• Recent
    • Unsolved
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. Quintin Giesbrecht
    3. Posts
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 5
    • Posts 31
    • Best 1
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    Posts made by Quintin Giesbrecht

    • RE: The image deployment is slower than before

      @Cristian Any chance you are sending the image out to new/different machines than before? We have just received some new machines into our fleet (Lenovo neo 50q Gen 4), and we are seeing something similar…we get 14GB/min on the older machines, but these new machines are at about 2GB/min. I started a thread on that here:

      https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/17698/fog-very-slow-to-deploy-image-lenovo-neo-50q-gen-4/2

      Not sure if yours is for the same or similar reasons, but if it is, it might help to know if they are the same machines as we just got.

      Thanks!

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: FOG Very Slow to Deploy Image - Lenovo Neo 50Q Gen 4

      @Tom-Elliott @JJ-Fullmer Never mind, I found the logging levels. So now that I have the level maxed, where do I find the logs? Is that still in the web gui somewhere?

      Thanks!

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: FOG Very Slow to Deploy Image - Lenovo Neo 50Q Gen 4

      @Tom-Elliott So I moved an SSD from a slow machine to a machine that is running at full speed, and I can confirm that I get full speed out of the drive, so that rules that out.

      Can someone tell me where I can enable/adjust logging levels for the kernel? I couldn’t seem to find it in the web gui.

      Thanks!

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: FOG Very Slow to Deploy Image - Lenovo Neo 50Q Gen 4

      @Tom-Elliott Yeah, that would be a good test to do…thanks for that suggestion.

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: FOG Very Slow to Deploy Image - Lenovo Neo 50Q Gen 4

      @JJ-Fullmer Thanks for your reply! You have given me some places to at least look. I agree, if it was slowing down because of decompression, you would think it would be more widespread (unless there is some sort of issue/difference with the storage adapter and/or drive in these machines). My compression level is set to 6.

      I will enable detailed kernel logging and see if that reveals anything.

      This is not end of the world for me. I can still image a machine in about half an hour on these slow ones, but it is nice to be able to just send out an image to a machine if someone’s computer goes squirly and have them running in 10 minutes 🙂 (plus, I think most of us sys admins have it in us to try and figure out why something isn’t working as expected 🙂 )

      Thanks again!

      Q

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: FOG Very Slow to Deploy Image - Lenovo Neo 50Q Gen 4

      For interest’s sake, I tried a few of the earlier 6.6.x versions of the kernal with slightly better speeds on the earliest 6.6.x version, but still not nearly as fast as the other machines in our fleet get. If anyone has any insight into this, please let me know.

      Thanks!

      Q

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: FOG Very Slow to Deploy Image - Lenovo Neo 50Q Gen 4

      Good afternoon. Wondering if there is a potential solution to this, or if you need further info from me (just tell me what you need, and where to look, and I will get it for you).

      Thanks!

      Quintin

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: FOG Very Slow to Deploy Image - Lenovo Neo 50Q Gen 4

      @george1421 Hi there. Thanks to both you and @Tom-Elliott for responding. I believe I am on the latest FOS Linux kernel, see screenshot:

      7bdceeca-8aa9-445e-82ca-85abd31fc5dd-image.png

      Is that not what you are looking for? If I should be looking elsewhere, let me know.

      Thanks!

      Q

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • FOG Very Slow to Deploy Image - Lenovo Neo 50Q Gen 4

      Good morning! We have several Lenovo Neo 50Q Gen 4 machines that we just got. I used one to create a new image - it captured a 40GB image in about 5 minutes. When I send that same image out to any of these new machines it takes 30 minutes. If I send that image to any of our existing machines, it takes 5 minutes or so. I am thinking it must be a NIC driver issue, or some kind of write issue to the SSD or something like that.

      Anyone have any ideas? I did look through the forum, but couldn’t find anything applicable.

      Thanks!

      Q

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Exit returned code 4 Trying to restore GPT

      Yep, that was it 🙂 I searched and searched yesterday, but couldn’t find anything that specifically applied 🙂

      Anyways, mental note, delete recovery partition after Windows 10 is installed 🙂

      Great forum, glad I was able to find a solution.

      Quintin

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Exit returned code 4 Trying to restore GPT

      This might be the same as this:

      https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/14670/error-trying-to-restore-gpt-partition-tables-exit-returned-code-4-on-new-pc-s

      Looking at my system, will post back if I have the same results.

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • Exit returned code 4 Trying to restore GPT

      Ubuntu Linux 14.0.4.6 LTS
      FOG 1.5.8

      Getting exit returned code 4 when restoring image to a smaller drive. Image created with 500GB drive on a physical machine. Restoring to same machine, but a smaller hard drive produces the above error. Here are more details about the error:

      "Warning! Current disk size doesn’t match that of backup! Adjusting sizes to match, but subsequent problems are possible!

      Warning! Secondary partition table overlaps the last partition by 506792321 blocks!
      You will need to delete this partition or resize it in another utility.

      Problem: partition 4 is too big for the disk.
      Aborting write operation!"

