@junkhacker That’s probably the best path to follow actually. There’s no rush for us to purchase everything at once. Worst case we have enough nodes now to get us by if we do need more. Thanks again for the help!

@junkhacker

Hey @Junkhacker thanks for the input. The thought of replication and time to replicate did cross my mind. My only concern with one FOG server is being able to image 45+ computers at a time even with drives in RAID 10. I was going to do 3 of the server setups you suggested though. So 3 servers with SSD in RAID 10 which, in my mind, should be more than enough to do 45+ computers at once.

@george1421

Thanks for the info george1421. I think because we haven’t tested on 10G backbone yet I am not sure what to expect as far as how many unicast streams we’ll be using before the link is saturated at that level.

The plan that I have right now is to get 3 servers with hard drives in RAID 10 but with a lower end CPU and RAM since the FOG nodes don’t necessarily need that power. As we do some testing with that initial setup and we find that we’re saturating the 10G backbone link or need to add another node then we can.

@george1421

To answer your questions

1. I would say that if we could get half of the expected capacity of the new workspace that would be great. So about 60 laptops. I figure that by the time 2 or 3 people get those 60 setup the first ones they started would already be done imaging.

2. We plan on having the FOG servers attached via 10G to a stacked set of 10G distro switches. This would then feed the access switches over 10G as well for the imaging benches which would be regular 1G copper.

We generally don’t do multicast since we have a lot of different images that are getting pushed at any given time. The staggered approach is what we’re used to already. I’m hoping that we can set up the FOG nodes so that at about 60 or so computers we’re just going to be bottlenecked at the target computer and not the FOG hardware.

Right now with 60 spaces open we can load the whole bench in an all hands on deck scenario and when normally on no load we’d hit 3.8GB/min on the laptops we’re now at 756MB/min instead. The goal is the keep as close to maximum imaging speed as possible so we have no doubts that the target computers are whats holding us back.

Hi All

I’m working on a project to redo my employer’s imaging setup since we’re moving to a new location and redoing everything ground up. To give you more insight into what we’re currently using. We have FOG on Ubuntu servers using normal Lenovo workstation computers. I have a “bench” of computers which consists of 15 spaces for imaging and a FOG node at each of the four benches giving a total of 60 spaces. We have a huge turnover for computers since we’re a technology and A/V rental company.

We’re looking to potentially double the amount of spaces up to 120 but that doesn’t mean we’ll have all of those spaces imaging simultaneously. Since I’ve found that at a certain point you’ll have reach the turnover where computers that were first setup were already done by the time the last computers are started.

Is there any recommendations on server grade hardware to make sure that half of those spaces are imaging as fast as the endpoints hardware will allow? Would a few beefy servers with a lot of discs be better than a lot of smaller servers? At this point assume the network itself won’t be the bottleneck because that will be completely redone with 10G backbone for the new office.

Thanks in advance for the help.

@tom-elliott

I’m also having the same issue except with a HP ProBook 650. I’m on the same version of Ubuntu as OP and FOG as well.

I ran the suggested command and then ran the installer again but I’m still having the same issue. Any suggestions?

Hi Tom

Apologies for the first post. I meant to edit the post and add more info in and got caught up researching what happened. I found the answer below and wanted to post it here for future reference or anyone else that might run into this issue.

I’m on FOG 1.4.4 and Ubuntu 16.04 LTS w/ latest updates.

On Chrome the Hosts tab would just provide and error that it could not load.

I found in the Apache logs at /var/log/apache2/error.log that php was using too much memory since I have so many hosts.

I then went to /etc/php/7.1/apache2/php.ini and edited the Resources to increase Memory Limit to 512M.

After increasing the memory limit I was able to load the hosts page fine.

When logged in on the web GUI I can’t access the Hosts tab.