The question says it all, I think. I vaguely remember there was an easy way to do this, but don't remember what it was.
Almost every time I've had to change the print processor for a printer, it's because it's set to something other than WINPRINT/RAW. Granted, fax software sometimes makes use of other print processors, but most of the time it seems as though the WINPRINT/RAW processor is the best way to go. Can anyone shed some light on the history and need for different print processors? For instance, when different processors are needed and what types of symptoms can be seen if the wrong processor is being used?
Greetings,
I'm working with RHEL 5.5 guest VMs under VMware ESX 4. When I configure the virtual disks in the VM hardware settings, each disk has a SCSI address in the format "N:M". For example, "1:3" would mean SCSI host number 1 and SCSI target ID 3.
When I look at the disk info from the VM's BIOS or a Windows OS, the detected SCSI address info matches up with the virtual hardware settings. But under Linux, the SCSI address components don't match up, at least not completely or consistently.
I've tried the three supported virtual SCSI and SAS drivers and they all seem to be "broken", but in different ways. Here's a list of the virtual hardware addresses vs what was detected under Linux with each of the drivers:
Driver vHW Addr Linux Addr
-------- -------- ----------
LSI SAS 0:0 0:0
LSI SAS 0:3 0:1
LSI SAS 0:6 0:2
LSI SCSI 1:1 2:1
LSI SCSI 1:4 2:4
LSI SCSI 1:7 2:7
pvSCSI 2:2 1:2
pvSCSI 2:5 1:5
pvSCSI 2:8 1:8
My main question is why does this happen under Linux? The next question is: how do I get it fixed or fix it myself?
If I was going to guess, I'd say it's an issue with how the kernel is handing out the SCSI host number and how the Linux SCSI driver (included with VMware tools) is detecting the SCSI target number. Perhaps the order the drivers are loaded also has something to do with the issue. I'm guessing this would not involve udev, but I could be wrong.
Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks!
PS. My environment is VMware, but I don't need an answer for these drivers specifically. I imagine this might be a problem with any SCSI driver under Linux.
As per standard procedure we've been using for years for previous versions of both Oracle and SQL Server, I have installed Oracle's latest ODAC package, which includes the Oracle OLE driver onto our new SQL Server 2008 R2 x64 nodes. I have done the recommended system reboot, but OraOLEDB.Oracle does not show in the Linked Servers\Providers node in SSMS. The only difference between this installation and previous SQL Server installations is that I am now using SQL Server x64 (on Windows 2008 R2). Should this make any difference?
Note that I am able to connect to Oracle servers using SQL*Plus from the SQL Server nodes directly. The only thing I am missing is that Provider. Anyone know what I am missing? There are many posts around the web, but there seems to be a lot of confusion and outdated links to Oracle's download page.
The ONLY thing I need to be able to do is create a linked server to Oracle, and run select queries against it. I don't need to do anything through Visual Studio.
We recently migrated to a Windows 2003 R2 Enterprise x64 Server (SP2) as a print server. For the most part, we found that it wasn't too hard to get both a x64 and a x86 driver for the printers we were using. Shortly after switching, we noticed that certain printers were taking far, far longer to spool their jobs. In particular, we noticed that our HP LaserJet 8100 was taking approximately 10-20 seconds to spool a job compared to its previous behavior of spooling almost faster than you could click.
At first we suspected it might have something to do with the x64 version of Windows managing the x86 client print requests. However, the behavior only seemed to manifest on certain printers. We eventually narrowed it down to the HP Universal Print Driver. Any printer using that driver was extremely slow spooling. HP doesn't offer a printer specific W2K3 64-bit driver for our LaserJet 8100, only the universal driver is available (as of 2/25/09). They do offer an 8100 specific driver for 32-bit systems in addition to the Universal driver.
Unfortunately, the 32-bit specific drivers cannot be added to the x64 printer share because of the difference in print name. Apparently you're only able to add 32-bit drivers if they are named exactly the same thing (i.e. they must both be Universal Printer drivers). This has created quite a dilemma. The performance is so poor with the universal print drivers, it makes multi-print jobs take many times longer than they did before. Doing a stack of prints for our Engineering team literally takes hours where before it took a half hour.
It seems our options are limited. If we return to an x86 Windows Install to support the 8100 specific drivers, we lose the ability to support x64 systems. It would be a waste of money and resources to create both 32-bit and 64-bit print servers. It would be a lot nicer to eliminate the Universal print drivers or find a way to improve their performance.
Is there a solution to improving the Universal Print Driver performance or am I stuck going back to a x86 print server?