian

  I have a mystery regarding pauses after file copies on windows server 2088 (and other releases) When copying large files, like vhds, to locally attached USB disks I often see a long pause after the copy has completed 100%. As an example: robocopying vhd files. The bytes read/written count matches the vhd file size and robocopy shows 100% but it pauses for several minutes. If I do nothing it will continue, but I will have to wait for quite some time - about the same amount of time as it took to get to 100%. The bytes read/bytes written counters for robocopy do not change. My first thought was that the AV had to scan it, but I'm looking at a machine right now which doesn't have an AV installed and this is occurring, so impossible. No other processes are showing read/write byte counts as going up. The behavior is the same if I use the copy command or xcopy. I've seen this on other systems but have never worked out what the cause is. Anyone got any suggestions as to what might be going on?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >