• Recent
    • Unsolved
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Latest Development FOG

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved
    General
    57
    652
    1.2m
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • sudburrS
      sudburr
      last edited by

      I’m seeing significant increases in deployment speeds. Well done and thank you.

      [ Standing in between extinction in the cold and explosive radiating growth ]

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Bill RiceB
        Bill Rice Testers
        last edited by

        I can tell you this as testing it to compare,
        Lenovo M73 with a 500 Gig hd, mechanical, 7200RPM icore5 2.6ghz quad CPU, 8 Gig DDR3 ram and gig Ethernet connection to server.

        Prior to updates, was imaging up to fog @ 500Meg/min to 1Gig/min Maxed out. This is a 70Gig usable partition.
        Prior to updates, was pulling image from fog @ 1Gig/min to 1.8-9 Gig/min, Same config 70 Gig usable partition.

        After updates - Same info/Same image/Same Config
        Upload to Fog was 4-4.5 Gig/min
        Download from Fog started @ 14Gig/min and trickled down to a steady 7.5Gig/min stayed there until it was completed.

        Big Thanks to Junkhacker for identifying the compression and Tom Elliott for getting Multicore functional.
        As always, Awesome collaboration to make Fog better.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • G
          George
          last edited by

          Hi
          After updating to latest edition 3377 i can not image a new disks that does not have partitions at all. I am getting a message Error could not stat device mklabel No such file or directory.
          I have tried it to virtualbox and i am getting the same error

          Any ideas

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • G
            George
            last edited by

            Hi again

            I have updated to latest 3380 version and same thing happens. Is anybody else has the same problem

            Thanks

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • Tom ElliottT
              Tom Elliott
              last edited by

              George,

              I am attempting to get FOG to initialize the disks for you, but I don’t know where/why it’s failing. It should be 100% fresh at that points as my setup makes it so it clears all partition tables, then creates a single partition, and now formats it if there are no found partitions on it. Maybe I screwed it up somewhere? I don’t know.

              In the mean time, you can boot your system and make a temporary formatted partition. This will force the disk to be initialized and you should no longer have issues with FOG trying to image the device.

              Please help us build the FOG community with everyone involved. It's not just about coding - way more we need people to test things, update documentation and most importantly work on uniting the community of people enjoying and working on FOG! Get in contact with me (chat bubble in the top right corner) if you want to join in.

              Web GUI issue? Please check apache error (debian/ubuntu: /var/log/apache2/error.log, centos/fedora/rhel: /var/log/httpd/error_log) and php-fpm log (/var/log/php*-fpm.log)

              Please support FOG if you like it: https://wiki.fogproject.org/wiki/index.php/Support_FOG

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • B
                Ben Warfield
                last edited by

                Love the speed increase. Download speeds went from 4gb/min to 8gb/min.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • G
                  George
                  last edited by

                  Hi Tom

                  Thanks for the fast answer
                  I have made a partirtition the whole disk and formated with ntfs. Now partclone starts, images the boot partition but it fails to image the second.

                  As i can see it fails to delete the partitions and partclone images only the first one.
                  I have made all tests with virtualbox.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • G
                    George
                    last edited by

                    Hi Tom

                    I am uploading a video capture from virtualbox so you can see what is happening exactly.

                    Thanks and sorry for my bad english

                    [url=“/_imported_xf_attachments/1/1989_Windows764.webm.zip?:”]Windows764.webm.zip[/url]

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • Wayne WorkmanW
                      Wayne Workman
                      last edited by

                      [quote=“Bill Rice, post: 47154, member: 927”]
                      Prior to updates - 1.8-9 Gig/min
                      After updates - 7.5Gig/min
                      [/quote]

                      [B]JUNKHACKER[/B] is [B]amazing[/B].

                      Please help us build the FOG community with everyone involved. It's not just about coding - way more we need people to test things, update documentation and most importantly work on uniting the community of people enjoying and working on FOG!
                      Daily Clean Installation Results:
                      https://fogtesting.fogproject.us/
                      FOG Reporting:
                      https://fog-external-reporting-results.fogproject.us/

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • G
                        George
                        last edited by

                        Hi

                        I have tested with 3347 in a different server and it is doing the same thing

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • N
                          need2 Moderator
                          last edited by

                          You should try again with svn 3400+. Changes were made to partition handling.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • G
                            George
                            last edited by

                            I have tried with svn 3407 and same thing happens.
                            Does anyone else experienced the same problem.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • Wayne WorkmanW
                              Wayne Workman
                              last edited by

                              [quote=“George, post: 47495, member: 1565”]I have tried with svn 3407 and same thing happens.
                              Does anyone else experienced the same problem.[/quote]

                              Can you create a new thread with all pertaining details of your problem?

                              Please help us build the FOG community with everyone involved. It's not just about coding - way more we need people to test things, update documentation and most importantly work on uniting the community of people enjoying and working on FOG!
                              Daily Clean Installation Results:
                              https://fogtesting.fogproject.us/
                              FOG Reporting:
                              https://fog-external-reporting-results.fogproject.us/

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • T
                                TheKoR
                                last edited by

                                REV 3412 : loose of download speed

                                Ubuntu 13.10 - Fog 1.3.0
                                XEON E5630 - 16 Go - 6To raid 5
                                Best download : 22Go in 23 sec
                                Avg rate : 4.5G/min on 20 unicasts at same time

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • Tom ElliottT
                                  Tom Elliott
                                  last edited by

                                  @TheKoR said:

                                  REV 3412 : loose of download speed

                                  We haven’t changed anything in the speed department. So if there’s a loss of speed in download/upload, maybe check the network or hardware within the machine?

                                  Please help us build the FOG community with everyone involved. It's not just about coding - way more we need people to test things, update documentation and most importantly work on uniting the community of people enjoying and working on FOG! Get in contact with me (chat bubble in the top right corner) if you want to join in.

                                  Web GUI issue? Please check apache error (debian/ubuntu: /var/log/apache2/error.log, centos/fedora/rhel: /var/log/httpd/error_log) and php-fpm log (/var/log/php*-fpm.log)

                                  Please support FOG if you like it: https://wiki.fogproject.org/wiki/index.php/Support_FOG

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • T
                                    TheKoR
                                    last edited by TheKoR

                                    All my test are done with the same machine (latitude d630) same place on my network.

                                    Before junkhacker change i have 8/8.5 Go/min, with 3405 i have 9/10Go/min and with 3412 i have 6.5/Go/min

                                    Edit : solved by reboot !

                                    Ubuntu 13.10 - Fog 1.3.0
                                    XEON E5630 - 16 Go - 6To raid 5
                                    Best download : 22Go in 23 sec
                                    Avg rate : 4.5G/min on 20 unicasts at same time

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • Tom ElliottT
                                      Tom Elliott
                                      last edited by

                                      @TheKoR said:

                                      All my test are done with the same machine (latitude d630) same place on my network.

                                      Before junkhacker change i have 8/8.5 Go/min, with 3405 i have 9/10Go/min and with 3412 i have 6.5/Go/min

                                      I realize that, but I still have not made any changes. If 3405 worked, and 3412 is slow, it’s something in your environment.

                                      You can see the commits:
                                      http://sourceforge.net/p/freeghost/code/commit_browser

                                      I have not made a change to the init’s since: SVN 3399

                                      Please help us build the FOG community with everyone involved. It's not just about coding - way more we need people to test things, update documentation and most importantly work on uniting the community of people enjoying and working on FOG! Get in contact with me (chat bubble in the top right corner) if you want to join in.

                                      Web GUI issue? Please check apache error (debian/ubuntu: /var/log/apache2/error.log, centos/fedora/rhel: /var/log/httpd/error_log) and php-fpm log (/var/log/php*-fpm.log)

                                      Please support FOG if you like it: https://wiki.fogproject.org/wiki/index.php/Support_FOG

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • ch3iC
                                        ch3i Moderator
                                        last edited by

                                        Hi,

                                        I’ve tested the bandwith speed in SVN 3377 and 3412, for that image :

                                        -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 512 mai 18 12:57 d1.mbr
                                        -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 mai 18 12:57 d1.original.swapuuids
                                        -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8620391 mai 18 12:57 d1p1.img
                                        -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 40917364300 mai 18 13:16 d1p2.img
                                        -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 3947741 mai 18 13:16 d1p3.img

                                        In 3377 :

                                        DL : 7.3G/Min (Avg)

                                        In 3412:

                                        DL : 7.4G/Min (Avg)

                                        Regards,
                                        Ch3i.

                                        Bill RiceB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • Bill RiceB
                                          Bill Rice Testers @ch3i
                                          last edited by

                                          @ch3i said:

                                          Hi,

                                          I’ve tested the bandwith speed in SVN 3377 and 3412, for that image :

                                          -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 512 mai 18 12:57 d1.mbr
                                          -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 mai 18 12:57 d1.original.swapuuids
                                          -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8620391 mai 18 12:57 d1p1.img
                                          -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 40917364300 mai 18 13:16 d1p2.img
                                          -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 3947741 mai 18 13:16 d1p3.img

                                          In 3377 :

                                          DL : 7.3G/Min (Avg)

                                          In 3412:

                                          DL : 7.4G/Min (Avg)

                                          Regards,
                                          Ch3i.

                                          As far as i know the speed increased prior to SVN 3377 (I think around 3374) and the speed you see appears to be full (again it depends on the hardware, memory, hdd and ethernet to server.) but your speeds look a lot better then the before for me… i was pulling images at 3-4Gig/min no I get about 7-7.5/gig min

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • ch3iC
                                            ch3i Moderator
                                            last edited by

                                            @Bill-Rice said:

                                            @ch3i said:

                                            Hi,

                                            I’ve tested the bandwith speed in SVN 3377 and 3412, for that image :

                                            -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 512 mai 18 12:57 d1.mbr
                                            -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 mai 18 12:57 d1.original.swapuuids
                                            -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8620391 mai 18 12:57 d1p1.img
                                            -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 40917364300 mai 18 13:16 d1p2.img
                                            -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 3947741 mai 18 13:16 d1p3.img

                                            In 3377 :

                                            DL : 7.3G/Min (Avg)

                                            In 3412:

                                            DL : 7.4G/Min (Avg)

                                            Regards,
                                            Ch3i.

                                            As far as i know the speed increased prior to SVN 3377 (I think around 3374) and the speed you see appears to be full (again it depends on the hardware, memory, hdd and ethernet to server.) but your speeds look a lot better then the before for me… i was pulling images at 3-4Gig/min no I get about 7-7.5/gig min

                                            It was to check if I had the same problem than TheKoR 😉

                                            Regards,
                                            Ch3i.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 29
                                            • 30
                                            • 31
                                            • 32
                                            • 33
                                            • 32 / 33
                                            • First post
                                              Last post

                                            214

                                            Online

                                            12.0k

                                            Users

                                            17.3k

                                            Topics

                                            155.2k

                                            Posts
                                            Copyright © 2012-2024 FOG Project