      Here the contents of the partition files for the image in question:

      root@cadillac:/images/STB-WIN10-AUDIT-APPS-INSTALLED# cat d1.minimum.partitions   
      label: gpt
      label-id: 5CCF75D9-E5A5-4585-A981-54F18E9A3BB8
      device: /dev/sda
      unit: sectors
      first-lba: 34
      last-lba: 976773134
      
      /dev/sda1 : start=        2048, size=      204800, type=C12A7328-F81F-11D2-BA4B-00A0C93EC93B, uuid=EB96ABA7-9327-47C0-A045-FFC4003540C1, name="EFI system partition", attrs="GUID:63"
      /dev/sda2 : start=      206848, size=       32768, type=E3C9E316-0B5C-4DB8-817D-F92DF00215AE, uuid=6EC57B75-45AD-42E2-83D5-3A2F89008346, name="Microsoft reserved partition", attrs="GUID:63"
      /dev/sda3 : start=      239616, size=    55697990, type=EBD0A0A2-B9E5-4433-87C0-68B6B72699C7, uuid=D2446D99-382D-454E-BABF-1C92DC3BD1C8, name="Basic data partition"
      /dev/sda4 : start=   974752256, size=      902160, type=DE94BBA4-06D1-4D40-A16A-BFD50179D6AC, uuid=9099F5EF-3AA8-427C-B309-3D553D637E8A, name="Basic data partition", attrs="RequiredPartition GUID:63"
      
      root@cadillac:/images/STB-WIN10-AUDIT-APPS-INSTALLED# cat d1.fixed_size_partitions   
      1:2:4
      
      root@cadillac:/images/STB-WIN10-AUDIT-APPS-INSTALLED# cat d1.partitions
      label: gpt
      label-id: 5CCF75D9-E5A5-4585-A981-54F18E9A3BB8
      device: /dev/sda
      unit: sectors
      first-lba: 34
      last-lba: 976773134
      
      /dev/sda1 : start=        2048, size=      204800, type=C12A7328-F81F-11D2-BA4B-00A0C93EC93B, uuid=EB96ABA7-9327-47C0-A045-FFC4003540C1, name="EFI system partition", attrs="GUID:63"
      /dev/sda2 : start=      206848, size=       32768, type=E3C9E316-0B5C-4DB8-817D-F92DF00215AE, uuid=6EC57B75-45AD-42E2-83D5-3A2F89008346, name="Microsoft reserved partition", attrs="GUID:63"
      /dev/sda3 : start=      239616, size=   974512640, type=EBD0A0A2-B9E5-4433-87C0-68B6B72699C7, uuid=D2446D99-382D-454E-BABF-1C92DC3BD1C8, name="Basic data partition"
      /dev/sda4 : start=   974752256, size=     2020352, type=DE94BBA4-06D1-4D40-A16A-BFD50179D6AC, uuid=9099F5EF-3AA8-427C-B309-3D553D637E8A, name="Basic data partition", attrs="RequiredPartition GUID:63"
      

      Screen attached of image settings:

      Fog-Image.png

      Hopefully that gives you enough information to troubleshoot this issue. Thanks so much for looking at this for me. If you need more details, please let me know.

      Thanks!

      Quintin

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Fog upgrade 1.1.1 --> 1.1.2 database error

      [quote=“darkxeno, post: 31683, member: 4011”]just fixed it I went in to the /var/www/fog/lib/fog/Config.class.php and removed the password from there and it fixed it[/quote]

      Thanks! that did it for me as well.

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Fog Client

      Ahhh…OK, makes sense…I have now applied the necessary changes to my groups, so I think we should be in business again.

      Thanks so much for your help, and for your work on this project!

      Q

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Fog Client

      Nope. That was an existing computer.

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Fog Client

      Got it…seems that all the options are turned off by default in the new version? Under service settings…

      Anyways, seems to be working now!

      Thanks!

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Fog Client

      Here are the fog client logs:

      23/05/2014 12:27 PM FOG::MODDebug A user is currently logged in
      23/05/2014 12:27 PM FOG::MODDebug Username: STB-98N0LS1\SNJSTAFF
      23/05/2014 12:27 PM FOG::MODDebug Hostname: STB-98N0LS1
      23/05/2014 12:27 PM FOG::MODDebug Attempting to open connect to: [url]http://192.168.0.45/fog/service/debug.php[/url]
      23/05/2014 12:27 PM FOG::MODDebug Server responded with: Hello FOG Client
      23/05/2014 12:27 PM FOG::MODDebug Module has finished work and will now exit.
      23/05/2014 12:33 PM FOG::ClientUpdater Attempting to connect to fog server…
      23/05/2014 12:33 PM FOG::ClientUpdater Module is disabled on this mac.
      23/05/2014 12:33 PM FOG::ClientUpdater Client update will be applied during next service startup.
      23/05/2014 12:33 PM FOG::ClientUpdater Client update process complete, exiting…
      23/05/2014 12:33 PM FOG::SnapinClient Attempting to connect to fog server…
      23/05/2014 12:33 PM FOG::SnapinClient Module is disabled on this host.
      23/05/2014 12:38 PM FOG::SnapinClient Attempting to connect to fog server…
      23/05/2014 12:38 PM FOG::SnapinClient Module is disabled on this host.

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Fog Client

      I went looking through the config file, and found a bunch of URLs as to where the client should look for various names, such as host name changes, etc…I tried pointing to one from a browser, and I get the following: “invalid version number please update this module”

      This was done from the workstation in question…not sure if that is just because I tried from a browser, or if that indicates an issue…

      Thanks!

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Fog Client

      Sorry, I have always restarted the system in between making changes…should have said that…

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • RE: Fog Client

      No, I detach the uploaded image before creating the image…that has always worked in the past…is that wrong?

      I did find this thread: [url]http://fogproject.org/forum/threads/changing-name-works-joining-ad-is-not-but-was-prior-to-upgrade.10568/#post-28063[/url]

      So I made those changes - I still had domain\Admin…

      Still no dice…

      posted in FOG Problems
      Quintin GiesbrechtQ
      Quintin Giesbrecht
    • 1 / 1