Posts made by ty900000

@george1421

Gotcha! Yeah, I’ll give that a shot in the morning and reply back here. Thanks for the idea and advice! I appreciate it a lot!

@george1421

Honestly, not really. I do have some 11 year old Catalysts I could configure, but my clients would have no DHCP server to pull PXE settings from. I’d have to create a new FOG server acting as DHCP, first.

I might do that in the near future before we update our networking infrastructure.

@Tom-Elliott

No, they’re not “dummy” switches. They are the whole entire network backbone, sadly. They’re so old when I unplugged one that hadn’t been turned off in years and plugged it back in, it was completely dead.

@george1421

Cool! Yeah, I was hoping to see 4-5 GB/min. We don’t have VLANs. Not yet, at least. The Dell PowerConnect switches are old and we only use them as a L2 switch for now. They can be managed, but they lack a lot of commands and documentation. Cisco Catalysts should be coming next quarter, I hope.

@Tom-Elliott

Yeah, they can be managed. But, I can’t do much with them. Their documentation isn’t great and the are seriously lacking commands. I’m a CCNA, so I’m a little more used to Cisco-specific commands that do Cisco-specific things. These old PowerConnects either don’t have an equivalent or just have a very different and more difficult way of doing the same thing.

@Tom-Elliott

Ah, yeah. It was going to take over 13 hours to blow down a 17GB image. I think it’s the crappy L2 Dell switches can’t handle … much of anything. It’s a constant battle with them.

@george1421

Which one sucks? The 20MB/min or the 6GB/min? Or both?

@george1421

Oh, you’re right! I meant <20MB/min for multicasting two machines and 6GB/min unicasting two machines. My bad!

@george1421

I am running a multicast image right now and it is super slow, <20MB/sec and declining. With the unicast with 2 computers imaging, I was getting about 6GB/sec each. I did a little Googling around it seems as if our very old, crappy Dell PowerConnect switches are probably causing the issue. I guess they can’t handle the “amount” of multicast traffic - no surprise there…

We should be getting Cisco switches soon, so I’ll have to test it with those and make sure they are configured to pass multicast traffic properly.

Thanks!

@george1421

Yeah, it’s just a 500GB desktop HDD I had lying around. I just blew the image to five machines this morning and it was getting about 40-50MB/s, which is what I would expect from a random read, like you said.

I’m going to turn one of our “newer” systems into a FOG beefcake server when we reimage over 20-30 machines at a time and I’ll use a RAID 10 setup.

@Quazz

Thanks for the confirmation. I’ll be beefing up our server soon with a 8 or 16 core machine with 24+ GB RAM and a RAID 10 configuration, so that should help tremendously, just with the RAID 10.

Thank you both for your help! I really appreciate it!

@Wayne-Workman

Yeah, I’ll probably try a RAID 10 when I reconfigure it sometime in the near future. Thanks all for the help! I appreciate it a lot!

@Junkhacker

It’s been only about 8 months or so. It’s at version 1.4.0-RC-9.2, so I’m only one RC behind as of today. Does this include the ZSTD compression as default?

Re: RAID 5 - Gotcha. I really didn’t want to use RAID 5, but I didn’t know if it maybe had a better test case for FOG specifically due to some underlying FOG code or CentOS oddity.

Thanks for the quick reply!

Okay, cool. That’s good to know the heavy lifting is done by the client. The server I’m using is older than the hills (was an 2003 box at one point), so I can imagine the underlying hardware is getting old and will probably fail sooner or later.

Re: faster image compression formats - where do I change the compression format? I know where to change the compression level. Is that the same thing?

Re: adding more disks - what is the recommended RAID configuration? I saw a lot of the developers mention RAID 5 in the past few years. Didn’t know if any testing had been done with RAID 5, 6, 10, 50, 50, 100, etc…

Thanks a bunch for the help!

Hello all!

I setup a FOG server a while back, CentOS 7 with the latest GIT version as of 5/2/2017; everything’s work well. I was wondering if it’s possible to image faster/better with more processors. My current server has a very old dual core Xeon processor, and I noticed its processor usage peaked over 2.XX when it was imaging only two machines simultaneously. I know the imaging is mostly based on HDD/SSD speed and network capacity, but would increasing the processor count decrease a possible (future) bottleneck if I were to image over 10 machines at a time?

Thanks!

Sweet! That’s all I needed. Thanks for the info and the quick response!

FOG version 1.3.0-RC-23 on a CentOS 7 machine:

Is it possible to disable the FOG login menu that asks for the username/password? If not, what is the correct procedure to change its password?

Thank you!

10-4. Thanks for the info, the link, and the quick response! I’ll mark this as solved. Thanks again!

Server

• FOG Version: 1.3 RC 14
• OS: Centos 7

Description

Fresh install of Centos 7, updated. Got the latest version of FOG using git, version 1.3 RC 14. Downloads, unpacks, and installs okay. However, when I get to the step to go to http://<server_ip>/fog/management, I get an error in the web browser:

FOG Requires PHP v5.5.0 or higher. You have PHP v 5.4.x

When I installed FOG 1.3 RC 13 the other day, it worked fine. I just wanted to report this bug. Anyone else seen this or have a work around? Thanks!