mastermind's weblog - Comments

Arto Bendiken: LSIlogic MegaRAID SAS and the self explaining CLI

nospam@example.com (Arto Bendiken) — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 01:54:52 +0100

For anyone looking for a recent revision of the manual, there's a link to download "MegaRAID SAS Software User Guide 80-00156-01 Rev. J September 2010.pdf" at the bottom of the page at: http://kb.lsi.com/KnowledgebaseArticle16516.aspx

nuess0r: factory defaulting an IBM Remote Supervisor II Slimline (RSAII) card

nospam@example.com (nuess0r) — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:32:04 +0100

had also some problems to revert my RSA II back to factory defaults.

Wrote a small how-to to help others. It uses a Fedora Linux live CD. You don't have to touch your operating system.

You find it here: http://brain4free.org/wiki/doku.php/blog:reset_password_on_a_ibm_rsa_ii

Anonymous: LSIlogic MegaRAID SAS and the self explaining CLI

nospam@example.com () — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:04:20 +0200

Hi, there is a documentation available at http://linux.dell.com/files/whitepapers/solaris/Managing_PERC6_0714.pdf

Scott555: LSIlogic MegaRAID SAS and the self explaining CLI

nospam@example.com (Scott555) — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 16:56:31 +0200

Hi-Larious...This is the best documentation I can find on this goofball utility, and it's a thread bitching about what a POS it is.

Well done, LSI.

Rudy: LSIlogic MegaRAID SAS and the self explaining CLI

nospam@example.com (Rudy) — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 06:05:07 +0100

Whee, a 9.7MB pdf instead of a comprehensive man page. I sure home LSI doesn't trash tw_cli (LSI bought 3ware -- my favorite RAID card)

Sergey: factory defaulting an IBM Remote Supervisor II Slimline (RSAII) card

nospam@example.com (Sergey) — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 17:54:05 +0100

Well, the problem is with installing the USB daemon. It supplies only for
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 x64
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 x 64
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 x64
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9 x64
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 10
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 10 x64

No Debian or Ubunbtu, even CentOS response the following error:

[root@unknown00145e304d9a RPMS]# rpm -U ibmusbasm-1.46-2.rhel5.i686.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
ibmasm conflicts with ibmusbasm-1.46-2.rhel5.i686

Any ideas how install this USB Deamon?

GreyCat: LSIlogic MegaRAID SAS and the self explaining CLI

nospam@example.com (GreyCat) — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:07:51 +0200

You might be interested in Einarc - a much more straightforward wrapper solution for LSI MegaCli and many other crappy proprietary utiliies. You can check it out at http://www.inquisitor.ru/doc/einarc

For example, monitoring RAID with einarc boils down to:

einarc logical list | grep -v 'normal$'

And it's the same for *every* RAID, not only for LSI.

Frank Bergmann: LSIlogic MegaRAID SAS and the self explaining CLI

nospam@example.com (Frank Bergmann) — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 19:05:15 +0200

Hi,

There is great documentation available, but it's kind of hidden:

- Cheat Sheet:
http://tools.rapidsoft.de/perc/

- LSI MegaRAID SAS User's Guide:
http://www.lsi.com/DistributionSystem/AssetDocument/files/docs/techdocs/storage_stand_prod/sas/mr_sas_sw_ug.pdf

Enjoy!
Frank

Stefan Kaltenbrunner: factory defaulting an IBM Remote Supervisor II Slimline (RSAII) card

nospam@example.com (Stefan Kaltenbrunner) — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:32:53 +0200

as said in my post you need to compile and install the USB daemon before you can change the password. If you did that already it would be interesting to see what exact error you are getting

Bostjan: factory defaulting an IBM Remote Supervisor II Slimline (RSAII) card

nospam@example.com (Bostjan) — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:31:20 +0200

Do you maybe remember how you configure that connection to RSA was successful?

I'm trying to reset RSA2 Slimline password with ASU, but i can't make it to connect.

I'm having Debian Lenny (Amd64)

If you can help me, it will really appreciate it.

dim: Benchmarking 8.4 - Chapter 1/Read-Only workloads

nospam@example.com (dim) — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 13:18:24 +0200

To overcome pgbench scalability limit, I'd advice using tsung. Bug me when you see me there on IRC if you want me to help through setting up the client etc.

With modern Erlang version (stable and all), you can have 50 000 concurrent TCP connected clients without a problem, you typically run out of TCP ports before erlang scalability level is reached, I've been told by tsung author.

Stefan Kaltenbrunner: Benchmarking 8.4 - Chapter 1/Read-Only workloads

nospam@example.com (Stefan Kaltenbrunner) — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:00:30 +0200

at this transaction rates (ie up to 140000 queries/s) the additional latency involved in going over tcp/ip from another box is significant and seems to hide some of the pgbench issues. However I will see if I can get some numbers as well.

Stefan Kaltenbrunner: Benchmarking 8.4 - Chapter 1/Read-Only workloads

nospam@example.com (Stefan Kaltenbrunner) — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 09:56:42 +0200

the first chart actually contains numbers at scale=1000 which I actually did to see if shared_buffers less than the size of the database would have a noticable effect in this scenario.

Greg Smith: Benchmarking 8.4 - Chapter 1/Read-Only workloads

nospam@example.com (Greg Smith) — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 07:19:47 +0200

The largest database test set used here (scale=100, about 1.6GB) is smaller than the 2GB shared_buffers already allocated. Giving it more RAM will just slow things down unless the working set of data is also increased.

slava: Benchmarking 8.4 - Chapter 1/Read-Only workloads

nospam@example.com (slava) — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:57:52 +0200

given that the server has 34GB of RAM would you consider allocating more memory to shared buffers? I would try 5-7GB.
This setting most likely wouldn't change the test results and I know that it's very often advised to keep shared buffers small, but given the amount of RAM available nowadays and efficiency of nehalem architecture (i.e. built-in memory controller and fasr QPI bus) I would be interested to see if more memory dedicated to shared buffers is appropriate. thanks.