Fw: Brat et misc.

From: Flemming Videbaek (videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.goV)
Date: Wed Oct 04 2000 - 07:49:17 EDT

  • Next message: Bjorn H Samset: "Testin' the new cluster-stuff"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Flemming Videbaek" <videbaek@bnl.gov>
    To: <brahms-dev-l@bnl.gov>
    Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 7:46 AM
    Subject: Brat et misc.
    
    
    >
    >   >   connect: Connection refused at
    > /afs/rhic/brahms/BRAHMS_CVS/CVSROOT/dolog.pl line 280.
    > >
    > > when I commit to CVS from NBI.ms
    > I have seen this too and mentioned to Kris
    > This happens from several machnies, it works ok from rcf.,, from the piis
    > but not from say rcas000.
    > I suspect it has to do with access priv. to the bonsai database on pii3 ?
    > >
    > > As to the ROOT 2.25/03 being "*the* version of ROOT these days" Ian is
    > > right if he's taking about ROOT, but not so in BRAHMS - yet. Flemming,
    > > Kris, when will we upgrade?
    >
    > I do believe that the time has come to upgrade - I think we agreed to wait
    > until after the run (which one ? -
    > the RHIC or the NIMROD at TAMU). I would hope that Kris can take the time
    > following the TAMU run
    > to have 25.03 installed for both linux and solaris so we can make the
    > switch.
    > >
    > > And now to something somthing completly different ... No 1 ... A Larch
    > > (sorry - couldn't resist). Does anyone what the status of AFS on Linux
    > > is? In particular, how does Redhat 6.1/6.2 fare with AFS? I believe
    > > there's a fix for the SMP problem, but a part from that, is there any
    > > problems? And does anyone know _when_ IBM will release "IBM AFS" in
    > > OpneSource? (there a almost delayed a month now). Thanks for any
    > > info.g
    >
    > This was an importanbt issue for RCT in the spring before the RHIC run.
    All
    > linux at RCF was upgraded to 6.1
    > following a long discussion on AFS. The brief answer is , to the best of
    my
    > knowledge without my notes,
    > RH6.1 + transarc AFS is fine with SMTP (at least 2 processors)
    > RH6.1 + arla AFS in additon is also fine and work with NFS-3 (speedier
    > access to disks)
    >
    >  I am not sure in regard to RH 7 and transarc afs. It is our intention to
    > try out 'arla' which has worked well
    > on rcf (all rcas and crs nodes).
    >
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 04 2000 - 07:54:25 EDT