RE: [cobalt-users] Raq550: A quick review - I feel like a crash test dummy

["Bill Gibbs" <bgibbs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

We have 2 RAQ550s and have only had one problem with them (a mysterious 
failure of the CCE engine that required a reboot)

If you look at the code Sun wrote for the device in /usr/sausalito, you will 
see why they did the things they did.

1) The "weird" directory structure - they are hashed based on the CCE object 
ID for peformance reasons.
2) /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow not used except for system users - again 
performance reasons, using libpwdb is faster because the users are stored in 
a BTREE DBM file in /var/db instead of a long flat text file.  Less time to 
parse, blah blah.
3) httpd.conf uses the "Include" directive to isolate the vhost stuff.  
Again, reduces the size signficantly of httpd.conf.  I've been using that on 
non cobalt systems for ages.  Works great.
4) meta-verify for the RAQ550 does NOT exist.  According to Sun (I asked this 
same question) it does not use the same database storage mechanism that the 
RAQ4's use to store information.  Again, look through /usr/sasusalito.

I think they hashed the directories and put users in libpwdb because they had 
a lot of clients with a lot of domains and alot of users that complained 
about slowness.

I'm confused about your problems with the "Auto DNS config" - we've been 
using it without a problem for a while (although I agree wholeheartedly it 
should be able to create more records automatically!).  It creates the proper 
DNS entry as long as you enter the proper IP in the config screen.  I don't 
have to delete the "A" record that is created.  However, I do tend to go in 
and create addiotional "mail" CNAME and "MX" records (so really all Auto DNS 
does is create the zone and add the www record)  That's kinda a bummer I 
agree.  It'd be nice to specify in the config to auto create those 
records...that'd be pretty sweet!  However, I haven't had any problems 
entering records into the GUI to create zones.  You can also go in and use 
the .include files to manually add records that the GUI doesn't support.

I'm also confused about why you think it's hard to not use it for a 
simple "hosting machine"?  I've put some non appliance stuff on it without a 
problem or a .pkg file (upgraded DHCP, used MRTG, RedHat Interchange, etc 
etc - simple things yes but "non automatic install" none the less)

I don't work for Sun, I just wanted to point out the reasons they did some 
things.  I've personally never used a RAQ4 so all my (relatively) good 
experiences with the RAQ550 come from it being the only appliances I've ever 
used.  I was actually considering a RAQ4 and kinda wish I had one of both for 
comparison reasons.

