OpenVZ Forum - RDF feed
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.php
OpenWRT OpenVZ containers
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.phpindex.php?t=rview&goto=48695&th=11271#msg_48695
Just made some scripts to have openwrt support as an openvz container here:
--
Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at ffii.org>
FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-3500762
"In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software
patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy.
Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of
software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent
court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their
favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or
democratically elected legislators."]]>Benjamin Henrion2012-11-01T22:47:02-00:00Re: vzquota uses too much(?) time
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.phpindex.php?t=rview&goto=48684&th=11263#msg_48684
>
> I think vzquata are syncing data to disk during this time. In this case
> it's normal.
>
> You could test this thing, if you calls sync several times during creating.
>
I can? How?
--
chs]]>Christer Solskogen2012-10-30T18:56:38-00:00libcgroup issue for EL5 users
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.phpindex.php?t=rview&goto=48681&th=11264#msg_48681
OpenVZ utils repository now upgrades the package from EL5, I have
downgraded libcgroup in OpenVZ repo down to 0.37-4.
Note that libcgroup is currently only used by vzctl when it's working on
a non-OpenVZ kernel (i.e. recent upstream kernel like 3.5).
Thanks,
Kir.]]>kir2012-10-30T16:19:19-00:00Re: vzquota uses too much(?) time
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.phpindex.php?t=rview&goto=48678&th=11263#msg_48678
> When creating a guest/vps/container vzquota uses too much time on my
> system. About 30 seconds to turn it off(?) - Is that normal?
> When I comment out the disk quota stuff from the config file, it will
> just take about 3-4 seconds to create a container.
>
>
> 2012-10-29T14:05:49+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Looking for
> /vz/template/cache/centos-6-x86_64.tar
> 2012-10-29T14:05:49+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Looking for
> /vz/template/cache/centos-6-x86_64.tar.gz
> 2012-10-29T14:05:49+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota
> stat 101 -f
> 2012-10-29T14:05:49+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota
> drop 101
> 2012-10-29T14:05:49+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota
> init 101 -b 41943040 -B 47185920 -i 9223372036854775807 -I
> 9223372036854775807 -p /vz/private/101.tmp -e 0 -n 0 -s 0
> 2012-10-29T14:05:49+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota on
> 101 -b 41943040 -B 47185920 -i 9223372036854775807 -I
> 9223372036854775807 -e 0 -n 0 -s 0
> Creating container private area (centos-6-x86_64)
> 2012-10-29T14:05:49+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Creating container private
> area (centos-6-x86_64)
> 2012-10-29T14:05:49+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running:
> /usr/libexec/vzctl/scripts/vps-create
> 2012-10-29T14:05:52+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota off 101
I think vzquata are syncing data to disk during this time. In this case
it's normal.
You could test this thing, if you calls sync several times during creating.
Thanks.
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota
> setlimit 101 -p /vz/private/101 -b 41943040 -B 47185920 -i
> 9223372036854775807 -I 9223372036854775807 -e 0 -n 0
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /bin/rm -rf
> /vz/private/101.tmp
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota
> show 101
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota on
> 101 -b 41943040 -B 47185920 -i 9223372036854775807 -I
> 9223372036854775807 -e 0 -n 0 -s 0
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Mounting root: /vz/root/101
> /vz/private/101
> Performing postcreate actions
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Performing postcreate actions
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running:
> /etc/vz/dists/scripts/postcreate.sh
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota
> stat 101 -f
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Running: /usr/sbin/vzquota off 101
> CT configuration saved to /etc/vz/conf/101.conf
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : CT configuration saved to
> /etc/vz/conf/101.conf
> Container private area was created
> 2012-10-29T14:06:26+0100 vzctl : CT 101 : Container private area was created
>
>]]>Andrew Vagin2012-10-30T09:44:17-00:00vzquota uses too much(?) time
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.phpindex.php?t=rview&goto=48671&th=11263#msg_48671
system. About 30 seconds to turn it off(?) - Is that normal?
When I comment out the disk quota stuff from the config file, it will
just take about 3-4 seconds to create a container.
In my experience, proxy_arp may need to be enabled when a container is
assigned an IP address not in a network that the host has a static route
for on one of its interfaces. Configuring such static routes appears to
be a better approach.
