TAM = Technical Account Manager. I asked about auditing and you asked about selinux auditing. Since when is selinux auditing? I mean the auditd daemon. It can tax the system severely if not set up correctly. I asked about your exports file, you give me the format for a generic exports file. If you didn't notice, i am an RHCA. I think I know what the general format is. I asked about kerberos, you said you didn't know.. how can you NOT know if you are using kerberos? I asked you to give us something to work with. You said "read the damn bug". I did, it's so fricking vague it's ridiculous. You seem to have very little information/knowledge of your system which isn't too surprising at this point. So, you seem to have decided to be very unproessional about this, so I say good luck. I will not respond to you again. I can only hope others don't either. Have fun.... On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:47 PM, mark <m.roth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/10/12 20:41, Corey Kovacs wrote: > >> Well, looking at the Bugzilla, it looks like they are asking you to >> contact >> your support rep. If you are working in the government, there will be a >> TAM >> > > I'm waiting for my manager to tell me how to file. I have no idea what a > TAM is - we do all this ourselves. > > > assigned to handle these problems. If you are a contractor working on >> systems to be delivered to the government, then you need to be a paying >> customer to expect support from Red Hat. Especially when your original >> problem manifested on CentOS. Granted, it's the same code base, but that >> doesn't make your problem on CentOS, a problem for Red Hat. >> > > I'll say it one more time: we found the problem on CentOS. We went to our > test RHEL system. Updated it. Exported a directory *from* the RHEL box to > itself, to /mnt/foo, and ran the test, and got the same results. > > In fact, I ran it twice today, updating the kernel in between, and with > 6.3, it's taking a consistent 7.5 min, instead of the 6.5 we were getting > with 6.2 > <snip> > > Now, all that said and done, here are some questions for you which might >> help us figure what would help. >> >> 1. What options are present on the mount? (cat /proc/mounts, thinks like >> sync can be a problem) >> > > I"m not at work. I'll have to answer that in the morning. I will tell you > that when we were first trying to figure it out, two months ago, I did try > no sync. > > > 2. What does your /etc/exports config look like on your server node (cat >> /etc/exports) >> > > /scratch/foo <servername>: options > > > 3. You are using NFSv4, are you using Kerberos with it? >> > > I don't believe we have kerborous set with NFS. We do use it for other > things. > > > 3.a. If so, what mode are you using for your gss/krb flag? (krb5, >> krb5i, krb5p) >> 4. What's your network speed? Are you sure? (ethtool ethX to make sure) >> > > Gigabit. > > 5. Selinux? >> > Permissive. > > 6. Auditing? >> > > Do you mean selinux auditing? As I said, doing it on the local drive takes > seconds. Doing it from a 5.x NFS server takes about 1.5 min. Therefore, > there's nothing that could affect it on the one server. > > > 7. How many clients are hitting your server and how many nfsd threads are >> you running on it? >> > > No other clients. This is a test system. > > >> This is by no means an exhaustive list of things to look at. >> >> Anyway, in order to get any real help, you cannot just shout out, "My >> stuff >> is broke, it's Red Hat's fault, no one will listen to me!" >> >> Give us something to work with. >> > > Try reading the damn bug. > > > >> By the way, in looking at the responses to your bugzilla, it doesn't look >> to me like they were shamed into responding. It looks like are telling you >> to go through proper channels if they exist. full stop. >> > > No, they gave *ZERO* responses until today. The one and only response > before today was, "oh, we're up to 6.3, we'll not even look at it". > > And my manager, who's a fed, and I, a contractor, along with the other > admin under him, who is also a contractor, handle the licenses, etc, so > there's no one else to wait for. > > > mark > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@**redhat.com<redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx> > ?subject=unsubscribe > https://www.redhat.com/**mailman/listinfo/redhat-list<https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list> > -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
