I'm seeing these errors multiple times a day in epylog. Can someone
with some accounts-system-fu take a look?
Oct 28 12:33:53 db1 postgres: [2-1] ERROR: relation "valid" does not exist
Oct 28 12:33:53 db1 postgres: [2-2] STATEMENT: SELECT id FROM valid WHERE name = 'valid'
Oct 28 12:33:53 db1 postgres: [3-1] ERROR: syntax error at or near ")" at character 179
Oct 28 12:33:53 db1 postgres: [3-2] STATEMENT: SELECT username , username,human_name, email FROM person WHERE
Oct 28 12:33:53 db1 postgres: [3-3] LOWER(mail) LIKE LOWER('mjergg(a)arkansas-realestate.com') AND id in ( ) LIMIT 250
Last week we discussed the need to open ports like 22 and 80 for the
mercurial test currently hosted on test1 to proceed with public testing.
I did not want to request this firewall change because it would make
it inconsistent, difficult to track, and a thus long-term security risk.
This is because we do NOT want public facing ssh except in known
test[1-9] remain internal-only test addresses. We assign new addresses
for services ready for public facing testing.
8887 (potential test plague master)
8888 (potential plague builder)
8889 (potential plague builder)
As a matter of security policy, Infrastructure team must approve any and
all uses of publictest[1-9] addresses, especially if they require public
facing ssh. Public facing ssh is necessary for mercurial and other VCS
Thoughts? Should we go ahead?
With the move to to a more xen based infrastructure. its a good time to
evaluate our ip allocation we have a /24 for our use. id like to propose
that we allocate the ips as follows
1-35 for Network appliances/devices nas, san, switches, kvms, etc.
36 - 169 for services i.e. xen guests and physical hosts when needed for
example ppc builders
164-169 for existing boxes admin interfaces these would most likely be
needed for a short term period
170-199 for admin interfaces drac, ALOM, etc
200 is a nat pool ip id like to have it moved to 250
201 - 219 for test systems
220-249 for physical xen hosts
250-254 for gateways to external networks
What do you all think?
Dennis Gilmore, RHCE
Is there anything out there (published) on how the servers are configured? Is it just up to whomever is configuring it at the time? The reason why I'm asking is that I'd like to set up a small test environment and I would like it to be compliant with any standards or recommendations for the Fedora Project.
If there is a standard, should it be published to the Wiki?
I had a thought about the builders that i wanted to run by everyone. it seems
that the chroot exploded on hammer1 and as a result some files got
installed in the real filesystem not in the chroot. so as a way to help
things in the future. once we are done with analysis we will need to rebuild
hammer1 So what i want to do is install a xen host on hammer1 and actually
have hammer1 a xen guest. it would be the only guest on the system but if
the same thing happened again it would be a simple task to fix. warren to
do this we would need a internal only ip for the xen host.
so what id like to do as far as the xen guest goes. and we should probably do
this with all production xen guests. is create a snapshot of the lvm volume
once the system is up and running and ready. so if the chroot explodes
again we put the snapshot in place start the instance and things are back
in a matter of minutes. we would have a pre-configured system ready to roll.
thoughts? opinions? objections?
Dennis Gilmore, RHCE
I've made some good progress with mercurial today on test1. I've created a
page with my results and processes thus far:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating/hg/dist-hg and linked to it in the
mercurial section of the VersionControl project page. I hope some of what
I've done will be of help to some of the other vcs proof of concepts.
Release Engineer: Fedora