Hi Lee:
Thanks for the pointers. I have FC4 on another box with the USB2
connected to it. I am getting about 35 MB/s reads (VIA chipset), and
about 15-20 MB/s writes. The context switching is horrible, and drives
the processor load way up.
I will install the new Centosplus RPMs for the kernel. I presume I
can do it via yum and adding it into the repos. Thanks.
joe
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 10:05, Joe Landman wrote:
>> Hi folks:
>>
>> Firewire was not supported in 4.0 due to the upstream provider not
>> including it. Is it in 4.1? Or is it still out of the mainline
>> upstream kernel provider? What about centosplus? Centosplus has been
>> listed as unsupported. I presume this means that they are/were one-off
>> builds with missing functionality (e.g. xfs, etc), and are not updated.
>> Is this the case? I am looking at this for an important server, and I
>> want to make sure that if we switch to the centosplus kernel that we
>> haven't messed up the rest of the package support, or major kernel bugfixes.
>
> The unsupported kernel just re-enables the things that are present
> in fedora kernels (at least...) but were turned off in RHEL. The
> kernel is rebuilt on updates so you don't lose anything by using
> it.
>
>> The reason I am curious about firewire is that I would like to use
>> the firewire interface rather than the USB interface for our backup
>> drives. Its not much faster, just fewer context switches (e.g. lower
>> server load).
>
> I'm using firewire on an FC3 box and am less than thrilled with the
> stability. The recent update to 2.6.13.x on FC4 looks promising
> but I haven't tested enough to be sure. Unless you have to
> use firewire now, wait till you have at least a 2.6.13 kernel.
> The box I'm using only has USB 1.0 ports so that's not a
> reasonable alternative.
>
--
Joseph Landman, Ph.D
Founder and CEO
Scalable Informatics LLC,
email: landman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web : http://www.scalableinformatics.com
phone: +1 734 786 8423
fax : +1 734 786 8452
cell : +1 734 612 4615