For example, if your server is initially on 192.168.100.0/24, and thus
it has this network configured on its eth0, you may proceed to use IPs
in this /24 for containers with no issues and no magic needed. However,
if at a later time you need to use e.g. 192.168.101.101 for a container,
you might have issues unless you either enable proxy_arp or add a static
route on the host's eth0 for a network containing 192.168.101.101 (e.g.,
for 192.168.101.64/26 or whatever network address and netmask is right).
I observed this behavior on RHEL5'ish OpenVZ kernels.
Alexander]]>Solar Designer2012-10-25T10:55:20-00:00Proxmox VE 2.2 released, including a new OpenVZ console
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.phpindex.php?t=rview&goto=48614&th=11249#msg_48614
We got a new console view (with login capability). Especially for beginners it is not that easy to understand and manage containers but with the new console this is big step forward.
OpenVZ and KVM (or any other full virtualization) console looks now quite similar and well known.
____________________________________________________________ ________
Proxmox Server Solutions GmbH
Kohlgasse 51/10, 1050 Vienna, Austria]]>Martin Maurer2012-10-25T10:04:19-00:00(no subject)
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.phpindex.php?t=rview&goto=48618&th=11250#msg_48618
I need to use samba and ldap. I have one hardware NIC, one server. What is the best way to do this? What should go into a VE, what on the host node?
I know I need veth instead of venet when I use samba to make broadcasts work. But what about ldap? Does this run fine in a venet environment? Is it possible to set up one VE with venet and the other with veth? e.g. samba VE with veth and ladp VE with venet or would there be problems?
Do I need a bridge?
At the moment I have shorewall on the host system. Do I need to install it also on VEs that use veth?
Recommendations on general setup and considerations about security are highly appreciated :-)
pls note: DNS is on another server, static IPs are used, so no need for a DHCP server.
Kind regards,
Birgit
=========================
David Brown wrote:
If you don't need broadcasts, then you can use venet and route traffic to the openvz server. It means windows clients won't see the server by browsing the network (or using "net view"), but they can get access by typing "\\server" (assuming you have DNS set up to point "server" at the openvz server, and have all the routing and firewalling in place).
That's not really an option because I want to make it as user friendly as possible so I want to have network browsing. More important is that I want to join work stations to the domain from the workstation and without using WINS. Working DNS is not sufficient for that. (DNS is working though) Are there other recommendations for this setup?
KR, birgit]]>Birgit Berger2012-10-25T09:45:44-00:00Re: samba and openvz
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.phpindex.php?t=rview&goto=48607&th=11247#msg_48607
> I need to use samba and ldap. I have one hardware NIC, one server. What
> is the best way to do this? What should go into a VE, what on the host node?
>
> I know I need veth instead of venet when I use samba to make broadcasts
> work. But what about ldap? Does this run fine in a venet environment? Is
> it possible to set up one VE with venet and the other with veth? e.g.
> samba VE with veth and ladp VE with venet or would there be problems?
>
> Do I need a bridge?
>
> At the moment I have shorewall on the host system. Do I need to install
> it also on VEs that use veth?
>
> Recommendations on general setup and considerations about security are
> highly appreciated :-)
>
> pls note: DNS is on another server, static IPs are used, so no need for
> a DHCP server.
>
> Kind regards,
> Birgit
>
If you don't need broadcasts, then you can use venet and route traffic
to the openvz server. It means windows clients won't see the server by
browsing the network (or using "net view"), but they can get access by
typing "\\server" (assuming you have DNS set up to point "server" at the
openvz server, and have all the routing and firewalling in place).]]>David Brown2012-10-24T21:03:21-00:00samba and openvz
https://new-forum.openvz.org/index.phpindex.php?t=rview&goto=48606&th=11247#msg_48606
the best way to do this? What should go into a VE, what on the host node?
I know I need veth instead of venet when I use samba to make broadcasts
work. But what about ldap? Does this run fine in a venet environment? Is
it possible to set up one VE with venet and the other with veth? e.g.
samba VE with veth and ladp VE with venet or would there be problems?
Do I need a bridge?
At the moment I have shorewall on the host system. Do I need to install it
also on VEs that use veth?
Recommendations on general setup and considerations about security are
highly appreciated :-)
pls note: DNS is on another server, static IPs are used, so no need for a
DHCP server.