Bill

On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 09:20:37 +0200, Robert Roose wrote
> One word...
> 
> AMEN!!!
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John D. Gorena [mailto:Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> > Sent: donderdag 17 oktober 2002 3:16
> > To: Cobalt-Users List
> > Subject: [cobalt-users] Raq550: A quick review - I feel like 
> > a crash test dummy
> > 
> > 
> > Greetings Group,
> > 
> > I admit that I waited to buy a Raq550 because it was new but 
> > apparently only a few are having problems or I have a bad 
> > system.  I migrated the Raq4 accounts and hardly anything 
> > worked (CGI, Password Protection,
> > other stuff).   I'll try the restore CD if I can figure it out. 
> > Thinking back, I have not seen anyone really give a good or 
> > bad review. 
> > Therefore, I want to give a review to the group on the Raq550 
> > and Since I use Raq4's, I'll compare them to help get my point across.
> > 
> > Overall, If you have a Raq4, then you may be disappointed 
> > with the Raq550.  Stay with the Raq4 - it is a paradigm shift 
> > to go to the raq550.  Here are some good and some bad things. 
> >  Good news first since there is not that much of it.
> > 
> > GOOD THINGS:
> >  - Seems to work OK as a simple Hosting machine.
> >  - Seems to be faster with the 1.26 Ghz processor.
> >  - reboots quicker than the raq4.
> >  - has better notification services to the administrator(s).
> >  - The Interface is different but not in too bad of a way 
> > though it is a little tougher than the raq4 to get around.  
> > There seems to be a few more options.
> >  - You can add other administrators and limit 3 areas of 
> > access: IP Hosting, Root, etc . . .
> >  - Seems to be build physically good.
> >  - The Beta Versions of the Cobalt Migration Utility (CMU) 
> > seemed to worked well enough though I had to go and change 
> > all the DNS entries. 
> > My Clients are still using the Raq4's because of all the 
> > problems that we experienced with the Raq550.
> > 
> > BAD THINGS:  
> > Bad because you would think Linux is Linux.
> >  - The GUI Interface is tougher to get around.  For example,  
> > most things are across several screens instead of a single 
> > page that you can scroll down.  I think it is better to have 
> > it all on one page and then click save.  The screens only 
> > list 25 domains per screen and they are not in any particular 
> > order that I can tell.  I constantly have to use the search 
> > feature to find a single domain name.  The other options are 
> > the same way as if the designers did not like to scroll down 
> > and they use a small screen less than 640x480 resolutions so 
> > they can constantly click and wait for the browser to refresh 
> > - very frustrating.
> >  - Cobalt does not know how to write a manual.  With all the 
> > information that the 275+ pages in the PDF file, you would 
> > think that there would be something simple like "Steps on how 
> > to setup a virtual domain account." 
> > Or in the section about how to add the memory chip "What kind 
> > of memory do we use?" or "How to properly set up DNS's 
> > because the 'Automatic DNS'
> > in the GUI does not really work."   You have to delete the 
> > one A-record
> > that it creates to do it right.   The manual is filled with such
> > blunders and omissions.
> >  - The so-called 'Automatic DNS' feature does not work as was 
> > mentioned somewhere.  As described above, it only creates one 
> > A-record that you have to delete.  It creates a 
> > www.domain.com record for the IP but then you cannot add 
> > domain.com without deleting the www.domain.com record first.  
> > You would think that it would resolve to create appropriate 
> > mx records and c-mames BUT NOOOOOO!
> >  - Adding an alias to make www.domain.com and domain.com work 
> > gives an error but it seems to work anyway.
> >  - The Structure of how Domains are built seems to be really 
> > straight forward in the Raq4i .  All the E-mail files on the 
> > Raq4i are in /home/spool/mail and listed by User name and the 
> > virtual sites are
> > numerically numbers.   In the Raq550, they are randomly 
> > numbered and it
> > does not seem to have any particular pattern.  In the Raq550, 
> > the mail file is like 
> > /home/.sites/XX/site1/.users/XXX/username/mbox where 'X' is a 
> > random number.  The files are separated by the virtual domain 
> > in the Raq550 like E-mail is called mbox and httpd file info 
> > are in separate files by domain.
> >  - Restarting the .httpd file returns error messages that 
> > 'NameVirtualHost xx.xxx.xxx.xxx has no VirtualHosts', etc . . 
> > .  I have sent this to the group but I have seen a response 
> > and I could not find one in the archives.
> >  - The common Linux operating files are not used the same.  
> > In the Raq4, the httpd.conf file has each virtual domain info 
> > listed.  In the Raq550 there are no domain names and etc . . .
> >  - Regular password files that we like to use (.htaccess) for 
> > password protection for virtual site administrators, all 
> > users, or specific login/passwords do not seem to be used in 
> > the raq550.  For example, files like 'shadow' and 'passwd' 
> > would list the users on the Raq4i but on the Raq550 they are 
> > virtually empty.  On the Raq550 gives an error message that 
> > says CI is not installed.
> >  - I migrated about 300 users (about 50 domains) and not one 
> > of them were in the passwd type of files.  I thought about 
> > using a program like the Raq4's 'meta-verify' but the Raq550 
> > does not have this file and I have yet to read any responses 
> > (I don't think I missed any) concerning the 'meta-verify' and 
> > the raq550.
> >  - Squirrel Mail does not work but I guess there is a fix 
> > somewhere.  I assume the main problem is the related to the 
> > virtual sites structure.
> >  - Basic CI programs do not seem to work - returns errors.
> >  - I am sure that there are other problems but I probably 
> > will find them as I work these problems above.
> >  
> > 
> > SUMMARY:
> > I am sure that others are having problems with the raq550 
> > that are trying to use it for more than a simple virtual 
> > hosting machine. I really wish that these problems were made 
> > more evident and the solutions for them were posted before I 
> > bought a system.  I am sure with much diligence and really 
> > getting into the programming language that a working solution 
> > may someday be reached but I really do not want to have to go 
> > there.  If I could get my money back without penalty, then I 
> > would return this thing ASAP and get Raq4's instead.  Maybe I 
> > would buy it after a year on the market with actual solutions 
> > to the problems.  For those of you who have the smarts and 
> > time to fix these problems should be working for Cobalt.  
> > Apparently they need you.  PLEASE post complete 
> > instructions/solutions to help the rest of us solve these problems.
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> > John, a cobalt crash test dummy
> > 
> > _____________________________________
> > cobalt-users mailing list
> > cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > To subscribe/unsubscribe, or to SEARCH THE ARCHIVES, go to: 
> > http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt> -users
> > 
> 
> _____________________________________
> cobalt-users mailing list
> cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe/unsubscribe, or to SEARCH THE ARCHIVES, go to:
> http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-users


--
Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)